Oslo got shot down by both sides. Israeli because no one was about to give up the settlements(greater Israel) and Hamas because they knew that the settlements(greater Israel) weren't about to be given up and no one could contain/eliminate them.
Barak's offer was an unviable cantonized Palestine.
Bullsh-t all around, Noel. Unless you believe Arafat above Dennis Ross and the other American negotiators. Even Agha and Malley, who came closest to the Palestinian side, never bought this "cantonized" crap, it was just a line the Palestinians tried to sell in the spring of 2001 when they realized how much PR damage they had done to themselves by walking away from Taba. Barak offer 95% of the territories, plus land swaps. I don't think he could have gotten it passed, but he offered it. Arafat demanded "right of return" for the millions of 1st, 2nd, 3rd and 4th generation refugees. That was the deal-breaker.
And as for an "unviable" Palestine, any Palestinian state will be unviable, because the kleptocrats who run it are only interested in three industries: extortion, car-theft rings, and scamming UNWRA. Shimon Peres tried to start some industrial enterprise in 1995 but Arafat wouldn't have any. A number of Palestinians tried to start businesses, but of course they have gone broke now due to Intifada 2. No state is viable without rule of law - or an oil trust fund like SA and Iran have. |
