Convergence to combat lines

I thought we had 21% of the mandate. Can you explain to me how it is about 5%. And if this Olmert government falls in maybe 12 months or a little less, what kind of governemnt do you think we will have.

their nonsense has been spouted by people like them since 1920. the nett result is ISRAEL IS NOW ONLY 5% OF THE MANDATE AND GETTING SMALLER

Some Peace Loving People the Israelis: Israel refused to negotiate with Arafat Israel refuses to talk to Abbas Israel refuses to talk to Hamas Israel refuses to return the West Bank and East Jerusalem to its rightful owners.

Isreal has never declared it's borders.Should Hamas recognize the 67 borders?the Isreal that occuppies the west bank?WHAT?

Meir I am interested in a peace solution between the Israelis and the Palestinians. I am absolutely not sure if it can actually happen (not the deal,but the success of such a deal) and if I have any doubt,I side with being conservative and not making a deal at least yet. We are being blasted with not only rockets and bombs but propaganda in all directions.I try and sift through this as much as a layman can. I refuse to give up the notion regarding peace for several reasons. One is because I believe in people. (That doesnt mean I believe in the politic).I believe deep down that it CAN be done.As I say its the politic I dont believe in and I have great doubt. It is with this that I say to give convergence a good try and to get all the players playing this game including Abbas and Bush (Though I think everyone is starting already) Israel have the ability to deal with whatever they have to deal with. We may just end up with something that you and others dont see as possible.

Ze'ev Schiff draws attention to a sticking point in the withdrawl. A quandary that leaves us really wondering what to think. The seperation barrier will not be sufficient to prevent qassams, or worse, katyushas.

The demographic issue was the main selling point of the dissengagement from Gaza. Sharon make it clear that there would be no other dissengagements. Recent demographic studies have shown that Israel does not have to worry about a demographic threat. And if this is correct, then why would any Jew be in favour of any more retreats. And if these retreats are meant to draw combat lines, then the lesson of Gaza shows that the army will not put down the terror. A retreat will lead to a bloody combat safeguarding only select areas. Tourism will come to a halt. And pressure will mount on Israel. Why does Ronnie and Ze'ev support this retreat plan?

Ronnie, Ram is thinking....

Actually by firing squad and will replace them with you? Now what are you going to do?

When the IDF were up against Arab camel drivers they easily defeated them, but once properly trained & hardened Hizbullah, Hamas & Palestinian guerrillas evolved, IDF has been beaten without mercy. First Hizbullah ran us out of S. Lebanon in a panic. Mofaz almost had a breakdown like Rabin did when he heard the rumor Hizbullah had mined the roads. Then beaten again in the first and 2nd intifadas and now able to rain down rockets whenever they please, IDF is at the guerrillas mercy. Why haven't we fired our generals. F-16s and 1000 kilogram bombs only kill civilians, Apache helicopter & Hellfire missiles only kill divilians, tank and artillery fire only kill civilians. Who are these losers leading our mighty army-Amir Peretz, Dan Halutz and all the other clown generals. With all their firepower and they can't beat a bunch of ragheads. Everyone of these idiots should be fired.

The convergence increases the likelihood of war or full scale incursions by israel,just as would rockets more deadly than qassams if they actually started killing people and destroying valuable property. Israel is much more likely to respond violently if they do not have defenseless settlements exposed to militias. they will also respond violently if the paslestinians come up with more destructive missiles. Neither fatah nor hamas are prepared for a full scale war with israel, but serve only as irritants to provoke israel and win a propaganda war when israeli forces accidentally kill civilians during perfectly justified self-defensive strikes. For this reason the palestininans will not be given better ordnance until their leaders see israel begin to dissolve into the sea. But they cannot control the convergence.

Every Israeli schoolchild knows the story of Israelis leaving Israel for Egypt. It will be even easier for Israelis to leave all the territories. If Olmert is wise he will evacuate all the territories during his 4 year term and attain the status of Menachem Begin. All the Israelis I know want out of the territories except the Kach-Kahane armed terror groups in the W. Bank.

You're wrong, Meir. In Jesus' time there were Nabateans in the Negec - Arabs. And there were Arabs here in the Biblical Period. See Isaiah 13:20 (it's immaterial whether he was the real Isaiah or a mid-6th century prophet; he was acquainted with the Arabs. And remember Geshem/Gashmu the Arab from Nehemiah 2:19 and 6:1?. They were as small minority as compared to the Jews, and they lived mainly in the South, but they were here. Sorry to be a party-pooper.

As I said yesterday, if you like Minsk so much, go move there yourself. I don't think my Yemenite or Tripolitanian relatives would like Minsk very much. If you don't like the idea of moving to Minsk, you can always go back where you came from - Arabia - worship Allah at Mecca and Medina, like in the "good old days", and leave us natives alone woth our Holy Temple Mount. Don't worry, we'll take care of the demolition of the structures already standing there at our own expense.

I certainly don't want Qassam or any other kind of missiles raining down on Kefar-Sava, or on the Trans-Israel Highway, Rte. 6, which I often use. On the other hand, I can't see Israel staying in Hebron, Tappuach, Shiloh, and all those other messianic looney-bins. (which, BTW, were in ancient times much more Jewish than the coastal plains, where Tel-Aviv, Herzliya, Netanya and Haifa are located today. But times change).

"Olmert does not really want to negotiate with Abbas. It seems that he is ready to "talk" with him, but not to negotiate." - Z. Schiff Olmert has no history of statesmqnship. During the 3-year Sharon government, Olmert was Trade&Industry then Treasury minister. The decade before he was Jerusalem mayor, causing Arab riots in town. Since his appointment as PM, nothing he said lasted long or showed any diplomatic talent. Olmert's one and only idea is convergence, continuing the Sharon move. He prefers it unilateral (because no Arab leader would agree to give him what he wants), but will agree to talk to Abbas to get the heat off himself. Suppose Abbas does agree to convergence, getting a Palestinian State declared, but with temporary borders. What does it mean to Israel: 1. Gaza becomes completely free, with air, sea, and land (Egypt) access everywhere. Count on it filling up with weapons. 2. Free road connecting Gaza-West Bank. The weapons move to WB. Dangerous. Read my post 23.

Shaath said at the Wharton conference: "In the last five years, we have gone back to confrontations. We could not agree on a permanent settlement." In the Clinton/Camp David talks the greatest and most generous offer was made to the Palestinians. They rejected it with no attempt to negotiate further and went to war.

It could have been done better, in the way Schiff suggests, allowing Abbas credit for wresting Gaza out of the maw of Israel; with that prestige he could have kept northern Gaza Kassem free. But the real point of that withdrawal is that it happened. Israel managed to disencumber herself from that burden. She made the important point: we are not the prisoners of PNA intransigence. We are not helpless if they refuse to cooperate. We will act alone. The problem of the Kassems will be resolved; for the time being they make a useful point. The world applauded the evacuation of Gaza. Now it sees what such a retreat means. The ceded land becomes as weapon platform to shoot at Israel all the harder.

very good article.The author is probably right.Convergence wont bring peace. The main culprits,tough , are rabin and the europeans as well as the US. The world should had never supported the creation of a palestinian authority who supported terrorism. Oslo was wrong. From the moment a palestinian authority was created in Gaza and later west bank the troubles began.Right now the european atitude of not recognizing a israel border after withdrawal only contributes to the stalemate

"this land Israel was promised to us by the Almighty Himself." It's like someone had promised to love you. He must have had a tender moment.

Since Oslo Israel do not want peace. Israel is beging for peace. More than that when Israel failed to have peace, Israel is trying to invent new names for peac withdrawal, unilateral withdrawal,covergence.. Worse Israel inventing partners for peace Arafat,Abu-Masen. Worse still Israel importing foreign plans for Peace Oslo, Road Map including shatle diplomacy Washington, Moscow, London,Madrid, Aman, Cairo.. No wonder the Palestinians keep raising the price for 'no peace' ! Who would sell to such a crazy customer ? Israel should wake up from the delusion of the Left .. Peres & Co. Talk is not a curency in time of War. Israel is at War. Only War can bring peace as it did with Egypt as it did with Jordan as it made Syria quite. Besides the Palestinians+Arabs like an Octopus with many heads. Israel should stop this nonesense. Olmert should not see Abbas. Abbas should send a letter to Olmert with one line : 'We recongnise Israel'. Akram Zekaria.

abbas spends more time travelling about talking nonsense to all and sundry than blair and thats saying something . ABBAS CONTROLS NOTHING AND NOBODY AND IS CONDIS PUPPET FOR THEIMPOSSIBLE DREAM OF ANOTHER ARAB STATE ON THE PALESTINE MANDATE.SO FAR THE US PUPPETS ARE NOT DOING WELL IN IRAQ OR AFGHANISTAN.

the jewish homeland of 1917 was occupied by the british army until 1948 the british as the mandated government failed to implement the terms of their mandate or defend the jewish populataion againt arab terror. by 1936 a self defence force had been formed called haganah and irgun came slightly later as a more militant force THEIR ROLE WAS NO DIFFERENT TO THE MAQUIS IN FRANCE. THE BRITISH CALLED EVERY OBJECTOR TO COLONIAL RULE TERRORISTS .IRELAND USA INDIA MALAYA KENYA SOUTH AFRICA START SOME SERIOUS STUDY OF THE SUBJECT

Mr Murray, chew on this.. Israel offered 6/19/67 to return most of the conquered in exchange for recognition and peace- In 1992 Israel initiated contact with PLO and Arafat. Subsequently handing over territory even with the daily terror attacks. In 2000 Barak came to Washington to Negotiate and final peace deal with Arafat. Arafat did not have any proposals and simply refused to accept anything. Over the past 40 yrs its been Israel that has intiated any type of peace negotians. Dont make us laugh you lying, racist asshole.

Rather than take an area like Gaza and 'test' it (which quite honestly I have no idea what the tactic itself is,I only understand the concept) I would prefer we try to develop a relationship with a palestinian or Palestinians (Maybe Abbas) who would be responsible for these Quassams period. The conversation is not "Stop the Quassams,period"It is "How can we stop the Quassams?" and "What help do you need to stop the Quassams?" all this while knowing that even against Abbas we have to defend so Abbas cant be given that much to hurt Israel.It needs a commitment from the other side,possibly to America.America could offer many goodies too to enhance a reletionship but the will and the courage has to be there.While I dont believe Abbas 'has it' I do believe that America can use Abbas (ultimately it will be for the good of the area for both people)We need a multilateral answer to this problem. Maybe Peter is right and there is no oneto talk too,but I dontbuy it YET.But I dont buy 67 either

There were no Arabs in Israel when even Jesus lived. Ask any Christian scholar. Jews always lived there and had kingdoms and temples. Only through Arab Imperialism did the Arabs get there. So throw them out.

"If the future Palestinian State will comprise Gaza and West Bank is it not unrealsitic to expect Gaza to be declared unoccupied whilst West Bank remains so?" - Emad Hello Emad, A state of "occupation" is simply a matter of military reality. The military can occupy one part of the country, but not the rest. For example, Germany occupied part of France, the other part was ruled by the Vichy government. In Russia too. It is the regular situation. The issue behind this is where does the Geneva Convention apply. And this is simply a humanitarian convention, not designed to deal with the political resolution of wars. If Israel is truly out of Gaza, then Gaza is unoccupied and Israel is not subject to Geneva rules there. Of course it continues to be obligated in the West Bank. Whether the international community makes a declaration about the Gaza status or not is also secondary here. War Crime is a legal term, not a political one. A violation is handled by a court of law, not by UN.

If the future Palestinian State will comprise Gaza and West Bank is it not unrealsitic to expect Gaza to be declared unoccupied whilst West Bank remains so? Even with air and sea ports and Egyptian border crossing, how is it feasible to hive off Gaza. Would the Palestinians accept this? A kind of half-state as downpayment. Hardly seems likely without any prospect of similar arrangement in the West Bank, which means International cognisance of a Gaza free from occupation would be most improbable. After all despite the two areas being geographically seperate they are indivisible politically.

Hamas has never struck outside Israel/Palestine, Sallam According to Egypt, the latest bombings in the Egyptian resorts were done by Hamas trained people. Yes, no one can prove that Hamas sent them to do it but, it sure looks much like Hamas is immitating the behavior of Hamas's hero: Osama Bin Ladin.

Ze'ev Schiff: As usual - right on! I wonder how would Olmert respond to your position in a public debate. I believe that as long as Israel is concerned about "war crimes" and "world's opinion", it should declare it's acceptable position for a peace agreement and do nothing. Until, the Pals have had enough and are willing to put forward a reasonable offer for a solution. Evicting the isolated settlements will make no difference as long as the IDF would not spend man power and money to protect them.

"..Why not ask them for quiet first? Why reward bad behaviour with bad behaviour? Why not reward good behaviour with good behaviour?" - Ronnie W Ronnie, I have no objection to any of this. But I have in mind a larger issue. How can you suppress Qassams even against the Palestinians' will. This is important to know because, regardless of how the present actors act, tomorrow there will be other people and other circumstances, and the behavior will be different. Example: Tomorrow there will not be a West Bank to free (since it may already be unoccupied). Human beings are complex. You can offer all the incentives you want, and there may still be criminals. You need to know that a prison system is a feasible solution. In the lab you have to define what you want to test. There might be other valuable matters worthy of tests, but you cannot do all at the same time. You isolate the issue to be tested, then you test IT. That's what I am proposing. Uniquely feasible situation today.

Response to talkback#1: 'scuse me, but where does it say the "holy land", but in the Holy Book, Torah, so while Arabs have always lived among us and we amongst them and throughout history amongst a multitude of other peoples, this land Israel was promised to us by the Almighty Himself. Therefore we did not choose Nabil Shaath's country. G-d decreed that it should be ours. We did not arrive there by some mere coincidence. Thank you.

Agreed. Israel's policy is the confiscation of the land; the destruction of the houses; the pulling up of the orchards; the curfews, stoppings and checkpoints; the systematic violation of the rights of the Palestinians and the illegal construction of the wall of the West Bank, which is used more to annex territories than to ensure the safety of the Israelis. Consequences of this policy : it is a tragedy that a State, supposed to constitute a refuge for the Jewish people after the Holocaust, is today one of the places of the world where the Jews are less in safety. Israel should evacuate the territories occupied, not for the Palestinians? good, but for its own good. And for the good of all the Jews of the world.

The Wall against suicide bombings ? This is not the real reason. The Wall is built to steal more land. It is the prelude to the annexation of a part of the West Bank. It appears desirable that the territories between the Jordan and the Mediterranean constitute, like Switzerland, a common political space. Let us recall that the Jews, the Moslems and the Christians had cohabited during centuries in this same political space before 1948.

Terrorism was a Jewish technique in Palestine before 1948. Ethnic cleansing was used by Israelis in 1948 and in 1967. Whenever there is a foreign occupation, there are freedom fighters, or insurgents, or terrorists (depending on the point of view). Europeans know what it is like to live under foreign occupation. Everybody in Europe ? except in neutral countries - has someone in his or her family who had to live under German or Soviet occupation (or both). All those who fought against such occupation were labelled as terrorists by the Germans or the Soviets. Are there "good" terrorists and "bad" terrorists ? Who can tell the difference ?

In Iraq the US army used radar ranging to control return fire from their A1M1 Abrahams return fire. The tanks were running at 50 to 60 miles an hour and at that speed they were almost impossible for the Iraq cannon fire to hit, but radar ranging allowed the return fire after only one shell to allow their return fire shell to go down the barrel the shell came from. Israel could use similar equipment now to stop the rockets but there would be so many Palestinian civilians killed that the international community of nations would intervene and the Palestinians know it. Once the west bank wall is finished, a major Qussam hit against something like the Ben Gurion airport will cause world opinion to relax enough for Israel to us cannon fire back to the exact location the Qussam came from. It will not take too many of this exact return fire regardless what is locate around where the Qussam was fired from to cause the Qussams to stop.

The wall is to prevent suicide bombs and to provide a temporary nation division between Israel and the Palestinians until they stabilize and really want to seriously negotiate an agreement which is not a totally surrender by Israel. They are not ready yet. Nor will they be in the foreseeable future. Thus the need to isolate from them until as an independent nation and they can accept reality. The Quassams can be dealt with by making it too painful to use them. This cannot be done until the West Bank wall is finished and the Quassams have done enough damage to cause world opinion to allow Israel to respond as necessary to stop that activity. In the meantime the settler issue will be resolved by the willing leaving with the unwilling being allowed to remain behind the wall as citizens of Palestine with out the protection of the IDF and the first thing that will happen will be the loss of all property that was not owned prior to 1948.

converge on damascus,baghdad, teheran yemen tunisisa morocco etec etc. and arabs like amin back to riyadh with the rest

Dear Salam, you are so right. We all wouold like them, the Governments, to effect what WE, the mass, wanted them to do. Perhaps you notified that there has been a slight change in political behaviour: they must be "correct". Therfore, we can announce whatever right we were denied, but can not hope one second to achieve this right as compensation. Of course, must Israel accept where it went wrong. And , of course, everybody else, must do the same. There is the problem, the kernel, if you want. One can not accept the other - always counting these and those crimes committed. One should draw a wall around your countries and leave you all alone.

If Abbas succeeds in pulling himself and the Palestinians along with him from the edge of total destruction by Hamas (and the funders in Teheran)then unilateral disengagement might not be necessary. The unilateral moves were to be the last resort in a long line of failed attempts to get the PA to stop supporting terrorism against Israel. Hamas has helped bring at least Abbas if not the people back to a negotiable state. If he's not killed first Abbas may yet succeed in being the partner Israel has hoped for.

Converge on Minsk. That will end your problems

Israel has tried to make legitimate peace all the time. Any arab "peace plan", if you can call it that, was nothing but a way to destroy israel marked at peace. Whether it was "israel does everything, and maybe we will be peacefull" or some stupid deal like that, none of them were ever even remotely sincere. Now, if as you say, arabs want peace, why turn down barak when he offered them 98% of the west bank and all of gaza? Not only that, but why did they turn barak down and take up terrorism?!?! Doesnt sound peaceful to me

terrorism isnt something that just goes away. Arab terrorism has been around at least since the 1920s. Care to explain the cuase for it there eventhough there was no state of israel, let alone any "occupation"???? the occupation is an excuse, not a reason for terrorism.

Why not put the onus on the Palestinians? Why not ask them for quiet first? Why reward bad behaviour with bad behaviour? Why not reward good behaviour with good behaviour?

If one understand, try anyway, the lonterm current Israeli leadership strategy, it seems to me that they are going with the current Western World mentality which for unforgivable reason look at the country a colonialist. It is unforgivable because a story of a population in its country has yet to be told. The majority of the Israelis are of Sepahardic-Mizrahi descent (that is why the Ashkenazes had to accept into the country any Russian whose connection to Judaism is at best tenuous, just tor equalise the make-up of the population)wwhose narrative has yet to be told and once it is told it will save Israel from being categorised as a COLONIALIST. At the same time, Olmert with Peretz and Peres intend to disengage from the WB so that in few years Israel will walk back into it, with the blessing of the new powers to be: India and China, who because of their Islamic minorities might just embrace wholeheartedly the Israel security in the ME. The problem is, we might even inherite the Land of Jordan, as the Jihadis going to make a move for the distraction of the Kingdom. Israel moves to make a break with WB is motivted with long term strategy that it requires for its futur.

Olmert is a lair when he said that evacuating settlement will keep the JEWISH majority in ISREAL in the further.BUT a new report made by BENNET ZIMMERMAN shows that it's not possable.

Olmert has a single idea in his mind: Covergence. Nu, what do you do when this appears not to work? Just ignore the problem and do more of the same, is the Likud (where Olmert grew up) traditional answer. But there is an opportunity now to save the approach if you do not ignore the problem. The IDF should learn how to control Qassams first, then can converge. Gaza is relatively small and can be used as a laboratory. My idea: Give Gaza its freedom, whatever it takes to become legally "unoccupied". At most, they get free air, sea, and land (Egypt) access. The PA may agree in advance (or Israel declares) that Gaza will be demilitarized. But of course much arms will be smuggled in (as they are today). No fear, though. Israel should cut off electricity and other supplies to Gaza in response to Qassams. The people will get the militants to stop their pain. Of course, without Geneva Protection, harsh military punishment is also available, as bombing areas where militants reside.

Imagine: a foreign army occupies your village for decades, reduces you to subjects without any rights, arrests you arbitrarily, savagely tortures the arrested, and, on top of it all, sends mighty bulldozers to erect a gigantic wall on your land, locking you up as in a cage. And your reaction? Peaceful demonstrations, shouting "No to the Wall" ? but "Yes to Peace," to peace with your very oppressor and dispossessor.

The majority of the Israelis support negotiations with Hamas, but official Israel refuses to talk to it, at any level. Why should Israel talk to HAMAS? 1- Hamas recognizes Israel de facto 2- Hamas is predominantly a Palestinian liberation movement. The Israeli media represent the entire Palestinian resistance to the occupation ? by stones or bombs, in the occupied territories or in Israel proper, against soldiers, settlers, or civilians ? as "terrorism."- Israel's state terrorism- . Terrorism is not a reason for not talking to Hamas ? it's just an excuse. Hamas has never struck outside Israel/Palestine, so that any attempt to portray it as part of global terrorism is futile. 3- Hamas is not corrupt. It was the PLO's corruption, and its selling out of Palestinian interests to Israel, that made Hamas win the Palestinian elections. the Palestinian vote for Hamas was predominantly a protest vote. Hamas voters are not necessarily Islamic fanatics, but are all fed-up with the Fatah-led corruption. Israelis can only envy the Palestinians for having a major party that is not associated with corruption. In Israel, all the bigger parties are equally corrupt. Is there no Palestinian partner? Of course there is, but not for the deal Israel wants to strike. Israel therefore plans to unilaterally impose its colonialist vision on the Palestinians ? to perpetuate the Israeli hegemony in the entire land, with scattered Palestinian enclaves strangled by walls and settlements. Unless the international community grants legitimacy to any democratically elected Palestinian government, Hamas will just be yet another excuse for the diktats that Israel would impose on the Palestinians anyway.

We know that a unilateral pull out can achieve certain things. It can reduce the cost and stress of occupation. It can simplify the burden upon the IDF What we also know is that a unilateral withdrawal which does not end occupation will not end terrorist attacks. And without an end to occupation, Israel cannot respond with any form of collective punishment. Olmert's "Convergence" is doomed to failure.

They talk the talk but one neeeds to walk the walk they are totally helpless. I know the Israeli media need an item to pound all the time but let's face it if Haaretz starts to doubt the "convergence" it's time to look for something new. How about internal security and leave the Palestineans to boil in their juices until they find ONE leader to control the situation on the ground. If that leader wants to make peace, THEN we should look for a deal. Until then lets fire 70% of the media men who are trying in vain to find an item in the Palestinean - Israeli conflict and start realizing that we need to live in the current status quo for years. Mike

Israel MUST learn from its errors. Any area we evacuated has become a HAVEN FOR TERRORISTS The arabs have failed at governing themseves - fighting terrorists. LETS NOT REPEAT OUR ERRORS

Is it just me, or are the columns and editorials in Haaretz getting more hawkish? Maybe the realization that giving away the land without any thing in return is just giving up. In his article titled "Convergence to combat lines" Ze'ev Schiff has it right. Israel is moving the battle lines ever to close to home. Anyone read Sharansky's book lately? Maybe we need a refresher.

Why did it happen? Why are we back from the peace road? Why is Israeli peace camp so frustrated? Has any relation with the 1000 dead and 5000 mutilated who were not soldiers but coffee drinkers, falafel eaters, bystanders and bus passengers?? I hate that wall and want the wall to be destroyed...20 years after the last suicide attack. Had we been muslims, we could kill 50 000 civilian pals in 5 days and the arab world would shut it mouth in the name of the Arab League. But we are not.

"Israel refused to negotiate with Arafat" - if you STILL think that Arafat was a good person to negotiate with, after all that has happened in the past few years.... oh boy! "Israel refuses to talk to Abbas" - no one supports him. Talks might be fruitful, but how would he enforce an agreement? What's the point? And for the record, Israel is talking with Abbas. "Israel refuses to talk to Hamas" - that's a no brainer. Hamas won't recognize Israel and supports terrorism. "Israel refuses to return the West Bank and East Jerusalem to its rightful owners." - you can't give land for peace if there's no attempt at peace from the Palestinians. "And Israel wonders why they are still being attacked?" - Israel has been attacked looooong before 1967, this is nothing new.

I've been asking this question a long time now on the forums and no one is able to give a satisfactory answer. They keep with the "Israel doesn't want to negotiate" and "Israel undermined Abbas" schtick. But they still can't answer the question. Who can Israel negotiate with to obtain results and peace?

Johannes - you know as well as everyone else that the wall is to prevent suicide bombs. And that's exactly what it is doing. The wall has nothing to do with Quassams. There was a fence around Gaza long before a fence was put around the WB. That's why most terror came from the WB and not Gaza. You already know this, so what's the need for spin? If you can't prove your point with facts, you should rethink it.

Although I don't agree with all that the author has to say, Nabeel Shaath is interested in two things: peace, and the development of the future Palestinian nation. The Palestinians need more people like him. I hope he can spread the message.

Convergenec brings notthing but trouble and kassams if people like peres and peretz are too weak to defend themselves.

There is almost universal agreement that another Israeli unilateral withdrawal will be counter- productive. It would be wise for the Prime Minister to understand this also, and not engage in a self- defeating suicidal withdrawal which as Schiff says will only bring the battlelines closer.

Looks like Franzen delights in baiting Israelis for all its worth. The wall not only saves lives it also saves cars from being stolen. Nobody builds an expensive fence if the neighbours are neighbourly, this money is badly needd elsewhre in Israel

Israel refused to negotiate with Arafat Israel refuses to talk to Abbas Israel refuses to talk to Hamas Israel refuses to return the West Bank and East Jerusalem to its rightful owners. And Israel wonders why they are still being attacked? Don't make me laugh.

"The rest of the world realizes that the only way out of this mess is a negotiated peace deal with the Palestinians..." Sorry if this appears like a platitude, but really who should the negotiations be conducted with ? For one things, the pals are killing each other over what should/could ne negotiated... and even if there was only one survivor left with whom to discuss, it appears his " negotiations wishes" would be things that are plainly unacceptable to the Israelis, since it would threaten their very existence. I would not negotiate under these circumstances.

The physclogical warfare conducted by the firing of unreliable Qassam rockets, made from scrap metal, begs the question what good is the wall against them? The whole idea was to grab land and hide behind the Wall. Now that idea isn't going to work. Now the threat of "indiscriminate attacks on the Palestinians", as Schiff puts it, is already ongoing so an "increased indiscriminate attacks on the Palestinians" should be the threat, but it just falls under the old righ wing doctrine of "hit them harder and they'll shut up", never worked, never will. From Qana, over Sabra&Chatila, to Defensive Shield, just proves that you won't kill them all, a lot YES; but you will never build owens. Why Olmert isn't willing to negotiate with Abbas is because he has nothing to offer him. Israel isn't yet ready to pay the price for peace. To "end the occupation that started in 1967". "Smaller Greater Israel" is still salvageble they think. Free Palestine!

Yes its only a hunch but I feel that the cast has been set. That the needs of the trio Olmert,Abbas and Bush are linked intrinsicaly with this conflict. That Bush and the Republicans are on the ropes and they need a result here.That Abbas has also a short time frame to work with before he gets booted in a vote of non confidence by his people.And Sharon's Convergence,a clever move,would have been forced to work by Sharon's own will but with Olmert at the helm needs the US to back it and ultimately Abbas to condone it as a first step to a peace that they all need. It is with this I say that my hunch was orchestrated in Washington and is on its way multilaterally starting with convergence and not 67.

Olmert is Sharon's protege and sees his government as the continuation of the stupid and immoral policies of his mentor. Convergence or "disengagement" or whatever you want to call it was a terrible idea from the beginning and only a fellow war criminal like George Bush encouraged the "man of peace" to move forward with it. The rest of the world realizes that the only way out of this mess is a negotiated peace deal with the Palestinians that will ultimately look something like the Geneva Accords. Olmert talks the "Road Map" talk, but he walks the Sharonian atrocity walk.

1 that Israel should declare provisional borders at the fence (to be determined) position. 2. that the IDF will remain beyond this position, until settlement withdrawal is concluded. IF when this is finalised, it is determined that contionued occupation is not required for military reasons (this being related to negotiations with the PA on security matters related to disarming and disbanding terrorist groups and or agreements regarding PA policing to prevent rocket attacks and assist Israel to prevent subversion of the security barrier), then the IDF withdraws - but with the right to return if PA security guarantees are not met).

Pulling out of Gaza could have been done exactly as done, with one difference... hold a meeting with PA/Abbas, give him the photo-op and "victory"... then leave exactly as actually done... result is strengthened PA, Abbas, Dahlan, etc. Imagine how PA elections go then? Pure theater, and no substantive difference for Israel. Except maybe no Qassam in Sderot. sigh.

"..Nabeel Shaath, ....told his audience at the June 8-9 Wharton Global Alumni Forum in Istanbul, he has yet to reach that goal..... Political bridge building means finding common interests between what he describes as "two classic victims. Israelis as Jews are victims of murder and crimes unparalleled in the 20th century. In their search for a homeland, they chose my country. That made us the victim's victim. We have become two peoples in a struggle to find a home in one place, the holy land." http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/article/1507.cfm interesting article!