PDA

View Full Version : Obstacles to peace: Borders and settlements



Lov3ll
05-25-2007, 02:18 PM
Obstacles to peace: Borders and settlements

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42943000/jpg/_42943717_washington203.jpg
In the 1990s Israel agreed borders with Jordan,
but not the Palestinians

The BBC News website is publishing a series of articles about the attempts to achieve peace in the Middle East and the main obstacles. Today, Martin Asser looks at the question of Israel's borders and settlements.
The modern Israeli state was forged in the fires of the first Middle East war in 1948-1949, but from the beginning it was a state without clear borders.
The fact that complete, permanent borders still haven't been drawn 60 years later is testimony to the rancour of Israel's relations with neighbouring Arab states.
Peace talks have taken place - Jordan and Egypt signed treaties with Israel turning 1949 ceasefire lines into state borders.
But the absence of a final settlement with Syria, Lebanon and the Palestinians mean Israel's borders and the state itself remain inherently unstable.

OBSTACLES TO PEACE

History of negotiations (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6666393.stm)
Jerusalem (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6668603.stm)
Water (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6666495.stm)
Refugees (http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6689355.stm)

In 1948, when British rule of Palestine ended, Israeli forces managed to push most of the Arab forces that joined the war to the former Mandate boundaries, which became temporary ceasefire lines.
The exceptions were what we now know as the West Bank, which remained under Jordanian control, and the Gaza Strip, which was controlled by Egypt.
Thus Israel came into being on 78% of the former Palestine, rather than the 55% allocated under the UN partition plan.
Parts of Israel's central region were just 15km (9 miles) wide, and strategic Jordanian-held territory overlooked the whole coastal region.

Exceptions

Fast forward to 1967, when Israel captured both the West Bank and Gaza Strip, as well as Syria's Golan Heights and Egypt's Sinai peninsula.
STABLE AND UNSTABLE BORDERS
http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42970000/gif/_42970805_israel_neighbour3_map203.gif
Egypt-Israel treaty, 1979
Article II of peace treaty defines border along Egypt-Mandate frontier
Jordan-Israel treaty, 1994
Annex I: Border along Yarmouk and Jordan river; Demarcation of frontier from Dead Sea to Gulf of Aqaba
Key Mid-East maps (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/middle_east/03/v3_israel_palestinians/maps/html/default.stm)

Israeli-controlled land now stretched from the Jordan Valley in the east and the Suez Canal to the west; it completely enclosed the Sea of Galilee in the north, and gave it a foothold on the Straits of Tiran in the Red Sea.
The Sinai was exchanged for peace with Egypt in the early 1980s (at about the time Israel occupied south Lebanon, where it remained until withdrawing unilaterally in May 2000).
So it was more than 30 years after the foundation of Jewish state that it acquired its first recognised international border with an Arab neighbour.
Jordan became the second treaty holder with Israel, agreeing river borders in the north and a demarcated desert border south of the Dead Sea.
The boundary between Jordan and the occupied West Bank was agreed, but "without prejudice to the status of the territory".
But such deals are the exception, and the state of Israel and its neighbours have had to live with the insecurity of moveable boundaries and an assortment of different coloured lines ("green", "purple" and "blue").

Consolidation

Politically, the most important of the Green Lines - as the 1949 ceasefire lines were called - is the one dividing Israel from the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Occupying the West Bank in 1967 was an important strategic gain in Israeli eyes, and successive governments have ignored the Green Line and built numerous Jewish settlements on the territory.

SETTLEMENT FACTS
* More than 430,000 settlers in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, alongside 2.5 million Palestinians
* 20,000 settlers live in the Golan Heights
* Settlements and the area they take up cover 40% of the West Bank
* There are about 100 settlements not authorised by the Israeli government in the West Bank
Guide: West Bank barrier (http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/shared/spl/hi/guides/456900/456944/html/nn1page1.stm)

The settlements are illegal under international law, but Israel disputes this and has pressed ahead with its activity despite signing agreements to limit settlement growth.
Today, about 400,000 settlers live in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
The land is strategically significant, but in Judaism is also religiously and historically so.
The first settlers were religious Jews who remained in Hebron after celebrating Passover there in 1968.
The settlement movement has become closely affiliated to Jewish religious nationalism, which claims boundaries of modern Israel based on Genesis 15:18: "God made a covenant with Abram and said, 'To your descendants I give this land, from the river of Egypt to the great river, the Euphrates'."
On both political and religious grounds, therefore, it is extremely risky for any Israeli politician to dabble in land-for-peace deals or unilateral pullbacks from occupied territory.
This is especially true after the 2006 war over Lebanon, when Hezbollah militants showed the effectives of rocket attacks as a terror weapon from the north, given Israel's vulnerability at the centre.

State solutions

From the Arab viewpoint, the acceptable territorial solution for a Palestinian-Israeli settlement is withdrawal from all the 1967 land.
Saudi Arabia has proposed such a formula in return for Israel gaining normal diplomatic relations with all Arab countries.

http://newsimg.bbc.co.uk/media/images/42943000/jpg/_42943623_wall203.jpg
The wall could be meant as a future border,
but Israel denies it

Israel has sought to ring-fence East Jerusalem from any territorial retreat, and it hopes to annex the largest settlement blocs on the east side of the Green Line, which house a large majority of settlers.
This would involve adjustments to the Green Line, perhaps involving Israel swapping its territory for the settlements Ariel, Modiin, Maale Adumim, etc.
Removing thousands of hardline settlers from other smaller, more isolated outposts would be a difficult task, however, even for the most secure of Israeli governments.
Further territorial compromises by the Palestinians (having already been squeezed into 22% of pre-1948 Palestine) could be a bitter pill for their leadership to swallow as well.
Then a Palestinian state could be established in the West Bank and Gaza, from which Israel pulled troops and settlers in 2005.
Not all Palestinians, however, wants a two-state solution.
Hamas, which won the 2006 Palestinian parliamentary election, wants at all costs to avoid a peace deal with Israel that involves drawing permanent borders, because its wider aim is to establish a single, Islamic state within the borders of pre-1948 Palestine.
They argue that such a state, with the return of 1948 refugees, would have an impregnable and growing Arab, Muslim majority, spelling the end of Israel as a Jewish state.
In the long term, therefore, Israel's reluctance to accept the existing Green Line in many ways plays into the hands of militant Islamist groups such as Hamas.

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/6669545.stm

kamaz
05-25-2007, 02:29 PM
lol, yeah its the borders that are the big bad obstacles, not the 30 years of jew hatred, Hamas charters that call for genocide and complete eradication of Israelis, brainwashing of generations of palestinian children, suicide bombings, rocket attacks, etc,etc, etc..


its the borders that get everyone all so riled up. gimme a break.

they didnt want peace in 48, nor 67, nor 93, and not now. and the borders were different each one of those years. enough with the BS excuses and apologists.

Hollis
05-25-2007, 03:10 PM
Borders and settlements ARE NOT THE OBSTACLE to peace.


Hamas, Hezbullah and the other proxies of "Arab" countries will not settle for anything less than NO Israel. Which is what those "Arab" countries are really saying behind all the massive propaganda smoke screen that so many people have bought into.

Laworkerbee
05-25-2007, 03:57 PM
The Palestinians don't want peace and never will. So buy them new land somewhere else and evict those who refuse to leave.

The Saudi's have plenty of open space, let them donate some to their Muslim brothers or sell it off for cheap.

I figure for a cost of around $10 Billion you could get about 100,000 families to move for $100,000 @piece. In the end it would be a good deal and cheaper in the long run with lower security costs.

Ordie
05-25-2007, 05:06 PM
The Palestinians don't want peace and never will. So buy them new land somewhere else and evict those who refuse to leave.

The Saudi's have plenty of open space, let them donate some to their Muslim brothers or sell it off for cheap.

I figure for a cost of around $10 Billion you could get about 100,000 families to move for $100,000 @piece. In the end it would be a good deal and cheaper in the long run with lower security costs.

The fact of the matter is that extremist are dependant on conflict. Without an armed struggle, the extremist's very existance is questionable.

To survive as a Palestinian "Leader" you must have two faces. You must have a sidearm while holding an oilve branch. At the same time watching your back.

This is why there is no Palestinian "Nelson Mandela", or "Gandhi".

As long there is a conflict, the moderates, the silent majority, will continue to have three choices.

1) Leave
2) Keep quiet and hope for the best
3) or die

Note: Not all Palestinians are Muslims. There are also Christians (Latin/Orthodox) and Samaritans. Beside the cultural difference between the "cosmopolitan" Palestinians and the "country bumpkin" Saudis may lead into conflict.

lightcav
05-25-2007, 05:44 PM
lol, yeah its the borders that are the big bad obstacles, not the 30 years of jew hatred, Hamas charters that call for genocide and complete eradication of Israelis, brainwashing of generations of palestinian children, suicide bombings, rocket attacks, etc,etc, etc..


its the borders that get everyone all so riled up. gimme a break.

they didnt want peace in 48, nor 67, nor 93, and not now. and the borders were different each one of those years. enough with the BS excuses and apologists.

Well the Isrealis don't want peace either. They're just as militant as the Palistinians. They should have made Isreal in the Rhineland not Palestine. Its like lets find the most fought over place in the world, one that all religions hail from and place a civilation made up the the most religiously conserviative people we can find. What the F*&K did they think was going to happen? I guess they didn't really care, let the jews and arabs fight it out as long as they're not fighting in Europe or America, right? Sounds sarcastic but thats the truth. Its just a bad situation that no one really cared to prevent in the first place and as long as all the suicide bombers keep blowing them selves up in Isreal and Israeli attack helicopters keep blowing up kids in Gaza then no-one in Europe or America really gives two S*&ts, as long as it stay there, where they don't have to deal with it. That is the whole reasoning behind it, thats why if the Israelis and Palestinians were really smart they'd figure it out and realize they've been made fools of by the rest of the world.

dangerclose
05-25-2007, 06:34 PM
Well the Isrealis don't want peace either. They're just as militant as the Palistinians. They should have made Isreal in the Rhineland not Palestine. Its like lets find the most fought over place in the world, one that all religions hail from and place a civilation made up the the most religiously conserviative people we can find. What the F*&K did they think was going to happen? I guess they didn't really care, let the jews and arabs fight it out as long as they're not fighting in Europe or America, right? Sounds sarcastic but thats the truth. Its just a bad situation that no one really cared to prevent in the first place and as long as all the suicide bombers keep blowing them selves up in Isreal and Israeli attack helicopters keep blowing up kids in Gaza then no-one in Europe or America really gives two S*&ts, as long as it stay there, where they don't have to deal with it. That is the whole reasoning behind it, thats why if the Israelis and Palestinians were really smart they'd figure it out and realize they've been made fools of by the rest of the world.


Ladies and gentlemen, your public education dollars at work.

lightcav
05-25-2007, 07:19 PM
Oh, I guess the only way you can criticize someone is by insulting their intelligence? Thats brilliant, wow, your really smart.

JJC
05-25-2007, 08:59 PM
Ohh another "balanced" article from the goddess of news the BBC on Arab-Israeli history.

I like it how the BBC conveniently doesn't mention that the entire Arab world including the Palestinians refused to accept the U.N. Partition Plan to which Israeli agreed even though they were already sacrificing on land.

What makes the BBC think that the current border issues with "East Jerusalem" or "West Bank" is the problem when the entire Arab/Palestinian world back in 1948 picked up their weapons and went on a Jihad offensive to wipe Israel and demon zionists off the map, when at that time West Bank and East Jerusalem were not in Israeli hands.

Friends, let's kill the East and West Jerusalem myth because Jerusalem was one unified city for over 3 millenia and its biblical people still exist. Here is a link which will help those interested understand the historical and modern day policitcal issue with the question of Jerusalem.
http://www.mythsandfacts.org/media/user/documents/Jerusalem.pdf

markjh
05-26-2007, 06:01 PM
Well the Isrealis don't want peace either. They're just as militant as the Palistinians. They should have made Isreal in the Rhineland not Palestine. Its like lets find the most fought over place in the world, one that all religions hail from and place a civilation made up the the most religiously conserviative people we can find. What the F*&K did they think was going to happen? I guess they didn't really care, let the jews and arabs fight it out as long as they're not fighting in Europe or America, right? Sounds sarcastic but thats the truth. Its just a bad situation that no one really cared to prevent in the first place and as long as all the suicide bombers keep blowing them selves up in Isreal and Israeli attack helicopters keep blowing up kids in Gaza then no-one in Europe or America really gives two S*&ts, as long as it stay there, where they don't have to deal with it. That is the whole reasoning behind it, thats why if the Israelis and Palestinians were really smart they'd figure it out and realize they've been made fools of by the rest of the world.

Congrats! We got yet another Galloway imposter here, that seems to be resistant against historical facts :cantbeli:

lider_r
05-26-2007, 11:02 PM
people seem to forget that israel is breaking the law here as well, they aren't just the helpless victim. There are two sides in this conflict.

Moledet
05-27-2007, 03:17 AM
people seem to forget that israel is breaking the law here as well, they aren't just the helpless victim. There are two sides in this conflict.
What law again?

Snoshi
05-27-2007, 03:24 AM
people seem to forget that israel is breaking the law here as well, they aren't just the helpless victim. There are two sides in this conflict.

And what laws did we break?

lider_r
05-27-2007, 09:15 AM
Secret memo shows Israel knew Six Day War was illegal (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2584164.ece)

U.N. court rules West Bank barrier illegal (http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/07/09/israel.barrier/index.html)

Breaking the Law in the West Bank - The Private Land Report - Nov. 2006 (http://www.peacenow.org.il/site/en/peace.asp?pi=61&fld=191&docid=2024)

JJC
05-27-2007, 11:48 AM
Secret memo shows Israel knew Six Day War was illegal (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2584164.ece)
Typical of British media, misleading titles; one reading that title may think that the 1967 war was is illegal, but when you start reading the article, it has nothing to do with the legality of casus belli itself......

U.N. court rules West Bank barrier illegal (http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/07/09/israel.barrier/index.html)
The ICJ's ruling shows how pointless the U.N. and its organizations have become when it has been high-jacked by politics. This is the same ICJ that has refused to accept testimonies from Israeli victims of terrorism who went to the court to show through their personal experiences as to why the Israelis would be forced to erect such a barrier.

Breaking the Law in the West Bank - The Private Land Report - Nov. 2006 (http://www.peacenow.org.il/site/en/peace.asp?pi=61&fld=191&docid=2024)


As to why the barrier built by Israel is legal "The Reply" by Eli .E. Hertz is the best book out there that explains every legal matter of the ICJ's ruling. The book cites people like Julius Stone, former ICJ Judge Steven Schwebel, and others who are renowned experts on international law.Here is the online version of the book.
http://www.mythsandfacts.org/ReplyOnlineEdition/toc.html

Hollis
05-27-2007, 11:54 AM
Well the Isrealis don't want peace either.


Gotta Call BS on that, either you are clueless about all the peace agreements the Israelis made, starting with the 1946 compromise....... till now, or the only news you accept is from Fatah, Hamas, Hezbullah or any other like minded group.

phoebus
05-27-2007, 12:59 PM
Gotta Call BS on that, either you are clueless about all the peace agreements the Israelis made, starting with the 1946 compromise....... till now, or the only news you accept is from Fatah, Hamas, Hezbullah or any other like minded group.

Zero factual points whatsoever in the above sentences.

Allow me to give you some proper insight. Firstly, whoever sees Israel and its regime mentality as of having a moral high ground in this story (alot of people here do; naturally most of them from USA or Israel), I'd initially say he's either biased or confused due to monolithic propaganda. It's everyone's right to choose sides based on interest, just say it openly, without trying to give it a fancy moral wrapping. Israel is not the one only party under constant attack and evidently what they statistically endure as citizens is far less significant compared to what Palestinians go through daily in Gaza or West Bank.

Right now Israel occupies large amounts of land that doesn't belong to them, they should be expecting what they get every single day, if not worse. That's how war and occupation works; it's nasty business and it involves terrorism and assymentrical warfare if the enemy doesn't even have an organised state, hence a proper army. Trying to be potraid as the righteous - defenceless victim of "bad Arabs" is simply senseless in this situation; despite having ballistic missiles, WMDs including a 30ish-year old illegal nuclear weapons programme and the strongest offensive armed forces in the region. In addition we could fit right here the poor record of past and current invasions, occupations, government-sponosored illegal settlements and finally the broad spectrum of human rights abuses.

So let us not ever again think of their side and regimes as of having any sort of moral high ground in this madness, at all. Both sides are part of the problem and hold the key to its solution.

Moledet
05-27-2007, 01:08 PM
Secret memo shows Israel knew Six Day War was illegal (http://news.independent.co.uk/world/middle_east/article2584164.ece)

U.N. court rules West Bank barrier illegal (http://edition.cnn.com/2004/WORLD/meast/07/09/israel.barrier/index.html)

Breaking the Law in the West Bank - The Private Land Report - Nov. 2006 (http://www.peacenow.org.il/site/en/peace.asp?pi=61&fld=191&docid=2024)
First of all, the independent talks about the settlements, not about the war which was perfectly legal. In addition, as far as I know it fails to mention that this is just another interpretation of the international law, many other professors and doctors of international law interpret the law differently and state that the settlements are legal. For example: Prof. Yehuda Blum, Dr. Meir Rozen and Meir Shamgar.
Meron's interpretation does hold sometimes in court though not always, he just refuse to believe that he lost to Meir Shamgar that was at that time the government's legal adviser.

The UN's trial was a joke, only one side was present in this "fair" trial. It was nothing more than another provocation by the Palestinians. This international court has no authority whatsoever and is probably the largest joke made by the UN ever.

dangerclose
05-27-2007, 01:50 PM
Zero factual points whatsoever in the above sentences.

Allow me to give you some proper insight. Firstly, whoever sees Israel and its regime mentality as of having a moral high ground in this story (alot of people here do; naturally most of them from USA or Israel), I'd initially say he's either biased or confused due to monolithic propaganda. It's everyone's right to choose sides based on interest, just say it openly, without trying to give it a fancy moral wrapping. Israel is not the one only party under constant attack and evidently what they statistically endure as citizens is far less significant compared to what Palestinians go through daily in Gaza or West Bank.

Right now Israel occupies large amounts of land that doesn't belong to them, they should be expecting what they get every single day, if not worse. That's how war and occupation works; it's nasty business and it involves terrorism and assymentrical warfare if the enemy doesn't even have an organised state, hence a proper army. Trying to be potraid as the righteous - defenceless victim of "bad Arabs" is simply senseless in this situation; despite having ballistic missiles, WMDs including a 30ish-year old illegal nuclear weapons programme and the strongest offensive armed forces in the region. In addition we could fit right here the poor record of past and current invasions, occupations, government-sponosored illegal settlements and finally the broad spectrum of human rights abuses.

So let us not ever again think of their side and regimes as of having any sort of moral high ground in this madness, at all. Both sides are part of the problem and hold the key to its solution.


Israel could settle this conflict - tomorrow.

Hollis
05-27-2007, 01:53 PM
Zero factual points whatsoever in the above sentences.





Actually that sentence should have followed your "Facts". rofl

dangerclose
05-27-2007, 01:56 PM
Right now Israel occupies large amounts of land that doesn't belong to them, .


That's what happens when you keep losing wars that you start.

Snoshi
05-27-2007, 02:12 PM
That's what happens when you keep losing wars that you start.

Yep.. Its not like we conquered the West Bank in some aggressive war.

~Berdan
05-27-2007, 02:34 PM
That's what happens when you keep losing wars that you start.

Frontiers of a state determined , not only de facto,but also de Juro by 4 factors:

1) Settlement-in case of no former ownership (Can later become state owned).
2)Buying (Can later become state owned)
3)Occupation and/or changes during war : de Juro , state is allowed to conquer ground of an enemy.It must install a martial law-temperary until peace accords with that same country. Please look for 4th Geneva convention.
4)Bilateral agreements:-two countires with a shared frontier change frontier line .

NimDod
05-27-2007, 04:39 PM
Frontiers of a state determined , not only de facto,but also de Juro by 4 factors:

1) Settlement-in case of no former ownership (Can later become state owned).
2)Buying (Can later become state owned)

these two are pretty much the case in some of the territories.
In Hebron, lands that belonged to jews for generations were taken by arabs in the 1929 Hebron massacre

The Hebron Massacre was the murder of 67 Jews in Hebron, then part of the British Mandate of Palestine, by Palestinian civilians and Palestinian policemen in 1929 .
The massacre had a deep and lasting effect on the Jewish community. The supporters of a binational solution, such as Rabbi Judah Leon Magnes, were demoralized. The survivors of the massacre were forced to flee the community, and their property was seized by the Arab residents and occupied until after the Six Day War of 1967.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1929_Hebron_massacre

as for buying the land: selling property to a Jew is punishable by death in Jordan and in the PA. thats how quite a few Palestinians found themselfs hanging in the town's square during the early days of the Intifada.



3)Occupation and/or changes during war : de Juro , state is allowed to conquer ground of an enemy.It must install a martial law-temperary until peace accords with that same country. Please look for 4th Geneva convention.

there was a martial law over the Palestinian cities until the Oslo accords was signed in 1993.