Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (7073)	10/23/2001 3:30:43 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Well, I believe that my argument still stands. Egypt was in different circumstances since, although poor, it could still claim it was relatively economically independent. And this is something that Arafat can't claim. Certainly not when 30% of his population is unemployed as a result of Israel closing its borders to Palestinian workers. The Israelis could pull all of their electricity and sewage connections within weeks if they chose to implement a policy of complete separation. They could cut the West Bank off from fresh water supplies as well if they chose by diverting the flow of the Jordan River as it exits the sea of Galillee. And while all of these actions would be considered "intolerable" in international eyes, they are indicative of the symbiotic position of the West Bank to both sides. The Israelis never again want to live under the threat of military artillery barrages or invasion from there, and the Palestinians truly need the modern infrastructure that their connections to Israel provide. And I opine that any politicians who ignore this reality are selling snake oil. I can see the points you are trying to make with regard to Egypt and Pakistan, but the financial benefits they obtained from their cooperation was quite an incentive, while they didn't face the tricky issues facing Arafat where they must "wean" themselves from dependence upon Israel. For any revolution to be successful, the new government must be able to completely cut the ties with the former colonizer/occupier. And it's pretty clear that, while Arafat would like to fancy himself the George Washington of Palestine, he can't deliver the economic goods that would make him independent anywhere in the near future, even with massive economic aid. Thus, this is like a battle between siamese twins who, while despising one other, find that they both have to learn to live with one another. Any attempt to separate them is obviously delicate political "surgery", especially when one is more dependent upon the other and would have a low chance of survival in such an operation.... Hawk