"Not essential to Israeli security??? Only if there were a solid peace treaty with Syria. Perhaps that is what your commission wants." - Jim The Commission of course assumes that the Golan will not be given back without a solid peace treaty. Many of the peace issues were already raised and negotiated during Hafezssad's rule, including demilitarized zones. The Commission has not yet made its report public. only its conclusions. However, I take for granted that they considered what would happen if Syria violates the treaty, and then concluded that holding on to the Golan was not essential. One has to move with the times, and new weaponry changes considerations. For example, during the days of bow and arrow, the Golan was too far to matter. Nowadays, with Israel possessing rockets and missiles that can easily hit Damascus, and Syria having similar things, there is a balance and the fact that the Syrians get 20 km closer (Golan) will not matter much. Also, Israeli vast superiority in air force was probably a factor. Note that we are talking about a commission of EXPERTS appointed under Sharon.
IDF deputy chief: I had no intention to compare IDF, trends in Germany 70 years ago (Haaretz)
from the article: Israel: Nasrallah speech 'spit in face' for international community
'Quiet and regular daily routine are a mutual interest and we will strive to keep them,' IDF says.04:42 05.05.16 | 4 comments