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: tekboy who wrote (26326)	4/21/2002 12:10:40 PM
From: LLLefty	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

>>>>>Barak administration's proposals at Camp David and Taba as proof of their good faith.<<<<< Dennis Ross was on CBS smorning (with Osgood) laying out what happened at Taba with some interesting sidelights. 1. He noted that the Clinton bridging non-paper was read at dictation speed to Arafat and his negotiators so that there would be no misunderstanding about what had been offered. I got the impression that there was no objection raised. It was, Ross said anew, 97 per cent of the territories returned. The paper was never divulged publicly by the PA side. 2. About the Jerusalem holy sites, Arafat, who apparently is an archeologist in his spare time, insisted that the Temple Mount was really in Nablus, not Jerusalem, according to Ross. Now wouldn't that create a mess if it were true. Chelsea Clinton would have had a more interesting dinner companion at Camp David had she chosen Arafat rather than Barak. New subject: While it's a stretch by the NY Times' one-week "expert" on Sudan to suggest that we could learn something about the ME situation from our fresh handling of events in Sudan, a somewhat closer parallel is that of the nasty, long-running affair in Sri Lanka, where a cease fire (with no US intervention that I'm aware of) has blessedly come about. Tamil Tiger suicide bombers and slaughter of civilians have been a marque feature of that terrible conflict.

To: tekboy who wrote (26326)	4/21/2002 12:21:38 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Respond to of 281500

It may not sound like it's helpful, but I noted the caveat he included: especially not isolated settlements, at least until the next general elections. He gave himself a backdoor since he obviously feels that any semblance of a new peace effort will not occur for the next 12 months. That should sooth the fears of the Israeli right, and his opposition from the Netanyahu faction. But he also knows that, in the case of a "no-confidence" vote, that next election could come faster than he anticipated.., so he could technically negotiate then. And he could just negotiate anyway, if he can be show to have be "forced" to do so by either internal or international pressure. And by putting up a good "fight", he can lay blame on the other parties pushing for closing down the settlements. And the rhetoric is also useful since it represents a bargaining chip as shutting down the settlements will require the Palestinians give up something of equal value. And as we both know, most things are negotiable, just as most things are for sale... so long as the price is right. Hawk