reuters: Leaks show Palestinians giving much ground to Israel

[twa]

To disprove(or clarify) them Israel would have to release sensitive information for no benefit

There is good reason negotiations are not done in the press.

Let Abbas and the NAD clarify their screwup.

[Predicto]

To disprove(or clarify) them Israel would have to release sensitive information for no benefit

There is good reason negotiations are not done in the press.

Let Abbas and the NAD clarify their screwup.

There is no benefit to disproving (or at least questioning) falsehoods indicating that you have been unreasonable in peace negotiations?

I don't see that, myself.

[Larry]

Interesting perspective, there.

PA: Here, we surrender. We offer virtually everything you want.

Israel: No (slam.)

twa: Abbas screwup.

[Predicto]

Interesting perspective, there.

PA: Here, we surrender. We offer virtually everything you want.

Israel: No (slam.)

twa: Abbas screwup.

well, they didn't offer to move to Tasmania, did they?

Damn terrorist scum.

[Larry]

well, they didn't offer to move to Tasmania, did they?

Damn terrorist scum.

That's always one of the argument I always love in these discussions.

The folks who claim that the Palestinian problem is all the Arab's fault, because no Arab country has offered to give the Palestinians a country somewhere else.

[twa]

Interesting perspective, there.

PA: Here, we surrender. We offer virtually everything you want.

Israel: No (slam.)

twa: Abbas screwup.

The screwup was letting sensitive documents get out...gonna blame that on Israel?

I like the earlier suggestion of letting it stew then making(or releasing a prior counter offer) a counter offer based on the alleged offers:evilg:

[Larry]

The screwup was letting sensitive documents get out...gonna blame that on Israel?

Not me. -I- wait till I have information before I decide which country to blame.

[Jrew1223]

Seriously, why would Israel agree to the concessions made my the PA? People need to understand that Israel's main objective is to annex the West Bank as well as East Jerusalem and then expel the Arabs to neighboring countries. It always has been their goal. I don't blame the Israelis because, as they will be quick to point out, other countries have expelled their native populations in the past. The issue here, in my opinion, is that Israel is trying to act in the same manner as the other European colonizers did before them only they are carrying out this action in a time where such overt actions are looked down upon. The vast majority of the American population believes you are the underdog and will continue to spend their tax dollars on you so unless that support is in threat of being stopped why accept PA concessions for peace when you can have it all as no one is capable of stopping you?

[oisn1]

True. And JMS may be right about my blindness on this account. If the Palestinians made these concessions (even if some of them to the Israelis were musts) and asked for nothing in return for making them... then Israel would be a doofus. I don't like to think of Israel as a doofus. She's been a tough, hard minded country for most of her history that has made its share of mistakes, but usually, like the United States, tries hard and means well. This would indicate something other which if real and genuine makes little sense. Israel had much to gain and nothing to lose in accepting this... unless there's a piece of the puzzle missing. Unless there's a big... okay, we'll give you these things, but you got to give us this (and the leaked info fails to include what Israel would give up). I have a hard time believing given their history that the Palestinians would give up something for nothing. That just sounds so unlike them, you know?

And maybe the reason Israel is stayin Mum is because while this offer was never made they want political pressure to mount so they can be "forced" to accept it and the Palestinians will be forced to ask for it. It's not a bad ploy.

The missing piece of the puzzle is simple, Burgold. There is absolutely nothing the Palestinians can offer them that they won't have eventually if things continue as they have been.

Israel can continue to slowly annex land in the West Bank and Jerusalem as they have been doing, almost unabated, for the past 40 years with only non-binding resolutions (that the US will veto) to "stop" them. Israeli civilian casualties are way down and close to 0, while the Palestinian casualties continually increase. They have quarantined many of the Palestinians into a walled off and guarded city in Gaza, a place so bad that people in the West Bank refer to it as Hell.

Israel can continue to create more "facts on the ground" so the goalposts keep getting moved and they can get a better a deal in the final partitioning of the two states. Assuming these leaks are true, that's the only idea that makes sense. The PA gave up the settlements, they gave up most of East Jerusalem, they gave up a military, they even gave up the Right of Return, and Israel rejected it.

---------- Post added January-24th-2011 at 08:08 PM ----------

Seriously, why would Israel agree to the concessions made my the PA? People need to understand that Israel's main objective is to annex the West Bank as well as East Jerusalem and then expel the Arabs to neighboring countries. It always has been their goal. I don't blame the Israelis because, as they will be quick to point out, other countries have expelled their native populations in the past. The issue here, in my opinion, is that Israel is trying to act in the same manner as the other European colonizers did before them only they are carrying out this action in a time where such overt actions are looked down upon. The vast majority of the American population believes you are the underdog and will continue to spend their tax dollars on you so unless that support is in threat of being stopped why accept PA concessions for peace when you can have it all as no one is capable of stopping you?

Good post, but I have one problem. I do blame Israel if that is their intention. Previous generations may have been okay with being savages, enslaving people and such but I tend to hold "the only democracy in the Middle East" to a higher standard. Just because something happened in the past doesn't give you the right to continue doing it.

[twa]

The PA gave up the settlements, they gave up most of East Jerusalem, they gave up a military, they even gave up the Right of Return, and Israel rejected it.

Would you support these concessions for a Palestinian homeland?...just curious what your reaction would be if Israel accepted this tomorrow.

[oisn1]

Would you support these concessions for a Palestinian homeland?...just curious what your reaction would be if Israel accepted this tomorrow.

Depends on what Israel gave up. But assuming Israel gave up nothing or very little, I wouldn't like it. But then again, I'm living in the US and it's easy for me to tell Palestinians to continue starving and dying so they can get their rights. If the Palestinian people accepted it, then I would accept that. I wouldn't support the concessions as they aren't fair and essentially amount to torturing a man for a confession, but I would accept it if the Palestinian people did.

We could complain later about why the Palestinians would give up everything for nothing (maybe their lives really are that bad due to Israeli oppression), the decision would at least allow the Palestinian people to no longer die due to oppressive policies. And maybe then the US could actually start helping the people out.

Again, this is all hypothetical as Israel rejected the notion.

[twa]

Thanks

all of this ,including a offer encompassing all those concessions at one time is hypothetical as well from what I read

added

JMS ...do you find it interesting(and counter to your condemnation of Bibi) that most of these offers were turned down by former leaders?

http://www.jpost.com/MiddleEast/Article.aspx?id=204914

Israeli government sources refrained from reporting on the documents Sunday night, saying they needed to see them first.

...

Livni said in response to the documents that she intended to continue to respect the discreet nature of the talks so as to allow them to be renewed so the conflict could be resolved.

“We do not intend to respond to internal Palestinian notes on the talks, whether or not they are accurate,” she said.

[Larry]

Would you support these concessions for a Palestinian homeland?...just curious what your reaction would be if Israel accepted this tomorrow.

Me? I think the only way there's even a slim chance of this thing reaching a negotiated settlement, is if it ends in two viable states.

That means, for example, two states with contiguous borders. That means Israel is going to have to give up those settlements they've been stealing for the last 40 years. It also means that Jerusalem is going to be Israeli. (This is me, acting like I'm Captain Kirk, and I have the power to tell the two warring factions on the planet what to do, cause I've got bigger guns than they do.)

I think that if I'm feeling really godlike with my ability to tell these two what to do, I'd demand that both sides grant full citizenship and civil rights to any member of the other "side" who chooses to remain where they are, when "where they are" becomes part of a different country. That means that Arabs who choose to stay in East Jerusalem, and Jews who chose to stay in their West Bank settlements, will keep their homes, and their civil rights, and will be full, voting citizens of the country which they are now a part of.

[JMS]

Unless there's a big... okay, we'll give you these things, but you got to give us this (and the leaked info fails to include what Israel would give up). I have a hard time believing given their history that the Palestinians would give up something for nothing. That just sounds so unlike them, you know?

It's not really a negotiation if the Palistinians are the only ones giving stuff up. I believe the Palestinians were suggesting an exchange. Israel get's Arab Land in east Jeruselem and around the 1967 boarders; in exchange the Palestinians get settlers land deeper into the west bank.

You can be sure the Palistinians weren't suggesting giveing up something for nothing. Their ultimate goal is a contiguous Palistine, on Israel's boarder; free of Israeli occupation. At least that's what it looks like from the few articles I've read on these leaks. In exchange for that they were willing to walk away from right of return, most of east jeruselem, and the right to their Palistine to keep a militia,

The dispute between left and right in Israel concerns a hundred or so settlements beyond the separation barrier.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/palestine-papers-show-true-partners-for-mideast-peace-1.338985

The news is the Palestinians drew up a map and agreed to effectively give up the right of return, and Jeruselem and Israel didn't offer them anything in return.. And remember this was the Livni government of Olmert who has endorsed an independent Palestinian state conceptually. Netanyahu's lakud party currently in power primary difference with Livni is they don't agree with an independent Palestinian state.

And maybe the reason Israel is stayin Mum is because while this offer was never made they want political pressure to mount so they can be "forced" to accept it and the Palestinians will be forced to ask for it. It's not a bad ploy.

Actually Israel has their own proposal to the quartette for peace. Lieberman is delivering it. Israel keeps all of jerusalem; all their settlements, no right of return, no right to dig wells in the west bank; the PA get's about 40-50% of the west bank land broken into enclaves separated by Israeli IDF check points.

[AzSkinsFan63]

A friend of mine sent me this...

The leaks are being selectively doled out by al Jazeera – no friend to the Palestinian Authority, and by the UK Guardian – no friend to Israel. They are being interpreted by Ha’aretz – which, typical of the Left, invariably sides with the perceived underdog without regard to the facts as they exist.

So rather than the leaked secret cables clarifying the actual situation as it exists, the leaks allow the media to shape the story according to their preferred worldview. So al-Jazeera paints the Palestinian Authority as the villain while the British assassinate Israel’s character.

The Australian picked up on al Jazeera’s narrative:

Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas and his chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat, were attempting to fend off anger yesterday from their militant rival, Hamas, and their own party, Fatah, over claims they had "sold out" Palestinians in their eagerness to achieve a peace deal.

Hamas, which controls the Gaza Strip, has used the release of hundreds of documents by Arab television network al-Jazeera to argue their opposition to negotiations with Israel is justified. Hamas said the documents proved the Palestinian Authority was "attempting to liquidate the Palestinian cause".

What is fascinating about the reaction is that if the leaks are true, the Palestinian Authority is under fire from all quarters for being sincere about seeking peace. Conversely, it is Israel that is the stumbling-block to peace.

All that is necessary for one to buy that assessment of the situation is a frontal lobotomy and/or total ignorance of Middle East history.

IF one takes the position (as do the media outlets quoted in today’s briefing) that Israel stole the land from the Palestinians, then everything that proceeds from that point forward is fruit of the poisoned tree.

From there, it is easy to forget that the Balfour Declaration predated the creation of every other state in the modern Middle East. And that the 1947 UN Partition Plan which would have created a Palestinian State side-by-side with Israel was rejected by the Arab side in favor of a war of annihilation.

It is easy to forget that the Arab side launched five wars against the Jewish State and that is how Israel ended up with the West Bank, Gaza and the Golan. The Arab side gambled and lost and now they want their bets back.

It is easy to forget that Israel entered into the Oslo Agreement from a position of strength and that it has surrendered almost fifty percent of what had been its territory since, in exchange for a peace that never materialized.

It is easy to forget the actual history because it is so easy to hate Israel. Israel should not exist. Israel was declared to be a nation by the God of the Bible Who also said Israel will remain a nation for as long as the sun shines in the daytime and the moon at night.

The existence of Israel is a visible reminder that God exists and that He remains intimately engaged in the affairs of men.

Israel’s existence screams that man is not sovereign on this earth. The powers that be hope to use the destruction of Israel to drive a stake through the heart of the myth that the Lord is preparing His return.

If there is no Israel for the Messiah to return to, then Bible prophecy is also a myth. God is not sovereign if He cannot keep His Word. The Enemy wins.

Do I believe that the leaked documents are legitimate? Some of them might be. Even if they ALL are legitimate, they are sourced by Israel’s most intractable enemies, and are selectively being released in order to produce a narrative that fits the agenda.

It is not a question of “Israel, right or wrong” it is an issue of “history, true or false?” and it is a pretty transparent effort to bury actual history under the weight of history as some would prefer it.

The Bible says that in the last days, Israel will find itself so completely and utterly alone and friendless that it will have nowhere to turn in the face of global aggression. It is then that the Lord God of Israel steps in.

“In that day shall the LORD defend the inhabitants of Jerusalem; and he that is feeble among them at that day shall be as David; and the house of David shall be as God, as the angel of the LORD before them. And it shall come to pass in that day, that I will seek to destroy all the nations that come against Jerusalem.”

“And I will pour upon the house of David, and upon the inhabitants of Jerusalem, the spirit of grace and of supplications: and they shall look upon me whom they have pierced, and they shall mourn for him, as one mourneth for his only son, and shall be in bitterness for him, as one that is in bitterness for his firstborn.” (Zechariah 12:8-10)

We haven’t been ‘had’ by Israel – the leaks show only what Israel’s enemies want to show – that goes without saying. It is an effort to revise historical reality by manipulating current events. It should be transparently obvious, but it won’t be.

Truth is no longer a reflection of reality, but rather a reflection of what people would like reality to look like. That’s just how it is.

[JMS]

JMS ...do you find it interesting(and counter to your condemnation of Bibi) that most of these offers were turned down by former leaders?

I do agree that the majority of the leaked documents deal with Olmerit and not Netanyahu. So the leaked documents don't directly support critism of BiBi Netanyahu..

But if you put these leaked documents into context. The Olmerit/ Kadima Party which they seem to tarnish is also the party which political platform favors a Palistinian State in the West Bank. Netanyahu's Lakud Party's major difference with Kadima is they have not made an Independent Palistinian State a plank on their political agenda...

So no, I wouldn't feel that these Leaked documents shed any new light on Netanyahu being a major obstical for a negotiated peace in the region as he's demonstrated in previous iterations as PM, or this iteration.

Bibi is a the most intransigent Israeli PM in the last several decades. And it's not like Israel has had a lot of PM's who really pushed for peace in that timeframe either.... Netanyahuu was even worse for peace than Sharon in my opinion; and that's really saying something.

Now the counter argument here is Netanyahu has said it's his consistent hard line policies towards a negotiated peace with the Palistinians which gives him the ability to deliver that peace. An only Nixon could go to China argument. Bottom line though, I don't buy it. Bibi is a conservative who believes it's better more reliable outcome for Israel to rely on military force. Bibi was not a general in the IDF and doesn't have the clout or frankly the creativity of a Rabin. Besides that, Netayahu's government was the second largest vote getter in the last election. Kadima(28) narrowly recieved more votes than BiBi's Lakud(27). The only reason BiBi got the PM office was his opposition to the land for peace principal. That's why Yisrael Beiteinu with their 15 seats sided with Lakud. Which means if BiBi attemped meaningful settlemnt with the PA, Beiteinu would pull out of the coelition and BiBi's government would fall. Not that BiBi has ever shown any inclination to serious negotiations with the Palistinians.

---------- Post added January-25th-2011 at 12:23 PM ----------

Me? I think the only way there's even a slim chance of this thing reaching a negotiated settlement, is if it ends in two viable states.

Separate but equal?

I suspect Israel will continue to dottle and waste opprotunities to negotiate. Eventually I look for the Palistinians to pull back from negotiated settlement. Ultimately I look for them to make a case before the world that what they really deserve is the Israeli vote, 1 man 1 vote for every man who has lived their entire lives under Israeli rule. The aparthied argument used with great effect in South Africa. Israel will balk. The world will embargo. That path will take decades; but it will lead to the end of Israel as a jewish dominated state. Overnight Israel will cease to be a jewish majority ruled state. We can only hope their is a Mandella or a Biship TuTu on the Palistinian side; else even that won't be the end fo the troubles. It's going to get really harry...

Thus Israel's reliance almost exclusively on military action is really a trap.