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 (53984)	10/22/2002 4:20:23 PM
From: Sir Francis Drake	Read Replies (3) \| Respond to of 281500

Yeah, sure, I enter and leave all MY negotiations demanding 100% of my demands, nothing less. Umm... no. The Palestinian demands span the gamut. From those that demand ALL of Israel including pre-67, to those who would happily sign anything. So you got that part wrong right off the bat. What I outlined was the MINIMUM that a majority (i.e. it is politically sellable to the population) could accept - 100% of the post-67 territory. In fact, there were other demands as well - such as the right of return of noncombatants following a conflict that is guaranteed under international law. So, in addition to territory, there were other questions. Palestinians really have a very strong case on the right of return, which would have huge implications. Regardless of international law on the refugees, I don't believe Israel could function properly if it were to apply. Therefore, it is a legitimate issue for Israel - and something the Palestinians would have to give up, law being on their side notwithstanding. So, indeed, the Palestinians would give up a great deal indeed, even if all they got was 100% of the post-67 territory. I simply outlined the MINIMUM, not what is the MAXIMUM Palestinian demand. I believe that it works for both sides - Israel retreats 100% to pre-67, Palestinians give up all claims to any other territory, all claims to right of return, even all claims to monetary compensation. Privately, I think it would be in Israeli interest to pay something - they accomplish two things: make the deal easier to swallow, hopefully undercutting the Palestinian extremists even more, and more importantly, a wealthier, rebuilt Palestine is a safer one, and a better neighbor with profit for Israel down the road (as experience post WWII in German, Japan and other places showed). But, I would not make it a demand - up to the Israelis. However, they do have to give back the land - every inch of it. Abba Eban deserves the last line, "The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity." This is about as out of date as when it was said. Sorry, old tired cliches that no longer describe the situation deserve a line - as a footnote in the endless exchanges of nasty and untrue things each side said about the other. However, it contributes nothing toward solving the problems. That is infinitely harder to do than to carp from the sidelines.