Netanyahu: yes to a demilitarized Palestinian state

[GiladS]

Netanyahu backs creation of Palestinian state


Prime minister endorses creation of Palestinian state but stresses any such entity will have to be demilitarized and acknowledge Israel as a Jewish nation

Roni Sofer


Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said on Sunday that he supports the creation of Palestinian state alongside Israel. Speaking at the Begin-Sadat Center for Strategic Studies at Bar Ilan University, Netanyahu said however that any such entity must be demilitarized. He also stressed that the Palestinians must recognize Israel as a Jewish nation for peace to be possible.

Netanyahu called on Palestinian leaders to restart peace negotiations without preconditions. He declared that the solution of the Palestinian refugee problem must be "outside Israel."
Netanyahu also called for Arab leaders to meet him and contribute to Palestinian economic development.

Netanyahu, who announced he would be delivering the policy speech following US President Barack Obama's address to the Muslim world in Cairo, worked hard to keep the content of Sunday's speech under wraps.

Activists from both sides of the political spectrum gathered at the Bar Ilan campus Sunday evening in anticipation of Netanyahu's speech. Some of the protestors were demanding a halt to all settlement activity while others demanded its expansion.

Right-wing activists, including Itamar Ben-Gvir, condemned US President Barack Obama and some carried signs saying: "Barack Hussein Obama – an anti-Semite and hater of Jews". They also called for more settlements in the West Bank.

Daniel Edelson contributed to this report

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3731225,00.html

[sinophile]

...any such entity must be demilitarized..
...Palestinians must recognize Israel as a Jewish nation...
...the solution of the Palestinian refugee problem must be "outside Israel."


They seem like reasonable requests, but he might as well have asked for the world.

[mas-36]

I think one of the big points of contention was the expanding settlments. Did Bibi-Net make any mention of these?

Otherwise I agree with the demilitarized Palestinian state. However, they must have some kind of nominal paramilitary organization for law and order, and the basic national self defence that comes with a sovereign state, or at least the appearance thereof. Perhaps something like a glorified militia or something of that order.

[LEGEND]

I think one of the big points of contention was the expanding settlments. Did Bibi-Net make any mention of these?

Otherwise I agree with the demilitarized Palestinian state. However, they must have some kind of nominal paramilitary organization for law and order, and the basic national self defence that comes with a sovereign state, or at least the appearance thereof. Perhaps something like a glorified militia or something of that order.

They already do have armed police. In fact it was Israel that was giving arms to palestinian police during prior negotiations in hopes that the new police would fight terrorists, but those arms turned against Israeli soldiers. The point that Netanyahu is making is not to disallow armed police or paramilitary but that any new state would not be allowed to legally buy and import Stingers, S-300s, Grads etc.

[Moledet]

I think one of the big points of contention was the expanding settlments. Did Bibi-Net make any mention of these?

He said that he won't give settlements new lands but he will continue to build within current settlements lands.

[surfingguy]

I listened to about 99% of the speech live. I don't think Bibi caved at all. He said the Arab nations declared war on Israel in 1948 before Israel even had control of Jerusalem etc. Why should Israel think there will be peace if those lands are given to Palestinians.

He said he would only accept a Palestinian state outside Israel's borders. I thought he did a great job. I had been concerned he would allow foreign nations to impose their will upon the democratically elected Israeli government. But he didn't. I will always welcome a stronger Israeli stance though.

[gazell]

I can't see it making much sense asking them to be demiliterisid, when yourself are up to the teeth in arms, this just can't be taken seriously, this reads for them as surrender.

[GiladS]

I can't see it making much sense asking them to be demiliterisid, when yourself are up to the teeth in arms, this just can't be taken seriously, this reads for them as surrender.

Why should a Palestinian state, that will be created in the framework of a peace agreement, need to match Israeli military strength?

Isn't the whole idea to stop the fighting? :|

[NimDod]

I Did Bibi-Net make any mention of these?

What's Bibi-net?

[mas-36]

What's Bibi-net?

A name I made up for Netanyahu. He's known as "Bibi" by some and by Netanyahu by the rest of the world. I simply created Bibi-net because it has a ring to it I suppose.

[Danielotu]

So assuming that the Palestinians finally get their own state, who will be responsible for the protection of their airspace and (in the case of Gaza) the country's territorial waters?You know you need an armed force for that.

[ISNJH]

If they are at peace with Israel they would not need stinger missiles to engage Israel helicopters and could have joint working relations with Israel for the creation of an air force and also Israel US help in developing a navy for coastal defense. The only reason they would need a massive arms buildup would be if they intented to arm up and attack Israel.

[lebinoz]

http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w168/XRDOSE/n727258081_2007396_3236.jpg

if this map correctly shows the land Palestinians now live on is that what will comprise of their new state? or will they get the west bank and gaza?

[sardukar]

netanyahu doesn't wish to see any green parts on the map
his speech was just him trying to be diplomatic with US pressures
he knows his conditions will never be accepted

[JJC]

So assuming that the Palestinians finally get their own state, who will be responsible for the protection of their airspace and (in the case of Gaza) the country's territorial waters?You know you need an armed force for that.
If Turkmenistan can survive without an army and an air force with its world's large natural gas reserves, then Palestinians have nothing to worry about either.


netanyahu doesn't wish to see any green parts on the map
his speech was just him trying to be diplomatic with US pressures
he knows his conditions will never be accepted
He knows that the other side have zero desire to see any white parts of the map, so they won't take the steps to meet those simple conditions.

[LazerLordz]

hmm..a Palestine under an Israeli defence umbrella...? It would take a huge paradigm shift in the Palestinian elite's mentality for that to happen..

[budgie]

A tall order. Any independent Palestinian state will want its own military force - if for nothing other than to keep Israel from stepping in over every little upset. However that force will have to be devoid of extremists, so a compromise will be hard to reach. Even then, it will be hard to keep extremist elements out.

[LRPV]

If the Arabs in the West Bank are wise they can achieve most of their dreams under Bibi. A military could be left for the future. It should be noted that the PA have Israeli approval for 10 battalions of "police". These US trained battalions are already referred to as the army by the PA. Hence the increment is already there as a basis for future development.

In all its about successful progress, which in an environment of mistrust can only be staged gradually.

[Player]

Even if Israel's offer isn't the best in the world, it's better than nothing, yet the Palestinian side rejects it because the given conditions aren't good enough for them. They fail to realize that once they meet these conditions, they will gain more trust from Israel as well as stability to continue further for being completely independent, including having their own army.

The problem is that Israel isn't going to give up it's stance on the settlements and East Jerusalem anytime soon, at least for as long as the Palestinians don't meet Israel's conditions, Palestinians are just missing a great opportunity, it's really better than nothing...

Yes, some people come and say "But why should Israel decide the conditions for peace?", the answer is that Israel has no more right than the Palestinians to decide the conditions for peace, but the reality is that without the agreement of Israel there won't be a Palestinian state, and Palestinians should use any given opportunity because otherwise they will get nothing.

No matter how much you support either side, sometimes you just have to be realistic and use whatever you have and look one step ahead.

[gilgoul]

Netanyahu wants demilitarized PA state
Jun. 12, 2009
Herb Keinon , THE JERUSALEM POST
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu lifted the shroud from his diplomatic endgame on Sunday night, saying at the BESA Center at Bar-Ilan University that he would support a Palestinian state if he received international guarantees that it would be demilitarized, and if the Palestinians accepted Israel as the Jewish homeland.
"If we receive this guarantee regarding demilitarization and Israel's security needs, and if the Palestinians recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people, then we will be ready in a future peace agreement to reach a solution where a demilitarized Palestinian state exists alongside the Jewish state," Netanyahu said to applause - the first time he has said he would accept a Palestinian state.
US President Barack Obama welcomed the prime minister's speech, calling it an important step forward.
"The president is committed to two states, a Jewish State of Israel and an independent Palestine, in the historic homeland of both peoples," White House Press Secretary Robert Gibbs said in a statement. "He believes this solution can and must ensure both Israel's security and the fulfillment of the Palestinians' legitimate aspirations for a viable state, and he welcomes Prime Minister Netanyahu's endorsement of that goal."
But Palestinian Authority officials in Ramallah expressed outrage and shock over Netanyahu's call for a demilitarized Palestinian state and his demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state.
The officials said the speech was much worse than they had expected. They also warned that Netanyahu's policies would trigger a new intifada.
In his much anticipated, 30-minute speech that was broadcast live both in Israel and in much of the Arab world, the prime minister not only dealt with the two-state issue, but also confronted the contentious issue of settlement construction head-on, saying that he would not - as the US and the Arab world are demanding - freeze all settlement construction.
"The territorial question will be discussed as part of the final peace agreement," he said. "In the meantime, we have no intention of building new settlements or of expropriating additional land for existing settlements."
But, he added, "There is a need to enable the residents to live normal lives, to allow mothers and fathers to raise their children like families elsewhere. The settlers are neither the enemies of the people nor the enemies of peace. Rather, they are an integral part of our people, a principled, pioneering and Zionist public."
Regarding Jerusalem, Netanyahu said it "must remain the united capital of Israel with continued religious freedom for all faiths."
He did not tackle the issue of a Palestinian state, or the settlement issue, until well into his remarks, and until after he corrected the impression Obama left with his Cairo address on June 4, that Israel was the product of the Holocaust, and not the result of a timeless Jewish connection to the Land of Israel.
The connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel goes back more than 3,500 years, the prime minister said. "This is the land of our forefathers.
"The right of the Jewish people to a state in the Land of Israel does not derive from the catastrophes that have plagued our people," he said. "True, for 2,000 years the Jewish people suffered expulsions, pogroms, blood libels and massacres which culminated in a Holocaust - a suffering which has no parallel in human history.
"There are those who say that if the Holocaust had not occurred, the State of Israel would never have been established. But I say that if the State of Israel would have been established earlier, the Holocaust would not have occurred."
Netanyahu, clearly relating to Obama's narrative in the Cairo speech, said the Jews' right to a sovereign state in Israel "arises from one simple fact: this is the homeland of the Jewish people, this is where our identity was forged."
Alongside this truth, he said, is another: "Within this homeland lives a large Palestinian community. We do not want to rule over them, we do not want to govern their lives, we do not want to impose either our flag or our culture on them."
The prime minister said that in his vision of peace; two peoples will "live freely, side by side, in amity and mutual respect. Each will have its own flag, its own national anthem, its own government. Neither will threaten the security or survival of the other."
Any peace agreement would need to be based on two principles: the first is a clear and unambiguous Palestinian recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people, and the second is that a future Palestinian state "must be demilitarized with ironclad security provisions for Israel," he said.
Unless these two conditions were met, he said, "there is a real danger that an armed Palestinian state would emerge that would become another terrorist base against the Jewish state, such as the one in Gaza. We don't want Kassam rockets on Petah Tikva, Grad rockets on Tel Aviv, or missiles on Ben-Gurion Airport. We want peace."
Netanyahu did not spell out what type of international guarantees he had in mind, but said that to achieve peace, "we must ensure that Palestinians will not be able to import missiles into their territory, to field an army, to close their airspace to us, or to make pacts with the likes of Hizbullah and Iran."
In an apparent reference to unceasing calls from the US administration for Israel to declare it is willing for a Palestinian state to be established, Netanyahu said, "It is impossible to expect us to agree in advance to the principle of a Palestinian state without assurances that this state will be demilitarized. On a matter so critical to the existence of Israel, we must first have our security needs addressed."
He began his tightly written speech by stressing the importance peace has always played in Jewish civilization, and then by saying he supported Obama's vision for regional peace and security.
"I turn to all Arab leaders tonight and I say: "Let us meet. Let us speak of peace and let us make peace. I am ready to meet with you at any time. I am willing to go to Damascus, to Riyadh, to Beirut, to any place - including Jerusalem," he said.
Turning to the Palestinians, Netanyahu said he knew first hand "the face of war."
"I have experienced battle," he said. "I lost close friends, I lost a brother. I have seen the pain of bereaved families. I do not want war. No one in Israel wants war."
The prime minister said it was necessary to be honest about why it has been so difficult to end the conflict.
"Even as we look toward the horizon, we must be firmly connected to reality, to the truth," he said. "And the simple truth is that the root of the conflict was, and remains, the refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own, in their historic homeland."
Netanyahu repeated his call to the Palestinians to begin negotiations immediately and without preconditions. In an oblique reference to the road map, he said Israel was obligated by its international commitments and expected "all parties to keep their commitments."
The coalition's right wing expressed disappointment with the call for Palestinian statehood and vowed to fight it.
Likud MK Danny Danon said the acceptance of Palestinian aspirations for statehood was "one unnecessary sentence in a brilliant speech. It goes against the Likud platform and we will work in the Knesset faction and central committee to make sure it doesn't get implemented."
MK Uri Orbach (Habayit Hayehudi) said that his Knesset faction "has to weigh its political steps in light of the dangerous implications of Netanyahu's speech and his agreement to establish a Palestinian state."
Contrary to prespeech expectations, the prime minister did not dwell heavily on Teheran's nuclear program or last Friday's elections there, relegating the Iranian threat to one paragraph.
"The Iranian threat looms large before us, as was further demonstrated yesterday. The greatest danger confronting Israel, the Middle East, the entire world and human race is the nexus between radical Islam and nuclear weapons," he said.
"I discussed this issue with President Obama during my recent visit to Washington, and I will raise it again in my meetings next week with European leaders. For years, I have been working tirelessly to forge an international alliance to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons," he said.
Khaled Abu Toameh, Tovah Lazaroff and Rebecca Anna Stoil contributed to this report.


Source:Jerusalem Post (http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244371095741&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter)




It is quite interesting to see that Bibi is here playing a fine game, he knows going straight against Obama would be counter productive, so he put's on his best diplomatic suit, and brings the ball in the PA camp.


Now, he takes a risk with the right wing, and this speech may explain why he didn't introduce the natioalist camp in his coalition, it would have gone bust after such a speech, and on the other hand, he leaves himself enough room to maneuvre if the PA does something stupid, or if his left wing coalition partners get out of the coalition, by having a possibility to bring in the nationalists if the soft way presented here doesn't work.


BTW, the Oslo agreements signed by Rabin were to be even ore restrictive for the PA than that.


Now, the PA and it's supporters have to answer constructively to that, but the first reactions are as usual disappointing.


PA: Netanyahu has buried peace process
Jun. 14, 2009
Khaled Abu Toameh , THE JERUSALEM POST
Palestinian Authority officials in Ramallah expressed outrage and shock on Sunday over Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's call for the establishment of a demilitarized Palestinian state and his demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state.
The officials said that the speech that Netanyahu delivered at Bar-Ilan University was much worse than they had expected.
They also warned that Netanyahu's policies would trigger a new intifada.
Some of PA President Mahmoud Abbas's top advisers accused Netanyahu of "burying the peace process" and said the ball was now in the court of US President Barack Obama.
"Netanyahu's speech is a blow to Obama before it's a blow to the Palestinians and Arabs," an Abbas aide said. "It's obvious, in the aftermath of this speech, that we are headed toward another round of violence and bloodshed."
Abbas's office issued a terse statement in which it accused Netanyahu of destroying efforts to achieve peace in the region.
"The speech has destroyed all initiatives and expectations," the statement said. "It has also placed restrictions on all efforts to achieve peace and constitutes a clear challenge to the Palestinian, Arab and American positions."
Nabil Abu Rudaineh, a spokesman for Abbas, also lambasted Netanyahu for refusing to recognize Jerusalem as the capital of the future Palestinian state and his call for solving the issue of Palestinian refugees outside Israel.
"Netanyahu's remarks won't lead to a just and comprehensive peace based on United Nations resolutions," Abu Rudaineh added.
Yasser Abed Rabbo, a senior PLO official closely associated with Abbas, launched a scathing attack on Netanyahu, calling him a "swindler and liar."
Netanyahu wanted the Palestinians to join the Zionist movement by offering them a state under the protectorate of Israel, Abed Rabbo said. He also rejected Netanyahu's demand that the Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state.
The speech, Abed Rabbo said, was worthless and meaningless and hampered efforts to move forward toward a fair solution to the Israeli-Arab conflict.
"Netanyahu is creating tricks to sabotage the peace process," he said. "The response to Netanyahu must be firm."
Chief PA negotiator Saeb Erekat called on the Arab countries to suspend the Arab peace initiative in protest against Netanyahu's statements. "We were not surprised by this speech," he said. "It didn't come as a surprise to all those who are familiar with the Israeli mentality. It's time for the Arab world to announce a clear position toward Netanyahu's speech."


source Jerusalem Post
(http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1244371096340&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter)

[Johnny_H02]

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=uiN6PZjY4_Q

[LRPV]

"Chief PA negotiator Saeb Erekat called on the Arab countries to suspend the Arab peace initiative in protest against Netanyahu's statements. "We were not surprised by this speech," he said. "It didn't come as a surprise to all those who are familiar with the Israeli mentality. It's time for the Arab world to announce a clear position toward Netanyahu's speech."


Odd. Last week Abbas stated that Palestinians in the West Bank had a good standard of living. Now that it seems Obama won't try to dislodge Bibi this statement seems to have been forgotten...

[Octavariable]

I guess they are yet again going round and round in circles instead of facing the obvious truth, like Netanyahu said, the 1st and foremost obstacle is the unwillingness of the palis to recognise Israel.
Their reactions could have had a more moderate sound if they were to say "we will recognise if bla bla bla", instead, they went to their usual bullsh*t of "apartheid, not fair, they this, they that."

Like people here say, the ball was thrown back to their side, but they opted to blow it up... oh well, let them stir in their own soup for the next.. well.. until a left wing government wins the Israeli elections, and in the current ways of things, it doesn't seem it will happen any time soon.

[HakkaPelitta]

Did Obama put pressure on Netanyahu? Will the settlements continue to increase?

[UoUo]

bottom line, obama is happy. case close.

[Moledet]

Did Obama put pressure on Netanyahu? Will the settlements continue to increase?
Increase as in the number of people living there-yes, but not increase in size of land.

[Octavariable]

http://i176.photobucket.com/albums/w168/XRDOSE/n727258081_2007396_3236.jpg

if this map correctly shows the land Palestinians now live on is that what will comprise of their new state? or will they get the west bank and gaza?

I know he's susspended, but for all the others, this map is wrong and manipulative.

the left one, of 1946, includes all arabs as "palestinians", though in fact some of them are druze and some are bedoins (south and north)
besides that, jewish "land" was de-facto a bigger portion than shown here. (take a look at that green blob where Tel-Aviv is)

1949 and forth, look how the terminology changed from jewish land to Israeli land. but the inhabitants of the land are the same arabs, druze and bedoins who lived there before and they still own the land.

The "2000" or 67 to today map is also quite misleading. it incorporated in blobish white and green the Oslo accords (remember? signd by Arafat as well):
Area A, the green parts, are indeed under complete control of the Palestinian Authority
the rest comprise of:
Area B: Palestinian civil control and Israeli security control.
And area C:under complete Israeli control, except over Palestinian civilians. These areas are Israeli settlements and "security zones."
but then agian, Palestinians do live there.

So like I said, these sets of "facts" are missleading and incorrect. the point they are trying to make is a coherent one, but things aren't so black and white (or in this case, green and white).

[Danielotu]

If they are at peace with Israel they would not need stinger missiles to engage Israel helicopters and could have joint working relations with Israel for the creation of an air force and also Israel US help in developing a navy for coastal defense. The only reason they would need a massive arms buildup would be if they intented to arm up and attack Israel.

Assuming that a state is created, then the Palestinians will have the right to protect their airspace if violated by Israel or any other country. That's what sovereign countries do.And why must it be Isreal or the US? Based on what you've just posted, i think that you're demanding for Israel's continued control of Palestinian airspace and territorial waters (that's if a Palestinian state is created).

With regards to the arms, we both know that no Arab country can match Isreal militarily. Thus I seriously doubt that the Palestinians will want to attack Isreal as it makes no sense at all.

[Danielotu]

If Turkmenistan can survive without an army and an air force with its world's large natural gas reserves, then Palestinians have nothing to worry about either.


Turkmenistan has a military.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Military_of_Turkmenistan

[jokuvaan]

On the positive side, if Israel gives military cover, then Palestine can save money big time without army.

[Moledet]

Assuming that a state is created, then the Palestinians will have the right to protect their airspace if violated by Israel or any other country. That's what sovereign countries do.And why must it be Isreal or the US? Based on what you've just posted, i think that you're demanding for Israel's continued control of Palestinian airspace and territorial waters (that's if a Palestinian state is created).

With regards to the arms, we both know that no Arab country can match Isreal militarily. Thus I seriously doubt that the Palestinians will want to attack Isreal as it makes no sense at all.
No, they won't be able to protect the airspace. There are agreements between Israel and Jordan about sharing this airspace and they can't be broken because they are vital for commercial flights to and from Jordan and for flights landing in Israel that its international airport is 5km from the green line. They want a country-good for them, but there are already agreements between existing countries and they can't nullify them.

They will only have a police force armed with light weapons. That's enough for guarding from smugglers/criminals.

[Palmach]

Assuming that a state is created, then the Palestinians will have the right to protect their airspace if violated by Israel or any other country. ... Thus I seriously doubt that the Palestinians will want to attack Isreal as it makes no sense at all.

Palestine - should it ever be created - will be sandwiched between Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, none of which it will be able to match, let alone, defeat, for a long time. Clearly, not having an army would not be the biggest issue they'd facing for quite a while. An agreement to keep such a state devoid of heavy weaponry for a period of 25/50 years should be sufficient for both sides. In 25 years either there will be a degree of de-escalation, or, more likely, it will be a failed state, like somalia, and any heavy weapons will be out of the question anyhow.

As far as "why should Israel be able to dictate" - the US went bonkers when Cuba aquired weapons that where a threat to the US-proper. Similar stuff.

To make this demand into an dealbreaker is plain silly.

[Octavariable]

Assuming that a state is created, then the Palestinians will have the right to protect their airspace if violated by Israel or any other country. That's what sovereign countries do.And why must it be Isreal or the US? Based on what you've just posted, i think that you're demanding for Israel's continued control of Palestinian airspace and territorial waters (that's if a Palestinian state is created).

With regards to the arms, we both know that no Arab country can match Isreal militarily. Thus I seriously doubt that the Palestinians will want to attack Isreal as it makes no sense at all.

Here's a thought for you to ponder on.
let's say that due to international pressure, the future palestinian state will have AA guns or missiles.
now, who can guarantee that they will not be used against planes near but not inside their air space? last week some wacko Lebanese shot at a helicopter because he thought it was Israeli, who is to bargain that this will not happen in the palestinian state?
now to make matters worse, planes landing in Ben-Gurion international that approach from the east, have to fly over what is deamed palestinian land. who can guarantee that said wacko will not try and shoot down a passenger jet?

it's not that you cannot trust the other side, it's that you can never trust a single person.
it's the acts of selfish individuals that cause the trouble and havoc, exactly like scholl shootings.

and with regards to arms. it's not the amount of arms, and it never has been, it's arms as a potential threat.
hezbulla has thousands of rockets, but no matter how hard they try, those rockets will never destroy Israel (though they wish it could)
it's there to stir up trouble and cause death.
having an armed group, only a few miles from heavily populated civilian areas, can cause trouble, trouble that can be avoided if they won't have an army.
army has tanks mortars, rockets and cannons.
and even you know that the only point to were these barrels will be aimed is Israel.
Police on the other hand, has guns and armoured vehicles to enforce order. the palestinian authority has a police force, given a free hand by Israel and cooperates with them when needed. and that happens now.

so you see, everything has a reason, and in order to protect the people of Israel, Netanyahu just did what every other Israeli PM must do.

[gilgoul]

The Palestinian reaction is understandable, their whining has always won international support eventually, and since they are in no hurry to have to effectively organize, run and make prosper their so coveted "Palestinian State", we see where this is all gonna go again.
Let's prepare for the next 'intifadah' followed by the next round of Israeli concessions, and so forth and so on.
It is kind of tiring to wish for peace in this 'hood'

[RoyB]

Bibi could have said 'here, have a state.' and still they would have been denouncing what he said and saying that he ruined the chances for peace.. which is basically what they have done for the last 40 frickin' years.

[Nameless1]

No, they won't be able to protect the airspace. There are agreements between Israel and Jordan about sharing this airspace and they can't be broken because they are vital for commercial flights to and from Jordan and for flights landing in Israel that its international airport is 5km from the green line. They want a country-good for them, but there are already agreements between existing countries and they can't nullify them.

They will only have a police force armed with light weapons. That's enough for guarding from smugglers/criminals.

Any source on this? Interesting.

[Moledet]

Any source on this? Interesting.

The Parties take note of the negotiations on the international air corridor to be opened between them in accordance with the Washington Declaration. In addition, the Parties shall, upon ratification of this Treaty, enter into negotiations for the purpose of concluding a Civil Aviation Agreement. All the above negotiations are to be concluded not later than 6 months from the exchange of the instruments of ratification of this Treaty.
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Peace+Process/Guide+to+the+Peace+Process/Israel-Jordan+Peace+Treaty.htm

There's an air corridor that goes over Judah and Samaria and is reserved for flights to and from Jordan, this way civil aviation saves a lot of fuel.

[annihilation]

I think what Israel asked is reasonable. I wouldn't trust Palestine with a military either or find it acceptable of them having any airforce at all. At the same time Israel has to give up any new settlements and in fact go as far as abandon any settlements they have made on Palestinian territory. They don't below on that side of the fence and it gets in the way of any true peace.