Abbas must unilaterally declare Palestinian state

Yes,Yes,Yes, do it ASAP ( as soon as possible) following the Israeli( 1948), Kosovo and Georgia model!

What is he waiting for? Just do it!!! Palestine would almost instantly get recognition from over 140 UN menber nations. Furthermore, this is not something the US can veto like it vetos any resolution that is even slightly critical of Israel.

"Since when is a unilateral solution a good idea?" (S) When there is no other option left.

"Why is it legal for Israel to have Israelis living in west Jerusalem or Jaffa but not in East Jerusalem and other Palestinians areas?" (zionist forever) There is only one way for Israelis to live legally in East Jerusalem and other palestinian areas, and that is for the Israeli government to first annex them, then to have the annexation recognized by the international community. Only then will Israelis legally live there. Nothing of that sort has happened yet. "The fact the Palestinians want something doesn't mean they should automatically get it." (zionist forever) You are absolutely correct. No one, certainly not in Israel, is even suggesting that "they should automatically get what they want." And no one will ever know what exactly they want as long as negotiations are not held, and their outcome published.

- except that you can't make 'valid' examples that easily. your cases aren't really good examples as they're about authoritarian regimes relating to their own people /formerly their own. you talk about a very different era (something always used as argument against israel when dealing w/what's lawful & acceptable) without any UN /international legal framework. also, britain 'granted' independence to lots of countries. where do you put east-timor in that scheme? that is a good example which particularly deals w/separating two peoples & ending occupation. why was northern ireland dealt with in a different framework as well? plus of course, bibi's not a king & israelis contrary to your claim aren't against pal. independence. in your #170 you also simplify. britain wasn't just feeling generous, it had largely been responsible for the whole process leading up to the creation of a jewish state for decades already, via balfour etc.

Until it declared its independent state status, Israel was an independent non-state actor. Israel unilaterally declared its independence during a period when Britain was feeling generous and didn't feel like suppressing independence. Instead others objected. 242 and 338 did not contemplate the Palestinians. If they declare independence, Israel will be in the British role, except Israel never was given the Palestinian Territories in trust. It took them by conquest. You can call it a defensive conquest, but the locals did not invite the Israelis to conquer them. The US was a non-state set of actors before it declared independence. King George objected, but ultimately conceded that we would not remain English or governed by the English crown. We tried negotiating and like the Palestinians ran into a blank wall. Parliament and King George also wanted a peaceful resolution. But were unwilling to concede our points so we declared the relationship over.

if only states can make agreements, then the palestinians will never be able to have a state since they are not sovereign. international law specifically recognises that under certain circumstances, non-state actors can enter into international agreements. such has been the case with the pa as a result of the oslo agreements. resolution 242 is the roadmap for such an agreement.

intarnational law requires that borders be agreed upon in treaties by the parties who are making claims. the idea of borders being "defined by default" is absurd and is not recognised anywhere in international law.

the borders of israel have never been fixed on her east. armistice lines are never borders. an armistice line is simply a line where armies stop fighting. israel's high court cannot fix borders. borders can be fixed only between belligerents as a final status agreement.

israel will win any conflict with the palestinians. israel is world class military power. she will not allow any genocide on her people, and that includes all israeli citizens.

you sound really scared. this is not 1939. this is 2001.

Had the US waited on George III, or the French waited on Louis Bourbon or the Russians waited on Nick Romanov, all would still be under monarchies. Granting independence and sovereignty is unnatural and rarely has happened. Palestinians waiting on such a gift from Israelis is now proven fantasy. It will not happen. Petitioning King Bibi I will be fruitless. It is against his nature and that of the majority in Israel just as it was against the majority in England to grant independence. Independence must be seized. It will then be the monarch's choice to let them become independent peacefully or not. Reading the Palestinian press, it is clear that they do not expect that Israel will merely acquiesce. But it has become clear that petitioning Israel's government to negotiate in good faith is a chimera.

Yaakov, why should Israel be forced to absorb all the Palestinians when all the Muslim states expelled their Jewish populations after 1949? Israel should have Jews as its majority. It is a Jewish state.

What a brilliant idea. The Palestinians declare themselves their own state. It only took them 60 years to think of it. Why didn't they think of it sooner? They want to supplant the Jewish state, not coexist with it.

There was no Palestinian territory per se.

"Sure, but Abbas must declare a Palestinian state on the East Bank only" All of Jerusalem/the West Bank, Gaza, a strip of territory bordering Egypt and a big chunk of territory bordering Lebanon are in what was left of Palestine after Israel Declared Sovereignty over it's borders on May 4th 1948. Israel has never legally annexed one inch of territory outside it's Sovereign territory and it is illegal to acquire territory by war/force.

Pals will finally take responsibility for themselves and will wind up with much less territory than they would get in a negotiated comprehensive peace deal. And if they want international recognition they will have to behave. Abbas can claim Tel Aviv as his capital if he wants, but it doesn't make it so.

Yes, very sadly, the removal of the barrier can't be done while there are Palestinian suicide-bombers. And yes, with peace and security arranged, it should run on the border, not into the new Palestinian state. Bith side should be committed to chack no terrorists cross over, and pursue them anywhere.

"Israel has already proved that it withdraws in exchange for REAL Peace. Just ask Egyptians and Jordanians. Also from Gaza it has withdrawn." (arik) Don't rewrite history, arik. Gaza is a very bad example of a withdrawal "in exchange for REAL Peace." You know that - and did not shrink from lying. Israel handed back the whole of Sinai into Anwar Sadat's hands, against a negotiated and signed treaty, and we got REAL Peace. Sharon idiotically abandoned the Gaza Strip into nobody's hand, without asking for any return from anyone, and we got war - with an tiny Islamist enclave we now cannot live with, nor defeat, we who 42 years ago knew how to crush three Arab armies in six days. Every folly and its price, arik. Face it. "It is not Israel who does not want to negotiate. Abbas does not want." (arik) Neither is that true. What Abbas does not want, is to negotiate over a territory while Netanyahu keeps building on it as if it already belongs to us. That IS what Abbas does not want. And it stands to reason. Don't twist the truth. Putting people in front of 'fait accompli' is no way to negotiate.

"If you want a wall, keep it. But make sure it is on your side of the border." OK. Afterthought: Apropos peace, BOTH sides should be equally concerned that no suicide-bomber passes from Palestine to Israel. Yes, it should run on the agreed upon border, and not enter Palestinian territory. But it's not that "I want it". It is a disgrace that Palestinian terrorist trained by Iran are still out there. If they would not exist, no barried would be needed, just like before that barbracic massacres of Israeli civilians called the Second Intifada.

only

Con't " On 9 August (1946), he met with the president's assistant, David Niles, " who informed (him), moved to tears, that the president had accepted the entire plan and had instructed (Dean) Acheson to transmit an appropriate message to the British Government." Also, Chaim Weizmann was very influential upon Truman towards creating the State of Israel. So I think in 1948, we had various opinions in the U.S. administration and also within the pre-Israeli administration and Ben Gurion. What does this have to do with the Palestinians? My personal opinion is that there's been enough bloodshed for the region and a negotiated agreement between Israel and the Palestinians is preferrable, and the Road Map should be just fine as a framework process to the deal.

Thanks to Michael Bar-Zohar's biography of Ben Gurion, on pg.159 he relates the story and the quote from Ben Gurion. Marshall wanted a postponement of the proclamation and the U.S. was afraid that we'd be annihilated and Moshe Sharett said to Ben Gurion " I think he is right!". Ben Gurion explained: " I stood up and locked the door. And then I said to him: " Moshe! I ask you to give a full and precise report of your conversation with Marshall (to the Mapia Central Committee) exactly as you reported to me. But you're not going out of here before you promise me one thing. Those last four words you said,"I think he is right!", you won't say them at the Central Committe.!" Moshe agreed." Now Truman supported the Partition plan. Nahum Goldmann p.135 "flew to America to persuade the three-man committee established by TRUMAN to formulate American policy on Palestine to adopt the partition plan. Con't

It isn't Israel they don't recognize. Like me and all my Jewish friends they recognize Israel but not as a Jewish state. We just want Israel to be a democracy. Even Ahmadinejad is only asking for the same.

The decision by the High Court of Israel is in full accord with 242 which calls for (1) the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupited in the recent conflict, (2) termination of all claims or states of belligerency, and (3) respect for and aknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of every state in the area. Moveover, the High Court decision in 2004 was delvered with the above principles in mind. It is a later and highly specific implementation of 242 and thus takes precedence over any earlier interpretations of the resolution. That the Israeli government chooses to ignore 242 and the more recent pronouncements of its own High Court says a lot about its attitude with respect to their own legal system I am of the opinion that that attitude can be summed up in one word: contempt.

the UN Charter, the Laws, Resolutions and Israeli Declaration of Sovereignty actually said. You're spouting propaganda. "...after the war of independence it was left with 78%.." It is illegal to acquire territory by war. (defensive or aggressive) Annexation is only legal if there is a treaty or an agreement. Israel accepted the borders of res 181. Res 181 is enshrined in the Declaration of a Jewish State. Israel was recognized as a Sovereign state by the majority of the International Community of States, over riding the Arab States objections. The name of Palestine has not been changed since the fall of the Ottoman Empire. As each bit has been carved off, what remained is PALESTINE! Jerusalem is in what was left of Palestine after Israel Declared. Israel exists because it Declared itself to be a Sovereignty and was recognized. The UN did not vote to recognize Israel, each country recognized it by their own decision. BTW It's 'P'alestinian.

Palestinians are stubborn people and they think they are right. The jews are tougher and they also think they are right. They are even stronger than the palestinians. Palestinians will resist forever... and Israel will not be removed from the west bank. If the palestinians wont recognize the jewish state with its capital in Jerusalem and accept there is no right of return, they will have no state. They will live as they do today, for another hundred years. Not worst that most people in the Brazilian favelas.

Let the Palestinian Arabs have a state that recognizes Israel's borders. Let them be responsible for their own economy, education and internal security. If Israel is attacked from this state then Israel has the right and duty to destroy it if it is a threat to her security. Be careful what you wish for Abu Sarid.

Clearly you see all the dead as being Palestinians, which I don't think is much of an issue for you. Let Israel take it by force as it has taken all the other land of the Palestinians. Let the world see once and for all what Israel is all about. Yes, Palestinians will die, but they have died for a long time and they are still dying. They are not frightened of dying as Israelis are, because the Palestinians know the land is theirs and they believe the land is more important than their individual lives. This is why they will prevail. They have incredible courage, and because they know they are right -- and they are right -- there is no way Israel can win except by removing or eliminating them all. And there's the rub for Israel.

Just move it onto Israeli land. And take all your settlers out of Palestine. Or if they refuse to leave let them stay as residents of Palestine, without their guns (since Israel wants the west bank demilitarized) We'll deal with Jerusalem next.

Charlotte If Israel should not be allowed to annex east Jerusalem or the Golan why should it be allowed to annex the Galilee, Jaffa, west Jerusalem and the other territory that it annexed in 1949 but was never supposed to get when the UN voted on partition? If the world is going to accept that Israel keeps that land then why shouldn't the world accept that Israel keeps east Jerusalem or the Golan it all came as a result of winning a war The extra that 27% of former Palestine that Israel captured in 1948-49 legally does not belong to Israel but the world has pretty much accepted Israel it keeping it so the world has already once accepted that Israel will keep land that was never supposed to have gone to it. If Israel stands firm on east Jerusalem and the Golan then it will eventually get what it wants The Reality is laws are based on what you can get away with & if Israel can get away with these things then different laws apply to it same as with the US who live by a different laws

"Israel "annexations" of the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem are illegal and null and void." Not in Israel, they aren't. Too bad Syria and Jordan attacked Israel. Now they get to negotiate final borders.

"It's sad and amazing that [Abbas] was elected to office, given his naivity." (Fred Fennaw) Perhaps. But he is the one his people has elected for Chairman, and we cannot choose our enemy/partner. It's also sad and amazing no less that Bibi was elected to office, given his stubborn refusal to freeze settlement construction and allow serious negotiations. "Jews 'as full and equal citizens ... ' - which Arab countries so far offer this policy?" (Fred Fennaw) Not one. Then what? The PA was also the first of our neighbours to hold truly democratic elections.

The decision by the High Court of Israel is in full accord with 242 which calls for (1) the withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupited in the recent conflict, (2) termination of all claims or states of belligerency, and (3) respect for and aknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity, and political independence of every state in the area. Moveover, the High Court decision in 2004 was delvered with the above principles in mind. It is a later and highly specific implementation of 242 and thus takes precedence over any earlier interpretations of the resolution. That the Israeli government chooses to ignore 242 and the more recent pronouncements of its own High Court says a lot about its attitude with respect to their own legal system I am of the opinion that that attitude can be best summed up in one word: contempt.

"Immediately after the declaration, celebrations will begin in the capital, East Jerusalem, and people from all over the world will join in, including Israelis." I guess for Sarid "we are the king": as long as he is going to celebrate he includes "IsraelIS" not in single form.

...because as you very well know by now, you've been told dozens of times this fact: 'territory seized by war is inadmissible" Israel "annexations" of the Golan Heights and East Jerusalem are illegal and null and void. The rule of law does not change at your whim, it just is, and Israel is in clear violation of numerous parts of it on a daily basis.

I'm not getting why you think Israel is "successful" when it is almost universally reviled for its warlike policies and abominable treatment of the Palestinians? You have no security, you've been propped up by US vetos and arms for decades, the only people who love you in the 'States are right wing Republicans and some evangelical Democrats who simply wish for the "second coming" where all Jews will have to convert to Christianity or go to hellfire (I'll be there under their extreme version of religious dogma as well). Israel enjoys no security, it is belligerent to the extreme to all the neighbors, y'all live i constant fear of the next attack (that your own actions bring on) and you call that success? Israel is the bastard child of the family of nations that has never learned to moderate it's violent behavior nor its constant refrain of always being the innocent victim. If you really want to be successful, take responsibility for the Nakba and grow the hell up.

Chechnya was not a sovereign territory, ben. More witty remarks? yes neither has palestien ever in history...

...in west bank. Palestinians become citizens of west bank asd as members of an enemy state, with whom there are no relations, are deported to the areas they control. Israel will remain in control of security locations as it does now. The land bridge will be dead and gaza and the west bank will be ermanently separated as were east and west pakistan. Populations will be exchanged as were pakistan and india. West bank will ultimately return to jordan and gaza kept in siege. There will be no need to negotiate borders. Who has control keeps what he has. Israel leaves them with enough land to form a state like lictenstein or manaco. They will need agreements with israel or jordan.

"In 1947 the UN proposed Israel get 51% of Palestine after the war of independence it was left with 78% and it just annexed the the extra land which came from the rejected arab state." They didn't reject the land. "Israels exists because of UN majority vote & American recognition palestinians going it alone will get non of those things" UNGA only voted to give an opportunity for either party to form a Sovereign State according to the conditions set out in Res 181. Israel accepted and was recognized BY THE CONDITIONS in res 181, which is enshrined in the Declaration of a Jewish State. Your propaganda is dealt with here, in detail http://talknic.wordpress.com/

The Israelis in Judea and Samaria at the same time could declare their own state and we would have a situation with a breakaway state from the "new Palestine" that would quickly align with Israel and merge with it. Whoever thinks that the Arab states would need an excuse to invade Israel and conquer if they could, should also realize that they may be terrorist states but they are not about to repeat the idiocy of 1948, 1967, and 1973,

In 1947 the UN proposed Israel get 51% of Palestine after the war of independence it was left with 78% and it just annexed the the extra land which came from the rejected arab state. Legally Israel never had formal borders only ceasefire lines which have just kind of been assumed as being its borders. So its borders from before 1967 are no less more or less legal than its borders since 1967. Why should it be legal for Israel to have people living in west Jerusalem or Jaffa if these areas were never supposed to be part of Israel but were just captured in war So at the same time why should it not be legal for Israelis to live in east Jerusalem or other areas palestinians want? The fact the palestinians want something doesnt mean they should automatically get it. Hamas want it all so why not just give them everything because they want it? Israels exists because of UN majority vote & American recognition palestinians going it alone will get non of those things

Yossi was so successful in building up the Shinui party that he is giving good advice to the palestinians s to build up their state. The result will be a Palestine as successful as Shinu with no tax base and no industry and little access to the outside world.

I am a strong supporter of Israel, but not of the Netanyahu government. As a former far leftist I abhor the far left that supports Hamas, Ahmadinejad, and Hezbollah. But I think Yossi Sarid is right, it is time for a unilateral West Bank Palestinian state. Let the settlers who live their decide if they want to become citizens of Palestine or return to Israel.

It will drive them bonkers !!!

If he wants to stay 'commited for Israel's security' and prove he's not a great liar, he wouldn't declare it. And there's no way to make sure he will: he's a neutral guy.

But now it is fact and something reasonable needs to be done and actually was agreed already in principle. Anyway, since when is a unilateral solution a good idea?

Indeed, the 242 does not deal with palestinians, but still the 242 constitutes the basis for peace negotiations between palestinians and Israel. This is accepted by the International Community. The difference between the parts are the two interpretations of it. Let's debate, indeed. In the meantime the status quo prevails. Crystal clear.

Israel`s borders were define 14th May 1948 when it declared Sovereignty over them and was recognized by the MAJORITY .... Irrelevant. The borders were not accepted by the palestinians and war imposed on Israel redefined the borders. The "new" borders are a result of armistice. Legal not legal is irrelvant. The truth is that these borders might be removed. That is plausible. Everything depends on NEGOTIATIONS, that israel is ready to enter into and palestinains do not. "Israel has never legally annexed any territory A lot of Israeli`s are living illegally.... Palestinian territory, have been for 61 years. 1) Indeed Israel has never ANNEXED. 2) IT HAS NEVER STOLEN 3) Never has been a Palestine state. 4) The future of the land depends on negotiations and in the meantime Israelies may live there. Will they live there tomorrow? Depends on negotiations. Period.

Hi Nevada, Yes I am familiar with the developments during the period before the declaration and there's a story about PM Ben Gurion's advisor who came back from the U.S. telling him under no circumstances should Israel declare independence given the Americans stance and that Ben Gurion should notify his cabinet, etc. But that wasn't going to be as Ben Gurion took his key locked the door to his office and put the key in his pocket and said to the advisor, " you are not leaving this room until you promise me you will not mention any of this (about the U.S. stance) to the others in cabinet." Ben Gurion was adamant to declare a State for the Jewish People and Truman knew it, despite the consequences. PS. I really must go now to visit my dad with my sons but will be back. He has many stories, my dad.

... is not with the self-determination of the Palestinian people. The problem is what they would do with their state afterward. Will it become a cockpit of Islamic extremism, sworn to destroy Israel? Will it declare war against Israel in an attempt to control every last square inch of the West Bank and Jerusalem? Will your proposal return us to the days *before* 1967, which was nothing less than declared (and often real) war along Israel's eastern side? A Palestinian state in theory is one which I fully endorse. It's your poorly-considered means of implementing it to which any sane person would be opposed. MV

Yossi, You forgot something even more important the datiyim will stay in palestine and we will be separated from a culture that doesn't recognize the State of Israel

Hi Swiss, Yes I too admire bold steps, which are the correct steps towards peace, to be justified but somehow such a move of a declaration is similar to the Disengagement of Gaza which was not planned well and also unilateral. The U.S. should continue the insistence on Israel fulfilling its obligation of halting settlements for the duration of negotiating the borders, as the Road Map stipulates. Now if ultimately this government in the near future doesn't comply, then perhaps the U.S. and U.N. could be more insistent. One thing with the Jewish community, there are many opinions or sectors to consider and that's part of the issue. Better to have agreement where there's majority consensus. P.S. I'll be preoccupied with family shortly but will return today.

Smadar: If you would do due dilligence before posting your nonsense you would know that first, Harry Truman did not work with Ben Gurion for Israels Independence. In fact there was great Arm Twisting by the enemies of Israel in High Places to not recognize Israel at all. Marshall, then Secretary of State, thretened to resign if Truman Recognized Israel. It was only after Russia Indicated it would recognize Israel first, because it represented an important step in gaing political influence in the ME as the USA had Arab support at that time, that the USA made the step. It is noted that there was great support for this move in the USA so Truman was not bucking any Political Correctness by doing so. I was living in Kansas City at that time, and I knew Truman's lawyer in their Haberdashery Business. His partner was a Jew. He prevailed, on a personal trip to Truman to do so, but got no promises, in fact he got arguments against. Truman had the guts to go against the ingrained Political

"In the 47 Partition plan we Jews were quite happy to accept an, as you put it "a TINY, completely fragmented and unworkable/undefendable portion" of our homeland ONCE AGAIN!!!!" So why take more if we were so happy? " Had your friends you so bravely encourage to wage war on us from the safety of far off Sydney, OCCUPIED Australia" A) 'friends'? I'm all for Israel, m' dear. A law abiding, Israel living in peace instead of trying to turn back the clock 3,000 years. B)The Arab States had a right to defend what remained of Palestine after Israel Declared. C) Care to show the UNSC resolution telling you Australia or Sydney is occupied... ".. accepted that plan they too could today be enjoying the fruits of almost 62 years of successful INDEPENDENCE" No they couldn't, because of Plan Dalet, begun weeks before the Israel Declared, part of the Palestinians allotted territory was not under their control. In order to declare Sovereignty, an entity must control ALL of it's territory

But now it is fact and something reasonable needs to be done. The big blocks to remain and everything else removed and compensating areas to be given from other places. This concept was agreed already, but if a state is declared w/o negotiation then the resulting arguments may, no, will, immediatly transform to violence, then worse, and finally, war. And that's why I say Sarid's idea is the worst scenario. But since when is a unilateral solution a good idea?

It says NOTHING about "territories in exchange for peace" Read it...then point out where is says "territories in exchange for peace" Res 242 was between STATES. The STATES were all Sovereign STATES. Sovereign STATES all have borders. The words were 'Acknowledgement of" boundaries and the (acknowledgement (same sentence) ) to live in peace within them. There is NOTHING about negotiating borders, nothing about Palestine, because the war was between the Arab States and Israel, not Palestine and Israel.

"CJ cannot grasp that international law may change with "fait accomply"." The word is 'might' change, however, it hasn't, unless of course you can show where it has... "In the meantime, without a western recognized border, Israel managed quite well tll now." Israel's borders were define 14th May 1948 when it declared Sovereignty over them and was recognized by the MAJORITY of the International Community of States, over riding the Arab States objections. Israel has never legally annexed any territory and it is illegal to acquire territory by war. A lot of Israeli's are living illegally in Palestinian territory, have been for 61 years.

when the Peoples Council accepted the borders of Res 181 and Israel was recognized by the majority of the International Community of States, over riding the Arab States objections. "The Palestinians will have to define the borders of their state, and that, without negotiations, will be the precise 1967 lines. This will mean that 450,000 Israelis must be relocated, an impossibility! " There were no borders defined in 1967, only armistice lines & why are Israeli's living in Palestinian territory in the first place?

I can't understand why Abbas didn't do it a long time ago!Montenegro did it, why not Palestine? Let Hamas deal with it after the deed is done.But it must be done, for the sake of both peoples.

The Palestinians recognize this; the international community of nations recognizes this; the UN recognizes this. The UN recognizes 242 "territories in exchange for peace" The french version is "les territories". The palestinians arabs and israel bashers take the second version, the israelies americans and the world community take the first version. Israel has already proved that it withdraws in exchange for REAL Peace. Just ask Egyptians and Jordanians. Also from Gaza it has withdrawed. Inded, no rejectionism Palestinian self determination might be welcomed, the problem is borders. They will be determined in NEGOTATIONS BETWEEN THE PARTS. It is not Israel who does not want to negotiate. Abbas does not want. Indeed, negotiations will not lead to borders identical to the arminstice. Otherwise what is a negotiation for? Negotiations of borders is the spirit of the 242, no matter that the Palestinians were not mentioned in it.

Just do it for f***'s sake! Say those magic little words "We declare an independent Palestinian state on all of the West Bank, with East Jerusalem as its capital, ensuring acces to all religious sites for all people. We call upon the Jewish settlers to become law abiding citizens of the state of Palestine, to work together with their Arab neighbours to build this country. We call upon the members of the UN, and Israel, to recognise our independence, and our legitimate claims to the land, as we recoginise Israel's legitimate claims!" Just bloody do it and end this circus freak show called peace negotiaitions! Hamas can then stew in Gaza while the Palestinians in the West Bank enjoy their sovereignty and freedom!

Did Yossi Sarid write this ridiculous essay as a way of showing everyone how unrealistic and silly the far left is? Is this guy an Israeli? If so, why is he writing articles on behalf of enemies of Israel? And Sarid said, 'For 42 years Israel has been scattering prior conditions and faits accomplis all over' That is insane. That's how this writer summarizes the last 42 years, by blaming Israel? Israel has scattered 'prior conditions' like 'stop attacking Israel' to the Palestinians. Does this crazy writer find that a bad thing to have done on Israel's part? And this writer calls Abbas? Is Abbas his friend? And why does this crazy writer want Israel's 'occupation' to end BEFORE the Palestinians actually even want peace with Israel? Seriously, this article is a good example why no one is on the left anymore. Everyone is in the middle, or on the right.

....but he surely is a very smart one. Imagine, if the people in the former Eastern Germany would have waited till Honecker was ready for negotiations, the "Iron Curtain" would most probably still exist today. Once in a while it takes "bold actions" to bring new life in a hopelessly blocked situation.... ....and that is why I fully agree with Yossi Sarids proposal.

In the 47 Partition plan we Jews were quite happy to accept an, as you put it "a TINY, completely fragmented and unworkable/undefendable portion" of our homeland ONCE AGAIN!!!! Had your friends you so bravely encourage to wage war on us from the safety of far off Sydney, OCCUPIED Australia, accepted that plan they too could today be enjoying the fruits of almost 62 years of successful INDEPENDENCE.

"Hamas wont allow this hahaha" Hamas' qassams can't even reach the Knesset in Jerusalem, much less Abbas headquarters in Ramallah! They are well advised not to tangle with the Palestinian Guard. So tough cookies! Hamas has nothing to say about this.

The borders of Palestine were decided upon and fixed as a part of the Armistice Agreement between Israel and Jordan at the close of the the 1967 war. The border is the Green Line. Its Easternmost point is the Western Wall in the Jewish Quarter of Old Jerusalem. The High Court of Israel has stated this expliicitly in a 2004 civil suit decision between Palestinian farmers and the IDF. The High Court decision classifies Israel as the "belligerent occupier" of Palestine. The Palestinians recognize this; the international community of nations recognizes this; the UN recognizes this. Unfortunately, Netanyahu, his government, the settlers, and those who support a Greater Israel ignore this. Whether they do so through ignorance or through willful disobedience I cannot say. But ignorance of the law is no excuse.

CJ cannot grasp that international law may change with "fait accomply". It may take time,and the "status quo" of a particular situation may give place to redefinition of legal borders. Borders will be determined by political acts. Palestinian unilateral decision is a good move regardles of the fact that will be rejected at the S Council anyway) Israel will annex parts of West Bank and also will be rejected. So what? Those are political moves that create de facto situations, whose final status will be agreed upon the parts. In the meantime, without a western recognized border, Israel managed quite well tll now. Isn't it? Palestine will do as well with its own "liberated" piece. Israel will not invade. Another "status quo" might reign for another 100 years. Who cares if Gaza is part of Palestine. It is indeed another Palestine state, "de facto". Legality at the end of the day will meet reality on the ground.

"in such an event Netanyahu would do nothing and just wait for another Pal Failure: the collapse of the new Palestine" Oh no! Netanyahu just wants you to think he is doing nothing! But look at all the activity in the settlement expansion! That is what Netanyahu is actually doing. However, you and I are not supposed to notice this. And when the time comes for Palestine to declare its sovereignty, he, or his successor, will rise up in righteous indignation and chide the world for their rejection of all the good things that Israel has done for progress in the Middle East while his Minister of Defense makes war upon the ingrates who dare to declare their independnece of Israel's benevolence.

"The time for negotiations with Israel is over" Yes! The time for negotiations is over - for the present. You cannot negotiate with a government which refuses to negotiate. Israel has demonstrated time and time again that she will not negotiate a true peace. Always she insists upon perpetuating the current status quo, i.e no change. As you say, Israel will never give the Pals freedom and justice. It boils down to the eternal formula. No one gives another freedom and justice, the other must seize his own freedom and make his own justice. So, too, Palestine. The State of Palesinte must declare itself with or without the consent of Israel. As the Pals would say, Inshallah!

In order to keep its international support, Palestine must declare statehood, but at the same time NOT declare war on Israel. Israel will likely declare war upon Palestine. It should suffice. But there is more yet. For as long as the Palestinian people are not united behind a common goal, there is the possibility of chaos. This will guarantee that Israel will win the ensuing conflict. That is what she depends upon for her mastery of the ME: disunity of the Palestinians and the split between West Bank and Gaza, PA and Hamas. PM Fayad is working this out. Maybe in two years the time will come when all these variables will add up to a declaration of statehood for Palestine. It is inevitable. The only question is when. Yes! Bibi is worried!

"And yet I do think he [Abbas] should do it [declase the Palestinian State] because he will have the entire world on his side and that is a card that Israel cannot trump." If Abbas does declare Palestine statehood, as Israel did in 1948, it will mean the worst war yet in the Middle East. But it will no longer be a war betweeen a state and an occupied but stateless people. This time it will be a war between two legitimate and sovereign states. Yet, I have to agree with Macabee. Horrible as the prospect of such a war may be, this is a stand that will have to be taken at some time if Israel's aggression is to be checked and Palestine's legitimacy recognized by its worldwide supporters. If that is the way it must be then cry Havoc! and let loose the dogs of war! Free Palestine!

Hamas wont allow this hahaha

"Yossi Sarid isn`t being realistic, situation different than 1948" More like 1939.

"The Likud Charter spells out what would happen next..." But, BBSNEWS! There is only one thing Netayahu is interested in: "Peace in our time!"

"Abbas is incapable." He has outlasted USA Presidents and Israeli PM's; and he is still going strong while Netanyahu's government is about to split apart at the seams. Yeah! Abbas sure is an incapable leader! Just think! Hamas to the West, Abbas to the East! If Abbas declares statehood, it will make an honest man of Netanyahu. Hang in there, Mahmoud!

A declaration of statehood would not resolve all issues, but as long as it is recgnized by existing states - as it would be - it would shift the nature of negotiations radically. A state need not be in full control over its land at the time time of the declaration. Many states, including the US, were not in control of all of their territory at the time of the declaration. If Palestine were to immediately sign the Geneva Conventions, assure the world that this is not a declaration of war nor the initiation of an ethnic cleansing campaign, there would be very little Israel could do. Israel would probably try to annex the WB immediately, but if even one state has already reognized Palestine, such annexation would be unlawful. If Israel responded by starting a war, the UN could and would intervene. Even the US would be hard pressed to support any such war or annexation.

#8 - "Abbas should settle for one man one vote".It will never happen. If an independent Palestinian state is not established on the West Bank (and Gaza?), the only alternative that Israel wii agree to will be to incorporate the settlements into Israel proper and declare the rest a Bantustan/reservation... what have you. We'll let them run their own casinos.To # 9- Jews living freely ia an Arab Moslem country? A pipe dream. Nice try Yossi but Abbas hasn't got the guts to try anything.

I may have missed it above, but I haven't seen any reference to what would happen to one of the ostensibly cherished goals of the PLO-- ie the right of return. That right, both in its strict meaning and in its more attenuated form of compensation, whatever the theoretical niceties would as a practical matter simply disappear as a possibility with the unilateral option. Similarly, (and this is noted above) the likelihood of getting East Jersualem as a capital is at a minimum seriously impaired. Some of the fantasists above like Johnboy who talk about the analogy with Kuwait seem to miss the point that it would not be Israel who would HAVE to "invade"; it would be the (in any event non-existent) Palestinian "army" that would have to consider that option since Israel --rightly or wrongly -- already holds possession of all and more of what it could expect to get through negotiations. It seems to me the unilateral option would work about as well for the PLO as it did for Israel with Gaza.

Palestinians can drag on the negotiations for several more years (especially easy with Netanyahoo - who will never accept dividing Jerusalem, even if he freezes the settlements) By then Iran has a nuke and Saudi has joined the Iranian camp (only way to prevent worsening of problem in Yemen, and soon Mecca). At this point, Iran says to US - it is one state or Oil. By then, all attempts at 2-state would have failed and US will be in no position to stop Palestinians from launching a civil disobedience movement. How many police can Israel put on the street before the army starts firing? Remember Algeria.

"Is that Palestinian state [...] going to give up territorial claims beyond the 1967 line?" (Moises) There is no way to know that for sure before it is put to test. "Prediction is a difficult art, especially so when applied to the future". I guess you know that. But what if it does not give up? What makes you fear it may not? A treaty is a contract, and he who breaks it has to suffer the consequences. Anyway, we have proved enough times that we are much better equipped to deal with hostile states than we are when confronted by a rebellious stateless population. I guess you know that too.

Yossi, how can we implant a couple of million Yossi Sarids in Israel?

Armed to the teeth the settlers will then declare a revlot against the PA. And more land will be grabbed by them. Pushing Palestinians deep in the vallies. Thanks but no thanks Mr. Sarid. Abbas should go on hunger strike with more and more Palestinians to join him until the Israeli army withdraws behined the wall and away from boarder crossings. Then will begin the negotiation to remove the wall to the 1967 line.

Amazing! If the Palestinians actually wanted a state, then please explain, why didn't the Palestinians accept the state offered by Barak, along with the 30 billion dollars in cash? A unilaterally declared Palestinian state in the West Bank, with Ramallah as its capitol, and the fictious "Palestinian right of return" would be fine with pretty much all Israelis. Of course,the first attack from the newly declared Palestinian state would be an act of war by a soveriegn state and Israel could then respond with the gloves off. But yes, please,declare a state and then nstay on the other side of the security fence.

If Abbas declares a state I would presume he would need mark out his territory in some manner. No doubt he would be putting in claims for East Jerusalem and many Jewish settlement areas. This will immediately bring him into conflict with Israel. So what then? War? Or peace talks to renegotiate the borders? What is gained by declaring a Palestinian state? How is this problem going to be fixed?

The beauty of silence. Why do you want a second state? Abbas does not want to go into political nirvana

If your claim that the resolutions declare Jerusalem as an international city and the Palestinians better settle for Ramallah as a capital, then Israel herself should finally swallow the fact (as all nations recognize) that Tel Aviv is it's capital and not Jerusalem.

"Israel is not going to abandon its settlers now in what the palestinians call their state" You are probably correct. However, this argument applies to any possible route to an independent Palestine. Two-states is thus an illusion. What the Land of Israel/Palestine needs is full civil rights for all its inhabitants in a secular state.

Actually, Israel relies on the West Bank for much of its water at present, depriving Palestinian farmers of what they need. This is one of the reasons why Israel will never willingly give the area true independence. However, given such independence, a tsunami of investment money would flow into Palestine, another reason for Israeli intransigence.

Charlotte is absolutely correct; I think that there can be no doubt this is the only place left to go for the Palestinians. The weakness of Abbas is, however, only one of the many logistical barriers to a unilateral declaration of independence. As surely as this is the single option left to the Palestinians by their occupiers, Israel will never accept the loss of its illegal settlements and war will be declared. I imagine this will be telling, one way or the other, if Obama can marshal the strength to break the hold of Congress and accept the worldwide consensus then there is hope for a final peace. I don't see him having this strength though; the Arab countries will not be able keep out of the fighting and Israel will find itself without a neutral border.

let's say the state has been declared & the wonderful celebrations in jerusalem have followed, israel not daring to crush any of it. are you expecting hamas in gaza just to fold? or to automatically reconcile w/abbas & co, to submit to a system of one command & one weapon? the two pal. camps may start another round of their brotherly war, & how long do you reckon israel, facing a torn, pal. entity without having a formal peace agreement w/any of the two, will be able to sit on the sidelines before entering that fray again? even if a relative calm prevails, can israel live w/a situation where no peace agreement exists, the pals have a state, keep getting arms in from the outside & keep talking (as they do now) about a return of refugees into israel proper? recognized by the world & without the grip of the occupation the pals, indeed divided, will be even less inclined to sign on to a deal filling a minimum of israel's requirements. so the grip & the conflict will continue.

"Is it going to give up territorial claims beyond the 1967 line?" Declaring a state within defined borders means borders to that state.

What is it you tried to tell Yossi? That having sowed evil (read settlements) amidst a foreign and stateless population, on a land outside our sovereignty, against the opinion of the rest of the world, for 42 years now, all we can reap now is only sorrow? Am I right ... ? Yes? I knew I was! You shouldn't have bothered. I'm sure Yossi already knows all that.

The author paints a completely unrealistic picture of the day after Palestine is declared. Israel will not just sit back and let the 67 armistice line be the new border, they will use their forces already stationed in the WB to enclose the PA into the isolated islands of the A areas and take the rest of the area for Israel. This is exactly what Israel has been building up to since 1967. Best option is to go the other way, declare the PA disbanded and give the Israeli's responsibility for the people under its control. Then ask for the vote.

1. If the Palestinians unilateraly declare a state they must also define its borders, which would be the 1967 lines. Meaning that some 450,000 Israelis must be relocated, practically an impossibility! 2. Furthermore, Sarid doesn't say what they should do with Hamas. But let us say the Palestinians will arrange that. 3. Next thing, the whole Arab world would now insist to implement this "peaceful solution". The UN, Europe, everybody will turn against Israel to get out of the entire WB, with all those hundreds of thousand of settlers. Rockets will start raining over Israel. The result of all this will be war. A big one. Actually, Likud's refusal to freeze the settlements, if continued, may lead to a similar disaster too. But Sarid's alternative disaster would come faster...

Is that Palestinian state going to rely on Israel for employment, water, electricity, etc, etc, etc? Is it going to give up territorial claims beyond the 1967 line? I think it's a good idea to declare that state, but only if it's a state with obligations as well as rights.

Both wars ended with the unconditional surrender of the vanquished. There is no possible way for Israel to compel the Palestinian side - if only because there is no one to speak in their name - to surrender and submit to our leaders' will. An Israeli PM who would try to achieve such a goal would soon find his country completely isolated and condemned, and perhaps himself sitted in the Hague. Anyone with a little bit of knowledge of modern history would tell you that time is long past when an Army clashing, not with another Army, but with a foreign and stateless people, could bring a definitive military solution.

....but he surely is a very smart one. Just imagine, if the people in the former Eastern Germany would have waited for negotia- tions with Honecker, the "Iron Curtain" would probably still be there today. Once in a while you have to take "bold steps", if you wanna bring change to a hopelessly blocked/stalled situation..... ....and therefore I fully support Yossi Sarids proposal.

One of the best article i read, lot of hope from you Yossi, thank you. I will be on the party the day Abbas say Independance and i will dance even if i am alone in my town to celebrate.

"after you took and stole palestin from them ,the least they can accept is 28% of their home land" Invest in a history book... Israel was a barren wasteland untill the jews came back in the 19th century... The pals as they call themselves were brought in by the jews as laborers... They have no history to the land before this... "unified Jerusalem(is east jerusalem Ben ,you built west of us in 1967,you can have that" Unified Jerusalem is all of Jerusalem. Jerusalem has always been a jewish city... The pals can declare what ever they wish. But Israel will never give up the city. "Obama will be the first to recognize a palestinian state in 1967 line". Umm no he wont. Obama cant afford to accept a pal state during an election year.

Let the Jews and Arabs of Israel and the territories stay where they, but then to base citizenship on geography? The problem is that the settlers are already Israeli citizens. Would they, should they, give up Israeli citizenship? How does this interact with "right of return?"

"This week, I phoned Abbas, after not having spoken to him for at least four years. I told him everything that I am writing now" What did Abbas reply ?? To me,sounds dangerous but a very good idea. In fact,can reframe the all problem.BRAVO YOSSY

Abbas said it once; his alternative is arm resistance ! He is trying it now because of his failure with Hamas and not because of Nathenyahu & the settlements; this is just an excuse ! Professional liars !

We'll now jump to day 1 of the new state,PALESTINE, recognized instantly by 130 countries. Their PM cries out to the world media that `the Zionists are invading our territory. We need help, instantly!' Jihadists from all around the world; armies, air forces etc. enter PALESTINE from Syria and Iraq and try to smash Israel. Obama calls a 3 day conference to tone down this `mess.' Israel is obliterated while the armies of Syria, Iran, Iraq, Egypt and others come to the aid of their lantzman. WHAT A SCENARIO!

after you took and stole palestin from them ,the least they can accept is 28% of their home land ,i mean West bank and Gaza . unified Jerusalem(is east jerusalem Ben ,you built west of us in 1967,you can have that .. ) is non negotiable .it is the basis of our economy . the settlers are free to stay and have a palestinian citizenship .LOL Abbas's declaration will define what is occupied or not ...it will bring the Gazan into the table . Finally ,i have news for MR Sarid if i am reading the events properly ....... Abbas is finalising the blue print for the independence ,but he appreciate your article and your phone call .... and here the shoker ... Obama will be the first to recognize a palestinian state in 1967 line . ..Sarid will be pleased .i am sure ... what do you think Nataniaho was told 2 days ago at the white house ??that he should grow a mostache ..or he has a good loking ass ... it is over body ,it will be good for everyone in the region .

If you want a wall, keep it. But make sure it is on your side of the border.

Excuse me ! Just like it is in Iraq, Afghanistan, Bosnia, Serbia etc.. Thank you very much ...

"Russia the great didn`t allow itself to remain inside the sovereign territory of Georgia after their war" Russia the great did not leave Chechnya... (ben) Chechnya was not a sovereign territory, ben. More witty remarks?

...so what you meant to say was that the right thing to do for Israel is to comply with the law and remove itself from East Jerusalem, it belongs to the Palestinians as the new capital of Palestine. Fear not, after that the US will finally move it's embassy to Jerusalem :-)

...and the day after the US recognizes Palestine I'll be there to cheer them on.

Pals have nothing to offer Israel. They just sit there waiting to hear what they are going to get and then criticize.

" Nine months after the elections, the left has evaporated and the right has only grown stronger, probably stronger than ever. The Labor Party and its leadership continue to sink lower and lower, but the general public is actually exhibiting intellectual flexibility and political moderation: the majority, including most of the Likud voters, support negotiations with Hamas, if it relinquishes terrorism and recognizes Israel. These are the main conclusion for a special survey carried out during the past days on behalf of Haaretz and Dialog, under the guidance of Professor Camil Fuchs of the Department of Statistics at Tel Aviv University. Advertisement The survey shows the impressive rising strength of the right and a serious shrinking of the center and the left. The balance in the current Knesset stands at 65 seats for the right and 55 for the center and the left parties, but if elections were held today , the current survey suggests that the right would garner 72 seats to 48 ..."

Now is the time, Palestine is the place, we will watch tyranny fall again and celebrations all over the world will be heard. From America to Russia, people will be celebrating the return of that which has been stolen from the Palestinian people. Not their homes, not their land, not their country, but their dignity, their self-worth, their independence, and their ability to live without the overbearing Israeli occupation that weighs like the world on the back of the Palestinian people. The same people who have kept for 60 years the hope that one day they would be free again. Free at last, Free at last, oh dear God they will be freed at last!!!!

Declaring a state in WB would be settling for less, much less, that what all Muslim states are aiming for. They don't say so, at least in English, but Hamas articulates their position quite well: no Jews on Islamic land. Period. If Abbas declared a state that was smaller than all of Israel, he would be considered a sell-out and probably not live a week.

2-state solution will permanently handicap Palestinian ability to recapture all the land. While pretending to want a 2-state solution, they will do everything to establish a 1-state solution. Even if their leaders personally might want to sign a 2-state deal, the internal forces will not them. Only by feverishly building settlements and making life for Palestinians miserable, Israel can maybe convince them to want to have a state of their own. But this would invite international condemnation, and clearly Israel is ill prepared to handle that, as Goldstone has shown. The only other way is to make Obama pressure the Palestinians, but for that the settlements have to stop.

Perhaps not the US due to the power of the zionist lobby there, but most nations would immediately recognise the state of Palestine. Isrtael would be further isolated. It is Israel's choice not to end the settlements which will eventually have to be dismantled and the colonists moved back to Israel. Any military actions by the IDF against the palestinian civilian population would be met with sanctions against Israel. Palestine has no other choice since Israel is not going to abadon its demographic struggle for dominance.

this plan would work just minus Jerusalem... There is no way that the pals are going to get it. they can cry about resolution 242 all they want but resolution 181 cleary shows Jerusalem being a International city not split in half one side for jews and one for arabs... If the pals want a state without negotiations be prepared for Ramallah to be the capital of Palestien...

"Russia the great didn't allow itself to remain inside the sovereign territory of Georgia after their war" Russia the great did not leave Chechnya...

then Israel would only declare war against it at the first opportunity. Win-win for Israel!

If only you had learned to live as neighbours instead of usurpers things might have turned out differently, but the colonists have made less fortunate choices. Your future, like that of any colonising power, is not very bright. You destroyed your chances as living as Palestinians equal to your Arab neighbours who you continue to dispossess from what is theirs.

Your vision is one whcih occurs in democracies. You forget that Israel is not a democracy but an ethnocracy. As inclusion of the Palestinians into tis expanded Israel ethnocracy, as Arabs in the majority they would be relegated to the status of aliens, since they are not Jews. That is the nature of an ethnocracy. Hope this clarifies the matter for you.

Like the Boers of South Africa, the colonists know the sun is setting on their colonial projects and that their dweelings of injustice that scar the hills of Palestine may be bulwarks today but sand tommorrow. This makes them more venemous and violent, more zealous and racist than ever. They long for a solution to their demographic problem either in trucks on the move east or at the end of a gun. I agree wholeheartedly with Sarid, but he must be aware that when Palestine is declared within the June '67 borders and East Jerusalem rejoices as the capital of Palestine that these pitbulls will turn into judeojihadists and Israel will support them covertly or otherwise.

when was the state of palestine created and by whom. was jerusalem its capital. how many arabs were living in the territories. when was tranjordan created , and in what soil. the so called territories belonged to whom before 1967. and can somebody tell me if the mosgue on temple mount was built on the ruins of solomons temple.

"Abbas must unilaterally declare Palestinian state" Yossi Sarid

"Abbas does not have the confidence that he could beat Israel in a war of independence" You seem to equate that independence and war of independence have to go together - what Israel could do is deny the legality, but war against Palestine is out of the question. Israel would not want to look like Arab states in 1948.

"I forget: which Arab countries so far offer this policy?" I suspect none, now... perhaps Palestine will be the first.

I hope they go for it. But I worry about the celebrations and/or the Israeli reaction to them, getting out of hand.

and maybe a settlement freeze would be cheaper for Netanyahu. then at least he would be part of the negotiations. Obama alledgedly asked Netanyahu "Would you like one or two sovereign states"? Netanyahu reportedly answered "two", but added conditions that made "Sovereign" sound very much like Israel would love to control the Palestine state some what. International ports at sea and for the air would have to have som control and maybe an International inspection body could handle that instead of Israel, if it was 'supervised' by Israel. The crossing from and into Jordan and Egypt would also have to have some mechanism on goods and people. So Sovereignty was to be for the Jewish State and Palestine would be defacto under Israeli control. God knows what other thoughts Netanyahu has on how to control a new state, but just the fact that he is being grilled on the subject shows prospect.

What would Rabin do ? If my memory is correct, Rabin threatened to end the Oslo Accords and deport Arafat & Co. if he dared to declare an Independent Palestine. Go ahead and check this. It is probably on the record.

Hamas wont tolerate a competetor.

It is real change to have such a publication in the Israeli media, while its people choose Liqud and Shas to represent them. Is it Obama who woke up the Israeli left, after its long dream? Occupation and settlements only bring further division and extremists into politics, from both sides. Communication is a must. Simply, all the opposite of what Ariel Sharon worked on. Two-State solution on the 1967 borders still has some chance, before one-democratic-state in all of historic Palestine becomes the only alternative.

Declaring a state is one thing gaining international recognition is another. Most of the western world the US especially will feel uncomfortable about the idea of a unilateral decleration especially because it won't bring peace. Israel is not going to abandon its settlers now in what the palestinians call their state so whats going to happen is if the palestinians give them any trouble Israel will launch an all out war to protect them and the troops will stay behind. Israel will never accept the idea of just handing over any part of Jerusalem so we will see more violence The PA will then find themselves in a position where they have a state but its to politically sensetive for countries like the US to recognize, we have no peace & Israel doesn't recognize this state & its borders. The PA is trapped they have a state thats not recognized & their people will then never let them negotiate away any of it, Israel is occupying it to defend its people & no peace HOW DO THEY SOLVE THAT ?

Thank you for making this phone call to Abbas. It is excactly what he needs to do! And also thank you for publishing it and make therefore this call public and addressing it to the sane people of Israel as well.

in such an event Netanyahu would do nothing and just wait for another Pal Failure: the collapse of the new Palestine

1. The Palestinians will have to define the borders of their state, and that, without negotiations, will be the precise 1967 lines. This will mean that 450,000 Israelis must be relocated, an impossibility! Not to speak of 2. Hamas! Well, since the whole Arab world would now insist on that "peaceful solution", the result may end up with war! This is where Likud is leading Israel with its stupid refusal to freeze the settlements and start negotiations...yet Sarid offers an alternative leading to the same end...but faster!

If Abbas declares Palestinian independence, it applies to Gaza too. Gaza is part of Palestine under its laws and international law. The fact that it is currently estranged from the PA is the Palestinians' problem to work out at a time of their choosing. Hamas can decide to recognise the legitimate authority of the PA or else remain an illegal, unrecognised entity. In the same way that Abkhazia and South Ossetia were in Georgia, but without the possibility of Russians or anyone else coming to save them. In fact, declaring independence is a very good way to deal with Hamas. It would establish the PA as the recognised lawful government of Palestine and Hamas would therefore be an illegal secessionist movement, recognised by no one.

How exactly will Abbas achieve 1 man 1 vote in a single state? Abbas says he wants a single state. Israel says not a chance in hell and you have no right to it under international law because Israel already exists and its down for Israel to decide its future not Abbas and his gang of terrorists The US want a single state and always have but they also know it will be the any president or politician who supports the idea of a single state will be out of a job come the next election. The US jews might support 2 states but they don't support a single state and if politicians start publicly endorsing that idea then the jews, the evangelicalists and anybody else who wants Israel to continue to exist as a jewish state will make sure that any politican who supports the single state idea will be out of a job. Great thing about democracy is you can kick out your representatives if you don't like their policies. Abbas says he wants a single state he has guarantted they never get anything.

"Abbas does not have the confidence that he could beat Israel in a war of independence - we all know he can`t." Oh? Why would there be a war? Only if Israel doesn't want the Palestinians to have a state. The reason they haven't declared a state is LEGAL. They could declare a provisional state, because they don't have full control over all their territories, but under those conditions Israel could still occupy. They cannot declare a Sovereign independent State, because Israel occupies. If they were to declare an independent state over only the territories they currently have complete control over, it would be TINY, completely fragmented and completely un-workableR. The Palestinians want the rights to what was left of Palestine after Israel Declared Sovereignty 14th May 1948. Rightly so.

We have 42 years of evidence that negotiating with Israel is a completely busted flush. It never arrives at any conclusion acceptable to anyone other than the Jewish settlers. So yes, time to put the brakes on, talking to Israel is a total waste of time. Abbas has the option. Declare Palestinian independence, knowing that he will get the strong support of the UN and EU. Or dissolve the PA and add 4 million Palestinians to the state of Israel, knowing that he will get the strong support of the UN and international law. If he does the former and Israel retaliates by taking over the West Bank government, then he just needs to do the latter, dissolve the instruments of government and put Isral on the way to becoming an Arab-majority state. That's the Pals' best route, a swift one-two to the chin. A win-win situation. Nice tactical choice for Abbas to ponder on.

"Naturally if Palestinians unilaterally declare that the disputed land is theirs this will give Israel right to take it by force and annex it permanently." No it won't. It is illegal to acquire territory by war/force and legal annexation is ONLY by agreement or treaty.

The thing needs to be thought through better. Still too many ifs. Basically, Abbas needs to be sure that the US has given the declaration a nod before he goes ahead. Yossi Sarid is over the top, but right that the peace is more deeply mired in mud than it has ever been despite the fact that a majority of Israelis wants it more than ever and seemingly so does a majority of Palestinians. Despite this, peace with the Palestinians is clearly not on this government's agenda.

You ought to look up the difference between peace and surrender, peace and armistice.

Be happy you're not the Serbs dealing with Kosovo. The US not only bombed Serbia, but we also bombed the Chinese Embassy. And our Air Force brought an end to Serbian aggression and some ethnic Serbs got a trip to the Hague. We also forced a peace on the region. It would be better not to behave like the Serbs in Kosovo. The US has a deal with the international community. We publicly investigate what we do and when we screw up. Sometimes it takes a while. But we don't just read after-action reports. It may take some time to get to all the Cheney-types.

What Yosele forgets is that the Palestinian Arabs are not united in the same way that the Albanian Kossavars, and for some strange reason there was no International Commission of War Crimes to take the US Air Force to the Hague for the bombing of innocent Serbs. As it is, Hamas controls one region of a divided Palestinian State and the PLO the other region, and, since any "declaration of . . ." at this point leaves the so-called borders of the . . . as they are. It might as well be what people call Hamastan and whatever the PLO decides to call their newly . . . Other than that, the person in charge now, is gonna leave soon with nobody to take over. Actually, it's a recipe for chaos the Palestinians. Reminds me of the story about Jouha and the Elephant's wife, read it--its instructive!

Well, maybe it's better to resign, to give up the PA and to declare that the Palestinians surrender to Israel and agree that all land belongs to the state of Israel. Then, the Palestinians will receive Israeli health care, social insurance, money for building and maintaining religious buildings and institutions, etc, etc. This will definitely be the better solution for the citizens in WB and Gaza.

As an recognized independent country, Israel would have difficulty not negotiating in good faith. The alternative would be to physically dismantle Palestine's government. And the world would see that for what is actually is. There would also be no denying that an occupation exists, a fantasy of the Israeli right wing. The US would still favor Israel's security. But would, if it recognized Palestine, also recognize that Palestine has a right to secure and recognized borders, something the Israeli right continues to deny. A Declaration of Independence would likely mean good-faith-negotiating would be forced on a recalcitrant Israeli government. Either that or they'd get to pick up the full tab for the occupation. A $1 Billion in new taxes for a small country is a BIG incentive to negotiate in good faith.

I'm very sad to say that, because I basically always believe in negotiations, but there is now ay Israel, particularly and Israel capable of electing Netanyahu and Lieberman, will ever give the Pals freedom and justice.

because he knows that what you're saying is absolutely true. ever since the hint of this became known a few days ago, i've felt that its the best way to end the impasse...and u.n. recognition is almost a given. even the united states would be hard pressed not to go against it once it happened. let's hope that abbas gives serious consideration to its potential and takes the advice. there's one possible snag though; israel is NOT russia, and it's proven time again that it's capable of bucking international norms and edicts.

Naturally if Palestinians unilaterally declare that the disputed land is theirs this will give Israel right to take it by force and annex it permanently. This will lead to hostilities and many dead. Is this what Sarid wants?

The problem is that the reasons why the Pals have not declared a state before are still in place. When Israel declared itself a state it was ready and able to defend itself against the nasty response by Nasser and the other idiots who thought they could chase the Jews into the sea. Abbas does not have the confidence that he could beat Israel in a war of independence - we all know he can't. So if he declares independence it will be an empty jesture and may cost him his credibility. And yet I do think he should do it because he will have the entire world on his side and that is a card that Israel cannot trump.

Attempts to solve the Arab/Israeli conflict regularly fail because of the refusal to acknowledge that this dispute has never been about borders, territory or settlements, but about the Arabs refusal to recognize Israel?s right to exist. ?The struggle with the Zionist enemy is not a matter of borders, but touches on the very existence of the Zionist entity,? declared an Arab spokesman. To be informed : http://xrl.us/bju8k

Anybody can declare a state in any borders but unilaterally declaring its existence doesn't make it real. It needs to be recognized by the internationaly and non of the countries that matter such as the US & Israel will recognize a unilaterally declared state they will all insist nothing without negotiation. Do that against US support and they risk alienating the US and suddenly they loose support from Obama & Israels left. Also if Abbas declares this state unilaterally Israel is never going to abandon its settlers leave them at the mercy of the palestinians so it will send in the troops. Instead of Israel occupying disputed land it will occupy the arab state. What happens if Israel refuses to accept the borders of this arab state? The palestinians will be in no better position to take on the IDF if they declare statehood than they will be if they don' Abbas has more to loose going it alone than leaving things as they are so he should agree to talk to Bibi without preconditions.

Great idea, Yossi! Both peoples will benefit. Move the separation barrier to the Green Line. Good luck to all of you!

The level of ignorance here is astounding. The Palestinians CAN NOT declare and independent state while any of their territory is under the control of another entity. It is against the rules surrounding the formation of states. The Peoples Council had to wait until the British Mandate ended in order to declare independence, just as East Timor had to wait until Indonesia had withdrawn before it could declare Independence. Meanwhile, the UNSC says Gaza is occupied. the UNSC said this of Gaza on 8 January 2009, when it adopted the following resolution Recalling all of its relevant resolutions, including resolutions 242 (1967), 338 (1973), 1397 (2002), 1515 (2003) and 1850 (2008), "Stressing that the Gaza Strip constitutes an integral part of the territory occupied in 1967 and will be a part of the Palestinian state.."

Yossi Sarid is not Prime Minister. Heck, he's not even an opposition minister. As the old saying goes, talk is cheap. Yossi doesn't even have to answer to his own electorate if his plan blows up (figuratively and literally). Of course, any politician / diplomat / statesman has to answer to someone, whether its the people or the party. It's nice to loft trial balloons, but really, this holds about as much in reality as the Geneva plan. The 'unintended consequences' are truly staggering here. What happens when the PA rolls into Hebron or Yitzhar, demanding things like taxes and census information to Jews stating that they're now "Palestinians". What happens if they get run off? If they get violent and some of the Jewish Pals wind up dead? What happens when the Jews, demand protection from Israel as Israeli citizens? Yeah. Nothing like luftballoons. I'm not even going to think about how this is supposed to work out when HAMAS gets into power.

Mr. Sarid if this happens does it mean that the Palestinenes is giving up the quest for a greater Palestine. ( which has been and still is there goal) or does it mean that your giving your house (were ever you may live) to the Palestine authority. Nether one will happen. History repeats it self, only when you don?t learn from it. Review our Jewish history Mr. Sarid stick to the thing that you can make a positive affect on Israeli life, the environment.

Likud: "The government will adopt immediate stringent measures in the event of such a declaration" Ahhh, yeah, but if the rest of the world recognized that declaration of independence then any such reaction would be too late i.e. any such "stringent measures" will be a war of aggression launched by one sovereign state against another. There is no question that he IDF would easily win that battle but, then again, so there was also no question that the Iraqi Army knocked over the Kuwaiti army in double-quick time back in 1991. But look how that ended up....

The mentality of israeli settlers in west bank will never permit such an ideal solution to the long lasting conflict. So the only way for us to libeate our occupied territories is uprising in a third, but contineous INTIFADAH.

Your argument leads to the conclusion that the only way Gaza can ever have peace is if it is armed to the teeth and capable of killing off substantial numbers of IDF soldiers at the slightest provocation. Or on the suspicion that there will be an Israeli incursion. How many and what types of tanks and aircraft and missiles should be stationed in Gaza to protect them under your theory? Your argument is MAD writ short without nukes.

It would pronounce the death of Oslo. But that was turned into a fig leaf for the "non-peace process" of endless preconditions and negotiations by successive Israeli and PA governments. The PA is merely the agent of the occupation in the West bank. Palestinians still have no property rights and they have no representation that is not Israeli approved. Their experiment with representative government was outlawed. They are only allowed to do limited law enforcement, but not to protect or serve their own people, just the Israeli settlers.

Thanks to Yossi Sarid for his bold and courageous position. It reminds me his historical vote against the first Lebanon war in 1982.

Declare your state everything from Lebanon to Eliat, Med to Dead. Then, peace will break out, and everyone in the world will be passing around candy. And pigs will fly.

answer? that Israel was not founded peacefully?

What can be more disgusting than a Jew giving advices to terrorist Abbas how to better undermine Jewish state. Truly Iossi you have a mindset of a Jewish policemen in Warsaw ghetto! Another illustration of what modern Israel leftists are - traitors and enemies of the state.

Yossi, your words are brave and wonderful. I wonder if your vision will ever come to be? Is such a thing really possible? And will the Palestinian people finally stop begging Israel and the rest of the world for justice, and just calmly and bravely and graciously take what has always been, and ever will be theirs? Their own land. Their own independance. Their freedom. The whole world waits and hardly dares to dream such a beautiful dream. Peace.

Couldnt have said it better - the only thing that would work at this point, and the best thing for Arabs and Jews.

before you make such irresponsible statements. You have a greater allegiance to Palestinians than to Israel. You belong there!!!

If Palestine declares its statehood it would push the Netanyahu coalition to act, and the Palestinians would have more leverege in negotiations. It would be a tragedy to have Jerusalem divided, but there are great prices for peace. Is it better to let the Palestinians have East Jerusalem, or an eternity of violence? Israel and Palestine could be neighbors and friends

This is EXACTLY what needs to be done. The one thing Israel cannot control is a unilateral declaration of independence and it is the one thing that will isolate Israel even further from the international community. They will stand alone, this time without the USA, who would not dare to do anything to stop it. Brilliant!!!!!

Mr. Sarid, You are a blessed man! There will be a day when Jews in Israel, Jews in Palestine, Palestinians in Israel and Palestinians in Palestine, will all rejoice and live like people of the same family. Yes, Mr. Abbas, declare the state of Palestine, so you can save us from ourselves! A proud Jew who loves the Palestinians! Abe

In 1948 U.S. President Truman worked with the Ben Gurion gov't up until the declaration of Israel's independence and strongly supported the announcement, as did eventually the U.N. I don't think that you can compare the current situation with the settlers in the West Bank today who would be caught in the turmoil of events, as would Palestinians, with a region which had much fewer people and much less development. These are emotions taking over rather than reason. Why not do things methodically and negotiate what the understandings were between President Abbas and PM Olmert in 2008 on the core areas? This makes greater sense and the present Netanyahu government doesn't really have much wiggle room to dismiss obligations of Road Map peace process or something of similar undertaking. Always the rebel this Sarid!

Sarid should study the Game Theory of economics. He may then understand that the willingness to go war is the only thing that will bring peace. The desire for peace only leads to war. The history of the 2 world wars both were started with the negotiations for peace. The cold war both sides were ready to go to war so we got peace instead. Our US president who is going around the world looking to make peace with the world and the world hates us even more. Israel s willingness to go into Gaza to protect its citizens from Palestine fire has brought quiet, to both sides. On the contrary to mister Sarid view, if Israel stands strong against the Palestine?s ability to negotiate the world to death under the peace banner, I am sure both Israel and the Palestine will have better and more peaceful lives.

Just read this piece by Sarid, keep the good work Yossi, few more of this literary masterpieces, even the memory of the left will be gone.

...right before justifying the illegal colonies it says what happens if those wily Palestinians got themselves so uppity that they up and declared a state: "A unilateral Palestinian declaration of the establishment of a Palestinian state will constitute a fundamental and substantive violation of the agreements with the State of Israel and the scuttling of the Oslo and Wye accords. The government will adopt immediate stringent measures in the event of such a declaration." Bibi is the heart and would of Likud and controls the fate of Israel and I fully believe they would scorch the earth before they give up the ill-gotten land that they have illegally transferred their citizens to. Nevertheless Yossi, I totally agree. It's the only hope for the Palestinians.

YOSSI THANK YOU FOR STABING ISRAEL IN THE BACK.MAKE SURE YOU ADVICE NASRALLA AND HANIEH ALSO

By declaring a state, Abbas would actually have to accept some responsibility, a notion which has been anathema to Palestinian leaders for decades.

It's sad and amazing that he was elected to office, given his naivity. Jews "as full and equal citizens..." I forget: which Arab countries so far offer this policy?

Why is Yossi Sarid negotiating for the enemy (the Palestinians still declare Israel their enemy) sound a little like treason.

Declare a state, then let international law sort it all out. Sounds great.

also, all arabs could perhaps tolerate jews living in palestine like israel tolerates christians and muslims i think palestine should equaly tolerate the settlements

why will Abbas want to settle for a Palestinian state when he can have one man one vote? Israel is giving him no reason to rush to a unilateral declaration.

NOW IS THE MOMENT FOR ABBAS TO DECLARE THE CREATION OF PALESTINE

He has been emasculated for so long this is all he has left in him...to quit. he has not served the Palestinians well...putting his faith in Bush and now Obama to fend off the biggest bully in the world

Pretty words, but instead of voices singing Kumbaya, expect a flurry of rockets from Gaza.

Am I the only person who has taken note of this fact: Abbas has announced that he will resign as President of the Palestinian Authority, but he has not announced that he is resigning as Chairman of the PLO. Think. About. That. If he resigns from the Presidency *and* Faayad and all his cronies fall on their sword *then* the Palestinian Authority is no more. It ceases to exist, and with that the Oslo Accords become moot. But Abbas will still be Chairman of the PLO, and so he will still retain the authority to unilaterally declare the State of Palestine. At which point the "institutions of govt" That Were Once Known As The Palestinian Authority could pledge loyalty to that newly-declared state. And as Sarid notes: the only way that Netanyahu could overturn that is to wage an instant war of aggression against that newly-declared state. Think "Iraq/Kuwait circa 1991", and then think what happened to the dude that unleashed that war.

Or he could declare unconditionall surrender and claim voting rights for the new Israeli citizens.

i agree with the message conveyed here. Palestine will never see the day through negotiations with israel. after 42 years it is clear that israel has no intention of relinquishing the west bank or east jerusalem, settlements are the case in point. A unilateral declaration of independance of palestine within the 67 borders may be required to get the ball rolling in that direction. Israel will never be ready to take down the settlements thus never ready to make peace. Palestine on the other hand could incorporate the settlements within its borders allow the settlers to become equal palestinian citizens, thus eliminating the settlement question. That would be a game changer

As long as there are terrorists bend to murder Israelis in suicide bombings, the barrier must stand. Everything else is OK. BTW: What about Gaza? You don't mention that little detail.