Take the Deal Already....

[onthebottom]

This is the deal, we all know it's the deal, will they take it already so we can stop wasting time on it.....

OTB

Arab leaders urge Israel, world to take peace offer

By Wafa Amr and Andrew Hammond 1 hour, 15 minutes ago

RIYADH (Reuters) - Arab leaders urged
Israel and the world on Thursday to take up a 5-year-old peace plan to end the conflict with Israel, and the Palestinian president warned of more violence if the "hand of peace" was rejected.

The endorsement at a two-day Arab summit came amid a U.S. push to restart the Middle East peace process, and Washington welcomed the endorsement as "very positive," but Israel stopped short of welcoming the plan it rejected in 2002.

Speaking at the end of the summit in Riyadh, Mahmoud Abbas urged Israel not to waste the chance for peace, saying the region would be face the threat of more war without a solution.

"I reiterate the sincerity of the Palestinian will in extending the hand of peace to the Israeli people ... We should not waste more chances in the history of this long and painful cause," the Palestinian president told the closing ceremony.

The plan offers Israel normal ties with Arab states in return for withdrawal from land seized in the 1967 war and the creation of a Palestinian state.

Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Shimon Peres said on Thursday that Arabs and Israel should have direct talks on peace rather than setting pre-conditions.

"It is time now to start negotiating and not only to make announcements," he told Al Jazeera television.

The final communique read by Arab League chief Amr Moussa at the close of the summit affirmed "just and comprehensive peace as a strategic option for the Arab nation in accordance with the Arab peace initiative" based on the "land for peace" formula.

State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said the Arabs should use the plan "as a point of active diplomacy and as a way of energising the push for peace in the Middle East."

PEACE HAS A PRICE

Rejected by Israel when it was originally proposed at a Beirut summit in 2002, the plan has important hurdles to overcome.

Israel objects to key points, including a return to 1967 borders, the inclusion of Arab East Jerusalem in a Palestinian state and the return Palestinian refugees to what is now Israel.

Islamist group Hamas, which heads the Palestinian government, also has reservations about the plan. It has not voiced opposition but called on Arab leaders not to compromise on the right of refugees to return to homes lost in the turmoil surrounding the creation of Israel almost 60 years ago.

Arab leaders had discussed insisting on the right of return, but the final plan calls for a "just solution" to the refugees issue.

At a closing news conference, Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal said Israel was subjecting "not only the region but itself to dangers with unpredictable repercussions" if it ignored peace offers. Moussa said peace comes with a price.

"Israel only wants normalisation. Withdrawal, negotiations over Jerusalem and other issues it does not want... It should be clear that the Arab position is not for free," Moussa said.

NUCLEAR RACE

The summit comes against a tense regional backdrop with fears high among Arab leaders that a U.S.-led attack on Shi'ite Muslim
Iran, which has refused to comply with U.N. demands to halt atomic work, could further destabilise their region.

The summit communique warned of the danger of a nuclear arms race in the region, though it also stressed the right of every country to possess nuclear energy for peaceful uses.

Iran says its atomic program is peaceful but Gulf Arab countries on its doorstep, most of them Sunni-led, share Western concerns that the Islamic Republic wants nuclear bombs.

Those suspicions add to long-running concerns among Gulf Arabs about non-Arab Iran's growing influence in the region's main hotspots --
Iraq, Lebanon and the Palestinian territories.

Gulf Arab states said last year they would begin developing their own joint nuclear energy program for electricity and water desalination, raising fears of a regional nuclear race.

(Additional reporting by Souhail Karam)

 

[onthebottom]

Unfortunately one of the key elements of the plan is not in the Reuters article. The Arab Legue is demanding that all Jewish immigration to Isreal be halted permenantly.

The whole reason Isreal exists is to provide a place in the world for Jews to find sanctuary from persecution. This peace plan is total bs. Like Hitler's peace plans this will be only the first. Given that the West really doesn't want to fight World War 3, right now the propaganda value of these peace plans will be enormous.

For the pacifists and the useful idiots in the West peace treaties of all kinds will enable us to pull out of the Middle East. They won't stop WWIII, but they will delay the outcome for quite some time.

EU

Would you please document that, I think most of us find Reuters a reliable source....

OTB

 

[onthebottom]

Then I stand by my view that Israel should take the deal and let us all move on.........

OTB

 

[basketcase]

I agree that they should take the deal (ok, it's really a framework for a deal) but there are two big problems. One is Jerusalem which is considered too holy by both sides to give up any authority. The other is the vague wording on refugees: "A just solution for the refugee crisis." Many hard-line Palestinians say the only just solution is for all of the refugees to go to Israel which Israel (and possibly many of the refugees ) would never accept.

These aside, it seems to be a good place to start negotiations from to work out all of the little details.

I guess another problem is that to really work towards peace, the Israelis and the Palestinians have to actually sit down with each other and work things out, not having to go through intermediaries. Unfortunately, the Palestinian government is providing an interesting playing field for peace. Hamas (the party in power) refuses to acknowledge the process or the goal of a two state peace while the more moderate Abbas (as well as Saudi) are threatening (predicting?-sure) violence if Israel doesn't meet their conditions.

There are many Israeli factions that aren't eager about peace, either because of the political power of the settlers or fear that a return to the '67 borders will not make the region any safer.

Ignoring the fact that the Arab governments (with the exception of Jordan and Egypt) and Israel are still technically in a state of war, the only way that this process can work is if the two parties involved sit down, understand why the other side is hesitant, and NEGOTIATE something that works for both sides.


On another front, why are the Arab states all of a sudden so eager to create peace after 60 years of conflict? Might it have anything to do with the rise of Shia/Persian Iran?


And here is the real tragedy in the region. http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/03/28/marijuana.nonkosher.reut/index.html

JERUSALEM (Reuters) -- Marijuana is not kosher for Passover, a pro-cannabis advocacy group says, advising Jews who observe the week-long holiday's special dietary laws to take a break from smoking it.

Damn religions interfering with world peace.

 

[onthebottom]

I agree that they should take the deal (ok, it's really a framework for a deal) but there are two big problems. One is Jerusalem which is considered too holy by both sides to give up any authority.

Isn't the sensible solution to split the city....

The other is the vague wording on refugees: "A just solution for the refugee crisis." Many hard-line Palestinians say the only just solution is for all of the refugees to go to Israel which Israel (and possibly many of the refugees ) would never accept.

Some right to return and some financial compensation (which I'm sure the US taxpayer would get stuck with) is the solution here.

These aside, it seems to be a good place to start negotiations from to work out all of the little details.

I guess another problem is that to really work towards peace, the Israelis and the Palestinians have to actually sit down with each other and work things out, not having to go through intermediaries. Unfortunately, the Palestinian government is providing an interesting playing field for peace. Hamas (the party in power) refuses to acknowledge the process or the goal of a two state peace while the more moderate Abbas (as well as Saudi) are threatening (predicting?-sure) violence if Israel doesn't meet their conditions.

There are many Israeli factions that aren't eager about peace, either because of the political power of the settlers or fear that a return to the '67 borders will not make the region any safer.

This is where the Arab governments that are proposing this and the US can step in, we need to tell the Israelies that if they don't take this reasonable deal they can experience real financial independence for the first time in a long time. Same goes for the Palastinian government, if the EU and US cut off all aid to the region until the parties agreed they might get off their asses and get it done already.

Ignoring the fact that the Arab governments (with the exception of Jordan and Egypt) and Israel are still technically in a state of war, the only way that this process can work is if the two parties involved sit down, understand why the other side is hesitant, and NEGOTIATE something that works for both sides.


On another front, why are the Arab states all of a sudden so eager to create peace after 60 years of conflict? Might it have anything to do with the rise of Shia/Persian Iran?


And here is the real tragedy in the region. http://www.cnn.com/2007/WORLD/meast/03/28/marijuana.nonkosher.reut/index.html

Damn religions interfering with world peace.

LOL, now that's funny.

OTB

 

[basketcase]

Isn't the sensible solution to split the city....

Makes sense to me but I'm sure every religious person will make claims that every piece of dirt is the holiest and can't be allowed into the hands of others.

Some right to return and some financial compensation (which I'm sure the US taxpayer would get stuck with) is the solution here.

This was proposed under Clinton and rejected by Arafat. It makes too much practical sense so it obviously won't be accepted.

This is where the Arab governments that are proposing this and the US can step in, we need to tell the Israelies that if they don't take this reasonable deal they can experience real financial independence for the first time in a long time. Same goes for the Palastinian government, if the EU and US cut off all aid to the region until the parties agreed they might get off their asses and get it done already.

The Quartet wants to sit down with the Israelis (for the first time) and the primary Arab League members to negotiate. Jordan and Egypt have advocated the Arab deal to be a template for negotiation but others such as Syria insist that it is all or nothing. The lack of money hasn't changed the minds of Hamas yet either.

As I said before, this isn't a deal since it lacks enough details but it sure is a good enough place to start.

 

[Egor]

Hmmm, lets see here. A return to the 1967 borders, giving the militarily strategic Golan Heights back to the Arabs ( so they can have a prime vantage point from which to attack the Israelis if so desired), the city of Jerusalem to be split up between two political states, and right of refugees to return to the land they lost when the state of Israel was created.

Sounds like the Arab conditions for peace are that the Israelis voluntarily give up the state of Israel. No surprise there; this is the line that Arafat, Iran, Hamas, Hezbollah et all have been proposing all along. That's always been their line, no peace until the state of Israel is gone.

The Jews, and indeed the entire world, have to accept the fact that Israel cannot continue to exist. They must voluntarily give it up, or face destruction from the Arabs and the Palestinians. It will be better for the Israelis if they give up their state voluntarily. Whether it will better for the rest of the world and help bring about world peace is another question.

 

[Aardvark154]

Isn't the sensible solution to split the city[Jerusalem]....

Or a bi-national capital (capital of both States) with actual governance (other than control of the Governmental buildings of the two states) by a independent city government (how you make that city government accountable to some higher power - such that it isn’t a cesspool of corruption - I don’t know). The problem with splitting the city is that was tried once before and didn't work particularly well, and all the holy sites are in the historic city part of Jerusalem.

Some right [of] return and some financial compensation (which I'm sure the US taxpayer would get stuck with) is the solution here.

This really is a thorny issue. The Israeli's just will not accept a blanket right of return after almost sixty years. While, at least under Arafat the Palestinian Authority refused to accept anything but. Most people don't know that the Clinton Administration had a peace deal completely lined up save for the signatures at the very last minute [literally within the last 20 hours] Yasser Arafat backed out changing his mind on this very issue. This is one reason why the U.S. hasn't been particularly involved in the Israeli-Palestinian issue for a number of years.

Also I truly doubt Israel will coincide to giving up the Golan Heights, not after experiencing twenty years of Syrian snipers shooting people down along the Sea of Galilee. Also I believe that Israel is willing to give up 98 percent - 99 percent of the West Bank but that final one percent of straightening the border and eliminating the 12 mile wasp waist I doubt.

As at least two faiths and possibly all three say Pray for the peace of Jerusalem.

And in particular in this year when Passover is next week and Pacha and Easter are on the same Sunday!

 

[basketcase]

I think peace with Syria is at the same time, the easiest and the most difficult part of the peace process. Israel has no real historic/religious or even economic reason to keep the land. The potential military/defensive value to Israel is important but could be overcome. At the same time, Syria has a deep political motivation for not making peace with Israel. Israel makes a convenient scapegoat for internal problems that Syria has in it's dictatorship and also serves to distract the world from the problems of Syria's involvement in Lebanon. If Israel is no longer the enemy, Syria can offer the Lebanese little justification for meddling in their politics. Finaly, all that Syria would really gain from reclaiming the Golan is a short term political victory.