Would Israel accept a state-and-a-half solution?

Germany, Japan, Poland and Mexico all were forced to give back land they took in an OFFENSIVE war. What went on before 1947 could be described either way. But since 47, Israel has fought wars on the DEFENSIVE, until recently that is. International law recognizes one, but not the other. In 47/48, the compromise was offered by the UN. The zionists accepted, the Arabs did not. When they attacked, they attacked Israel. In 67 and 73, the wars were defensive. Yes, there was a preemtive strike on Cairo, but war had already been declared.

"Israel was always ready to concede territories in exchange for peace as was proved with Egypt and Jordan, and even with Gaza." (arik) Don't rewrite history. Gaza is a very bad example of conceding territories in exchange for 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 hands, without asking for any return from anyone, and we got war - with a 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.

Throughout the long years of the perpetual "peace process", deadlines have been consistently and predictably missed. Such failures have been facilitated by the practical reality that, for Israel, "failure" has had no consequence other than a continuation of the status quo (which, for all Israeli governments, has been not only tolerable but preferable to any realistically realisable alternative). For Israel, "failure" has always constituted "success", permitting it to continue confiscating Palestinian land, expanding its West Bank colonies, building Jews-only bypass roads and generally making the occupation even more permanent and irreversible.

There is just a little problem called International Law..... and no country has recognized your 'conquest'. It is the logic mentioned satisfactory to you? PS, do you know that the Native people got about 1/3 of BC and 1/2 of Quebec from the government of Canada?

" ... Jewish Liberals who forget too quickly the history lessons." (B.A.B) Zionism is not a Jewish crusade aimed at delivering the Holy Places back in the hands of Judaism. The "history lesson" that the Jewish Liberals have not forgotten, and that you and your kind should remember, is how all crusades have ended: In shameful disasters. In one decade, or two at most, there will be a solid Palestinian majority between the Sea and the Jordan River. We Israelis have to decide wether to live as a clear Jewish majority, in a homeland of our own - that wouldn't include East-Jerusalem, or in a country that does include it, but then as a Jewish minority under a Palestinian prime minister. Only religious fundamentalists - believing in eventual divine intervention in the affairs of a UN state member - think that we can have it both ways: A Jewish state AND an unquestioned Jewish rule over the West Bank and all its population. The choice is ours. And ours only.

"The occupied lands are occupied because five countries declared war on Israel.." Read their declaration. Israel was not a part of Palestine on May 15th 1948. They had every right to invade Palestine in order to protect it from Israeli aggression, which is why there is no UNSC resolution condemning that Arab State action. " AND LOST" Strange, they prevented Israel from taking Gaza and the West bank. The Palestinians lost. "Under what logic is Israel required to return any of it? " It is illegal to acquire territory by war. The logic of LAW! "Israel is the only country in history that has returned land gained in a DEFENSIVE war (eg Sinai), and only in exchange for peace." No it isn't Japan, Germany, Poland, MEXICO, to name a few.

"once the arabs unleashed the yom kippur war, [...] the pals, no longer under jordanian rule, felt free, [...] to lay a claim to certain territories, such as gaza and the west bank." (CJK) This screams for an explanation. What, in your views, should the Palestinians have done, after having been freed from Jordanian rule (in June '67, not by the Kippur war, oct '73) instead of laying claim to certain territories such as Gaza and the West Bank? Please enlight me. I would much appreciate. Ps: If you find the question too embarrassing to answer, don't. I will understand.

"City of Jerusalem A. SPECIAL REGIME" Indeed. However, the UN has never executed that part of partition. The only part of partition that was ever executed was Israel's acceptance of the recommended borders and it's Declaration of a Jewish State, which did not include Jerusalem, so clearly, Jerusalem is in what remains of the non-state entity of Palestine. "How the city was officially handled by the UN. NOT belonging to the Arabs(Palestinians) as you claim." That's not what I claim.

The Arabs have been living a lie for so long. When the PA is cancelled there will be peace, 2 states, Israel and Jordan Palestine. The border is near completion. Arabs in Judea and Samaria can look to Amman, and the 80+ percent of the land they took from Israel.

There is an never was a country of Palestine, unless you count Jordan Palestine. Mandate Palestine was a temporary territory divided from TransJordan to become Israel. Actually, to be correct, both TransJordan and Mandate Palestine were to become Israel, but the British went back on the agreement. however, Jerusalem was part of what was to become Israel. Under the UN partition, which was never accepted by the Arabs is irrelevant. Since 67, Jerusalem has been liberated from its occupiers and back as the united capital of Israel again.

on Goldstone in particular, and the Palistinian plight in general. American actions to sabotage Abbas could lead one to think that the Americans don't want a solution any more than the Israelis.

"once the arabs unleashed the yom kippur war, the pals, no longer under jordanian rule, felt free, [...] to lay a claim to certain territories, such as gaza and the west bank." (CJK) This screams for an explanation. What, in your views, should the Palestinians have done, after having been freed from Jordanian rule (in June '67, not by the Kippur war, oct '73) instead of laying claim to certain territories such as Gaza and the West Bank? Please enlight me. I would much appreciate.

Clinging to a bad handle, 'Mr. News' attempts to demean, with boorish fervor displayed ad nauseam, what he terms your "nationalistic rhetoric". Rail On Cipora. Copious amounts of inane drivel do not reflect understanding, solely a lack of concern for the survival of your Jewish State, a beacon of civilization surrounded by those whose essence lies in denying the right of the Jewish people to our own nation state in any part of the land of Palestine.

"City of Jerusalem A. SPECIAL REGIME" Indeed. "How the city was officially handled by the UN. NOT belonging to the Arabs(Palestinians) as you claim." That's not what I claimed. Never the less, the UN has never executed that part of partition. Jerusalem is still in what is left of Palestine.

It almost would be amusing to see the panic. But just a reminder. This is all wholly and totally speculation about what might happen 2 years in the future if the Palestinian Authority survives and is not dissolved in the interim. The Fayyad plan for independence does not call for a declaration until after the PA is ready, fully with the institutions of a state. What happens with Palestinian unity in the interim? Speculate - nobody knows. What happens to the Likud led government in the interim? Speculate - nobody knows. What happens to the settler lawlessness in the interim? Speculate - Nobody knows. Will Israel do another pre-election invasion of Gaza? Speculate - only the current crop of incumbents know.

The occupied lands are occupied because five countries declared war on Israel AND LOST. Under what logic is Israel required to return any of it? Israel is the only country in history that has returned land gained in a DEFENSIVE war (eg Sinai), and only in exchange for peace. The losers do NOT get to demand their losses back.

The 'Palestinians' made their claim in 1968 not 1967.

The proposed resignation of Abbas is nothing but a head fake. With an election Abbas has must quit. Fatah is smart enough to not have multiple candidates this time, so Hamas is likely to lose. Without a resignation he remains. Hamas, Fatah and Abbas are all in agreement that no democratic elections should be held, and this is how to do it.

Negociate with Messrs Abbas and Fayyad, and make Peace with your good neighbors before it is too late for all of us.Think of the wise words of Abba Eban, you know what I mean. It is never too late. get a better team for Peace and help President Obama's vision of this region. thanks.

and scrap the PA all together. Let the occupiers foot the bill of their occupation. Why should the EU tax payers do it? We are sick and tired of paying Israel's occupation bills.

City of Jerusalem A. SPECIAL REGIME The City of Jerusalem shall be established as a corpus separatum under a special international regime and shall be administered by the United Nations. The Trusteeship Council shall be designated to discharge the responsibilities of the Administering Authority on behalf of the United Nations. How the city was officially handled by the UN. NOT belonging to the Arabs(Palestinians) as you claim.

"In my view the problem is no that of creation Palestinian state. The problem is that the Palestinians want Jerusalem." Jerusalem was in Palestine under the British Mandate. Israel's declaration of Sovereignty did not include Jerusalem. Jerusalem was in what remained of Palestine, May 15th 1948.

other entity controls any of their territory. It is a pre-requisite for a Declaration of Sovereignty. "the palestiians could have declared a state from 48 onward.." Not so. Israel has been in control of Palestinian territory since 14th May 1948. The territories taken under Plan Dalet before Israel Declared are Palestinian.

In my view the problem is no that of creation Palestinian state. The problem is that the Palestinians want Jerusalem. But as the old saying goes: you can not have it both ways. Bibi would never allow splitting Jerusalem, because Bibi is the Mensch, unlike some Jewish Liberals who forget too quickly the history lessons.

... or Arafat. Milking donor countries is too good a deal to pass.

Netanyahu criticized Sharon's disengagement because it was the complete opposite of the platform upon which Likud was elected. Sharon effectively stole the votes of Likud members. Netanyahu knows full-well that the overwhelming majority of Likud voters had no intention of completely ceasing settlement construction because that would "dry up" the settlements. These voters, who want peace, believe -- as indicated by the Bush Administration to Sharon himself-- that the major settlement blocks (such as Gush Etzion, which has always been Jewish historically and was captured by the Jordanians in 1948) should be left in Israeli hands in any peace agreement.

the three sides of the israeli palestinian problem all seem to neurotically prefer the ongoing conflict for the risks of negotating and surrendering their security blankets. the palestiians could have declared a state from 48 onward, but chose to hate and fight israel in their ineffective way. israel too prefers the conflict so it can expand and not come to terms with the reality of the palestinian people, and the damage israel has caused by usruping land. it takes courage for all, but it seems the easy path of avoidance will continue until there is another catastrophe, even worse. may they return to the negotiating table now and be brave and enter history as peace makers..

Not one, not one and a half- not anything. The Arabs have had numerous chances to establish one in peace, but have chosen war and terror instead each time. The Arabs will just have to learn to "make do" with their own 99.9% of the Middle East- including all of the oil, and stop trying to steal OUR tiny 1/10th of 1% without oil. The Philistines won't have a state here in Israel, and if they don't stop their violence, they won't even exist here anymore. They will be gone- sent back to their own lands elsewhere. And THEN there will be peace.

So you are saying Israel would be supporting and funding terrorist groups on another nations soil?

every case of diputed territory starts at a certain point in history and ends at a certain point in history. there was no plo before 1964, and no pal claim on the west bank before 1967. once the arabs unleashed the yom kippur war, the situation changed immediately. the pals, no longer under jordanian rule, felt free, with others' encouragement, to lay a claim to certain territories, such as gaza and the west bank. since the territories were conquerred by israel, she was then in a position to make demands of her own, under unscr 242. this history cannot be denied. it will not be denied. the territories are disputed and will remain so until there is a final status agreement between the parties: israel and the palestinins. believe me, when i say it, israel is in no position to relinquish ever centimeter of the west bank. israel will retain most, if not all, of the major settlement blocs. she will so do either through agreement, or through war, if it is thrust upon her.

Letter From the Agent of the Provisional Government of Israel to the President of the United States, May 15, 1948 ?MY DEAR MR. PRESIDENT: I have the honor to notify you that the state of Israel has been proclaimed as an independent republic within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. The Act of Independence will become effective at one minute after six o?clock on the evening of 14 May 1948, Washington time.?

Can someone clarify this for me? I don't see how Abbas stepping down necessitates the dissolution of the PA and the Somalization of the West Bank. Can't this be an opportunity for a new generation of leaders to take the old one's place? Perhaps one that can reconcile with Hamas and be more effective?

If the West Bank is under dispute, so is Israel proper.

Israel never "disputed" the land before the conquest of 1967. In 1948, Israel never claimed the land in the West Bank. In 1949, it didn't either. The whole "disputed territories" is a fantasy made up after the 67 6-day battle and the start of the settlement enterprise. Israel even recognizes that it is seizing private property by its court actions about Homesh and the laws it passed requiring rent for private properties taken by the IDF in the territories. Someday, the government may even obey its own laws and pay the back rent due. You seem to fear Palestinians doing what Israelis did in 1948.

Israel never "disputed" the land before the conquest of 1967. In 1948, Israel never claimed the land in the West Bank. In 1949, it didn't either. The whole "disputed territories" is a fantasy made up after the 67 6-day battle and the start of the settlement enterprise. Israel even recognizes that it is seizing private property by its court actions about Homesh and the laws it passed requiring rent for private properties taken by the IDF in the territories. Someday, the government may even obey its own laws and pay the back rent due.

Yet they have ALREADY announced that they are willing to cede that right and accept a state on less than half as much territory i.e. a state within the boundaries that existed in 1967. They are willing to concede what they never had it because of their stubborn and relentless denying of any jewish sovereignty in the region. Palestine does no exist because Palestinians never wanted it. Rejected the Peel proposals, rejected partition and rejected Clinton proposals in 2000. Instead of it, Israel was always ready to concede territories in exchange for peace as was proved with Egypt and Jordan, and even with Gaza. Moroever, Israel was and is ready to recognize a palestinian state, in borders that will be determined in NEGOTIATIONS What else? Who is the rejectionist here? Johnboy cannot get that Palestine and the legitimate borders of Palestine will be decided at the end of the day in NEGOTIATIONS WITH ISRAEL. I would suggest Pals not to trust U.N or Iran.

Israel refuses citizenship to the people it conquered in 1967. It wants their land but does not want to pay the price of absorbing the people, peacefully or not. If The Palestinian Authority is dissolved, the costs of government of the people still exist. the question is who pays for their government? The occupying power? or the US and EU? The Romans are irrelevant. So is archeology.

RE Israel: "It will respond to the demand of the Settlers to be saved from the Palestinians." Of course. But perhaps the scene might play out a bit differently... Israel could effectively withdraw from the territories militarily while providing arms and support to the remaining Settlers. The former Settlers, now dual citizens with this new nation, will revolt with a vengeance when attacked. Many tens of thousands are current or ex IDF. Already a well trained and equipped army, they would be far more than a match for any other Palestinian military force. The Palestinians should be very careful. As it often does, independence could explode into revolutionary war. Unilateral independence just might end up creating the internationally recognized country of Judea and Samaria.

there are many cases of border disputes and land disputes in the world that have gone on continually for decades. some of these disputes are between major power, affecting many people. your claim that i insist on "the right of conquest" is simply ridiculous. the amount of land involved is very small. if the pals want a state, they should negotiate regarding that small piece of land. believe me, israel will not uproot hunders of thousands of israeli jews just because the palestinians want what they deem to be theirs to the last centimeter. you are not a good advocate for them as long as you encourage them to continue resistance rather than compromise and a fina diplomatic solution.

I'm confounded by the lack of conceptual thinking on this issue. History is a fixed reality that no one can escape, and that is the one thing that NO ONE is considering, but rather, white-washing away with condescension and arrogance. The FIXED-REALITY: The land of Israel has been, LEGALLY, the land of Israel (re-named for the exterminated Philishtim by the Romans as a "Territory"...not a state or a people) to be overseen by a Roman procurator...period. Since then, BEFORE there was 'such a thing' as a 'Palestinian'...the Jews have maintained a presence there and NO ONE EVER, in the international community, looked at the territory as being anything but Jewish. Just look at the thousands of ancient archealogical findings that show clearly whose land it is: Israel's. Dissovle the PA: if they want to live within its borders, they'll be Israeli citizens, not 'palestinains.' Its a damn farce and its being re-inforced continually by the international community. Israel OWNS ISRAEL.

"What will the Israeli government do if the day after Abbas resigns the Palestinian Legislative Council ... decides to disperse and dissolve the Palestinian Authority? What will happen if after this, Prime Minister Salam Fayyad locks the government ministries and stops paying the police's salaries?" A fallacy! Nobody, ever, locks ministries... The following "alternative" is another delusion: "If Netanyahu is serious about a two-state solution, he has 32 partners at his disposal: the Kadima MKs and the four Labor rebels who will be glad to replace the rejectors of compromise in Likud and its partners to the right." Unfortunately, this is not (and never will be) part of Netanyahu's plan of action. Netanyahu will continue to go, resolutely, on his (wrong) way.

...know only too well, that at the latest by then, Israel would be in for the "South-African" treatment, and the purses of the average Israeli citizens get a lot thinner until the whole thing would be reversed again.

what would happen to them , i say just try it. you are diffentenly just a reader so you should not write .

...the self-professed "leftist". Your post shows your inability to grasp the nuances needed to understand that your nationalist rhetoric sounds to the outside world very much like that which you rail against day in and day out.

i wonder how would you feel about that and what kind of compromise would be in your culture. you all think your cowboys and we are red indians . FAR FROM IT. WILL NEVER GIVE UP if i cant get you out my kids will , if they cant their kids would if not so on and so forth. remember moores ruled spain for 700 years and now its spain with no moores.

The Israeli insistence on the right of conquest and right of expansion is the problem. Of course you cannot see that. Somehow, you see the need for the Arabs in Jerusalem and those whose properties have been confiscated to compromise for your convenience. And they should do this without compensation or a vote either? Conquest is conquest. It doesn't matter if somebody thinks it was defensive or preemptive or was just greedy.

"compromise does not seem to be part of arab culture." such a bigot face? It works against Israel and Judaism. A) It's 'A'rab B) It IS Israel who has been un-compromisingly ignoring International Law and UNSC resolutions for the past 62 years " those who fail to understand this simple fact.." Pity it ISN'T a fact at all. " will continue to lead foreign policies that lead no where" Where have the policies you support gotten anyone, except for more territory towards a Greater Israel. That IS what you want, yes?

Then there would not be a Jewish state which is why Israel was founded in the first place

"Arabs in the WB or Gaza must know by now that a 2 state solution is no solution. Gaza was in their hands and no improvement appeared there. WB is not any better. Why? because almost no will exist - it is the nature of some ppl." Twaddle. The Palestinians have been and are still under occupation and almost 50% of their land has been illegally acquired since 1948. Many have been dispossessed by Israel, twice. Israel controls what and who and when anything goes in or out of the Palestinian territories. "Best remedy is if they return to their birthright places such as the Saudi Arabia, Jordan or any other rich oil countries and demand their rights back." UH? You can show that's where they're from? I'd like to see. Meanwhile, we have plenty of up-to-date evidence, even Israeli Government encouragement for American, Japanese, Chinese, African, British, European Jewish folk who've moved into Israel. Not that they were all refugees or even victims.

"What right does Abbas or his entourage have to declare a Palestinian state without Hamas approval???" Neither Fatah or Hamas can Declare Statehood. You should perhaps look to the example of the Jewish People's Council who declared sovereignty on behalf of all Jewish people regardless of their political persuasions Only a non-political body can Declare Sovereignty or statehood on behalf of ALL the people of an entity.

You may want it but borders and Jerusaleum, Refugess are not something the current Palestinians will agree with Israel on. They have not come to grips with a Jewish state and this can be ignored by people willing to stare reality in the face even if unpleasant. When palestinians have leaders who convince the popluace that half a loaf of bread does more to alleviate hunger than no loaf of bread they will be hungry for a state! Israel is stronger and scare tactics of a one state with lots of Arabs is not going to scare Israel away from Jerusaleum and the settlement blocks as long as their leaders are not weak!

All these talks about percentage, resolution, and initiatives are all doomed. Those self-imposed Arab Kings and Presidents along with corrupt PLO would not succeed in allowing the Holyland to be a Jewish State. The only acceptable and equitable solution is a democratic mult-faith state (modeled on SA, Switzerlan, Lebanon etc.) where Palestinians would return from despair and neglect. That solution is natural and nearer than many would imagine. It is a necessary condition for World peace and security. Hegemony based on power and arrogance will certainly come to an end.

CJK: "compromise does not seem to be part of arab culture." According to the Partition Plan of 1947 (you know, the one that Ben Gurion claimed Israeli his declaration of independence) the Palestinians are entitled to claim that 50% of "Israel" is not Israeli territory at all, but rightfully belongs to them. Yet they have ALREADY announced that they are willing to cede that right and accept a state on less than half as much territory i.e. a state within the boundaries that existed in 1967. That is an astonishingly generous compromise on their part, Cipora, quite unprecedented. When has Israel ever offered anything even remotely as generous?

ML: "No longer restrained by the Fourth Geneva Convention," Explain, please; why would Israel be freed from the constraints of GCIV?

VoR: "Didn`t Hamas win the last elections????" Indeed it did; the elections for the Palestinian Legislative Assembly. VoR: "What right does Abbas or his entourage have to declare a Palestinian state without Hamas approval???" The Palestinian Legislative Assembly is not recognized as the representative of the Palestinian people. That remains - to this day - the PLO. The Palestinian Legislative Assembly exists to appoint the govt of the Palestinian Authority, and the PA has the "authority" to do lots of things e.g. collect taxes, sweep streets, pay salaries, etc. But it can't declare an independent sovereign state: only the Chairman of the PLO is recognized as having the right to do that.

R: "Well Johnboy, Israel Could Control the WB Like Gaza." And doing that helps Israel..... how, exactly? There is a reason why "disengagement" from Gaza was not followed by a "disengagement" from the West Bank. But you not only haven't pondered WHY that West Bank "disengagment" got canned, you don't even appear to have noticed that it WAS canned. How odd.

compromise does not seem to be part of arab culture. those who fail to understand this simple fact, will continue to lead foreign policies that lead no where.

Have you no sense of decency/history? Bizarro world is here people.

It is time for Israel to accept the Palestinians as equal citizens with a democratic voice in all of the territories. After some struggle, the Palestinians will win their freedom and liberty within this single state, where every man and woman, Israeli or Arab, has an equal vote.

"What will Israel do if Abbas announces that by a reasonable date, say, December 31, 2010, the option of a state and a half - Israel and alongside it a Palestinian entity. . ." - Akiva Eldar It will respond to the demand of the Settlers to be saved from the Palestinians. No longer restrained by the Fourth Geneva Convention, Israel will hammer the Palestinians until Lebanon, Jordan and Egypt have no choice but allow the survivors to flee in panic across their borders.

Arabs in the WB or Gaza must know by now that a 2 state solution is no solution. Gaza was in their hands and no improvement appeared there. WB is not any better. Why? because almost no will exist - it is the nature of some ppl. Best remedy is if they return to their birthright places such as the Saudi Arabia, Jordan or any other rich oil countries and demand their rights back. Don't let arab leaders tell you otherwise - They are using the homes and lands that they owe you. They have created all this mess you are in. It is so sad to see arab countries rejecting their own bretherns and just use them as fool tools. Israel the Jewish country is there to stay. Better face the reality. We wish you well in any of the 52 arab countries.

Better start digging tunnels to Jordan.

A shake up on all sides is definitely in order. I hope Abbas goes and Netanyahu follows when he is put into a corner by the rest of the world. That way perhaps sanity will prevail and the Nussebeis and Fayaads can emerge as new leaders with a positive vision. Then maybe Israel will elect a more reasonable government and things can progress. Otherwise there is no hope.

What right does Abbas or his entourage have to declare a Palestinian state without Hamas approval???

I surprised there is no sense of manifest destiny. Israel does 99 year leases of land in the Czech republic, but doesn't even consider the idea for the Palestinian lands no occupied and for future expansion. The US did this with the Hawaiian Islands--all the land was 'owned' with 99 year leases to originating with the Hawaiian natives, and many became quite wealthy as a result. The ownership ultimately remains with the Hawaiians. It is not a perfect solution and expensive, but certainly a lot cheaper and ultimately much more productive than the constant fighting and the whole tribal 'us' vs 'them' mentality that really only benefits (and is very much encouraged by) the many enemies of the combined population of Israel and Palestine. They all claim to be 'friends' of Palestine or Israel, but like everyone else in the international arena, really only care about their own interests, which often includes Israel and Palestine to be in a constant battle rather than (horrors!) becoming one.

If Abbas dissolves the PA then Israel has to take up all the slack of paying for the occupation, and Israel: a) doesn't have the money, and b) doesn't have the political will Israel has been running an occupation on the cheap for the last 10 years, and that is the major reason why Israel can AFFORD to be so smug about its "commitments". And one way or the other that option is about to be taken away from her, and not before time. If Israel is ever going to end this occupation then it is going to be because this occupation **hurts**, and nothing will hurt Bibi more than a hit to the wallet.

It seems to me that Israel has finally lost control of the balls it has been juggling to keep the status quo (occupation) going indefinitely. I hope so. Who knows what will happen now? We are living in interesting times.

Mr. Netanyahu only needs a good chair with seat-blets so as not to have to get up and loose his chair.