That "rest", a very small patch, has a major neighborhood of Jerusalem on it, and the Gush Etzion settlement bloc, and several other towns right by the Green Line, containing in all about 400,000 Israelis.
I believe that it will be required to make Jerusalem an open city. East Jerusalem might become the PA's capital, while West Jerusalem will be Israel's.
As for those 400,000 Jews living there, there are 1 million Arabs living in Israel. Is there something wrong with 400,000 Jews being given some form of status in the PA (of course many Palestinians would consider this a "deal-killer), but what choice would they have under a NATO imposed solution.
The Palestinian issue only finds traction on the international front so long as Israel continues to control the West Bank and Gaza. And since the two parties can't seem to find an amicable solution to their differences, why shouldn't the same UN (enforced by NATO) that partitioned the territories in 1947 have the authority to impose a solution that neither side believes gives them 100% of what they are demanding?
Both sides have to sacrifice something for peace to be fostered there. The Israelis living in settlements will have to either move, or be willing to live under Palestinian rule (with their rights secured under a NATO imposed solution)..
I'm just getting to the point of agreeing that the Israeli-Palestinian issue is becoming a detriment to obtaining a regional and international front against the Islamic militants.
What's more important to the world, vainly hoping the two sides can achieve 100% agreement on their agendas and make peace bi-laterally, or fighting Islamic militancy?
They do seem to go hand in hand.. For so long as they remains a deadlock between the Palestinians and Israelis, Islamic militants will have the ideological ammunition they require to claim that the US is acting on behalf of some Jewish conspiracy to control the region.
Hawk |
