Facts All US Citizens Need to Know About Israel and Palestine

[OnMyWayID 1,489]

Well maybe if you didn't build up walls around your neighbor's house that turned their property in to a prison, and prevented them from running their own affairs, they wouldn't throw M-80s into your yard.

Also, maybe taking more and more of their yard so you could move in more family members might cause some of those M-80s to be lobbed your way as well.

Actually that's why the walls were built in the first place - walls did not cause the violence, the violence caused the walls... Really cut down on the Israeli deaths.

[Karee 4,190]

Actually that's why the walls were built in the first place - walls did not cause the violence, the violence caused the walls... Really cut down on the Israeli deaths.

I have no problem with the wall per se, just it's location. Why not build the wall on the 1967 border? Once they built that wall where they did, that sends the message that everything inside this wall is within Israel. While the wall may have had an impact on the reduction in attacks on Israel, I'd argue that it's real intention is the eventual annexation of more land.

That red line doesn't seem like it's drawn for security. It seems to me that it's drawn to enclose as many Israeli settlements as possible, while cutting off sections of west bank land from the rest of the west bank.

Edited July 26, 2014 by Karee

[Sousuke 1,214]

I think those fears are overblown. We have a case study in India and Pakistan. Education at all levels is deeply nationalistic, deeply anti-the-other-side. And yet, almost 70 years have passed, both countries have nukes, and nothing terrible has happened.

Apparently, grown adults are capable of being grown ups. Who knew.

Another case study: the two koreas.

If India and Pakistan attacked each other, it would be the end for humanity. It doesn't require that many weapons to start a species ending nuclear winter.

[OriZ 3,157]

The best plan I have encountered so far - everyone gets what they want. Those who think Israel should just annex the land and give the Palestinians citizenship, well there is some of that too. Those who think that the Palestinians should have their own state - there's that too! And at the same time, both sides enjoy security and a flourishing economy. Nothing perfect about it and it's not meant to be nor should it be a final solution but for now it's better than the status quo:

On May 14 U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry met with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in London to discuss the "unity government" that Mr. Abbas announced unexpectedly last month. Mr. Abbas's decision to establish a national government in coalition with Hamas is the latest example in a long line of Palestinian intransigence.

Hamas is a terrorist organization dedicated to Israel's destruction. The group has killed hundreds of Israelis in suicide bombings and missile attacks. That is the organization's very mission: The Hamas charter calls for perpetual jihad against the Jewish State while forever rejecting peace negotiations or compromise. Israel will not negotiate with a Palestinian government that includes Hamas.

So how should Israel respond to Mr. Abbas's announced plan for such a government? I propose what I call the Stability Plan, which I will promote throughout Israel's new Knesset legislative session.

Palestinians living in certain portions of the West Bank (known as Area A and Area B) should govern themselves. They should hold their own elections, run their own schools, issue their own building permits and manage their own health-care system. In short, they should run their own lives. Israel should not interfere in day-to-day governance.

Enlarge Image

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas Associated Press

To achieve this, Israel must allow Palestinians complete freedom of movement, which requires removing all roadblocks and checkpoints in the West Bank. In particular, Israel should dismantle the security barrier erected throughout the last decade to defend against Palestinian terror attacks during the Second Intifada.

Many Israelis credit the barrier with the dramatic increase in security over the past decade. Not a single Israeli was killed by terror in the West Bank in 2012, making it the first year without bloodshed since 1973. Yet this was not solely due to the barrier. The remarkable drop in terror happened thanks to high-quality intelligence coupled with Israel's ability to conduct targeted military operations in the West Bank. The number of Israeli operations in the West Bank has dropped significantly because the military now only carries out pinpointed operations based on reliable intelligence.

Israel can now stay reasonably secure without the barrier. This will prove especially true if the Israeli government works with the international community to promote Palestinian economic development in Areas A and B. There's no perfect solution to the conflict, and the wait for one has allowed the Palestinian economy to languish. The hope of independence and statehood has delayed crucial economic investments.

So, during the past few months, Israel's Ministry of Economy, which I lead, has reviewed different options for helping the Palestinian economy grow. We have looked at the export and import systems, work permits, the climate for international investment and more.

One promising idea is to encourage multinational corporations to invest in Palestinian areas by offering economic incentives such as insurance guarantees and tax breaks. There are also ways to streamline the export process for Palestinian manufacturers so products can reach their destination quickly and in perfect condition. Israel has become known as the "Startup Nation," but now it is time to build a "Startup Region."

The other part of the Stability Plan deals with the remaining portion of the West Bank, known as Area C, where 400,000 Israelis and 70,000 Palestinians live. Under my plan, Israel would annex this territory, much as it exercised sovereignty over East Jerusalem in 1967 and the Golan Heights in 1981. The Palestinians who live in Area C would be offered full Israeli citizenship.

East Jerusalem and the Golan Heights still aren't recognized by the international community as part of Israel. But it is impossible to imagine a state of Israel without the Western Wall. Israel could not withdraw from the Golan Heights while the Syrian civil war rages nearby. East Jerusalem and the Golan are Israeli territory, and the same should be true of Area C.

Annexing Area C would limit conflict by reducing the size of the territory in dispute, which would make it easier to one day reach a long-term peace agreement. Annexation would also allow Israel to secure vital interests: providing security for Jerusalem and the Gush Dan region along Israel's central coast, protecting Israeli communities within Area C, and applying Israeli sovereignty over national heritage sites such as the Cave of the Patriarchs in Hebron, the burial place of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob.

This arrangement might not be the utopian peace Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat imagined when they shook hands in the White House Rose Garden in 1993. But it offers Palestinians independent government and prosperity, while ensuring Israeli security and stability. That would improve lives and foster a much healthier coexistence, major progress for a region that has known conflict for decades.

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304081804579559432394067704

[Karee 4,190]

The best plan I have encountered so far - everyone gets what they want. Those who think Israel should just annex the land and give the Palestinians citizenship, well there is some of that too. Those who think that the Palestinians should have their own state - there's that too! And at the same time, both sides enjoy security and a flourishing economy. Nothing perfect about it and it's not meant to be nor should it be a final solution but for now it's better than the status quo:

http://online.wsj.com/news/articles/SB10001424052702304081804579559432394067704

Seems interesting. Will the hard liners on both sides go for it is the question. Also, what to do with Gaza?

[OriZ 3,157]

Well it was written by Bennett and he is considered a hard liner. Gaza? There need to be guarantees for no more tunnels and rockets, in return - Israel could/should gradually lift the blockade, let more supplies in, etc. It's crucial to remember that after Israel left Gaza in 2005, there was no blockade. Fatah was in charge, there were talks about a sea port, opening all crossings, etc. Only after Hamas took control of the Gaza strip and threatened to turn it into a base for terror(which it did good on that threat) did Israel and Egypt seal the borders.

Convince Israel and the international community that all you really want is to be able to freely move around - like Mashaal claims, and the problem goes away.

[Karee 4,190]

Well it was written by Bennett and he is considered a hard liner. Gaza? There need to be guarantees for no more tunnels and rockets, in return - Israel could/should gradually lift the blockade, let more supplies in, etc. It's crucial to remember that after Israel left Gaza in 2005, there was no blockade. Fatah was in charge, there were talks about a sea port, opening all crossings, etc. Only after Hamas took control of the Gaza strip and threatened to turn it into a base for terror(which it did good on that threat) did Israel and Egypt seal the borders.

Convince Israel and the international community that all you really want is to be able to freely move around - like Mashaal claims, and the problem goes away.

Are there any maps of these Areas A,B, and C? If Area C covers 50% of the west bank, doesn't seem fair.

[Karee 4,190]

I found a map of these areas. I hope you don't consider this a serious proposal. It splits up all the Palestinian ares into islands. Not only that it looks like area C is roughly 40-50% of the west bank.

It almost looks like a map of a bunch of refugee camps.

Edited July 27, 2014 by Karee

[OriZ 3,157]

To achieve this, Israel must allow Palestinians complete freedom of movement, which requires removing all roadblocks and checkpoints in the West Bank. In particular, Israel should dismantle the security barrier erected throughout the last decade to defend against Palestinian terror attacks during the Second Intifada.

This will prove especially true if the Israeli government works with the international community to promote Palestinian economic development in Areas A and B. There's no perfect solution to the conflict, and the wait for one has allowed the Palestinian economy to languish. The hope of independence and statehood has delayed crucial economic investments.

So, during the past few months, Israel's Ministry of Economy, which I lead, has reviewed different options for helping the Palestinian economy grow. We have looked at the export and import systems, work permits, the climate for international investment and more.

One promising idea is to encourage multinational corporations to invest in Palestinian areas by offering economic incentives such as insurance guarantees and tax breaks. There are also ways to streamline the export process for Palestinian manufacturers so products can reach their destination quickly and in perfect condition.

I'm re-quoting two parts that I find vital to the success of the plan. Like I said, it is not perfect, nor should it be a final solution to the conflict, but it is better than the status quo. No side gets everything they want, but each side gets some of what they want. Those who support one state with equal rights for all get that with the annexation of area C. Those who support a two state solution get that with Area A and B. I'm also attaching a better map that also shows roads. Those areas will not be islands like they appear to be on your map but there will be better freedom of movement than there is today, by removing checkpoints. Israelis and Palestinians use alot of the same roads today and that will continue to be the case. While land wise it seems pretty vast, alot of it is the area near the Jordan river which A. is extremely vital to Israel's security to an extent most people do not grasp, especially with the "arab spring" going on, and B. hardly has any Palestinian population in it, it is desert land almost as much as the Negev. So Israel gets to stay secure, and the Palestinians get freedom of movement and a much better economy. It's a win-win.

[Karee 4,190]

I'm re-quoting two parts that I find vital to the success of the plan. Like I said, it is not perfect, nor should it be a final solution to the conflict, but it is better than the status quo. No side gets everything they want, but each side gets some of what they want. Those who support one state with equal rights for all get that with the annexation of area C. Those who support a two state solution get that with Area A and B. I'm also attaching a better map that also shows roads. Those areas will not be islands like they appear to be on your map but there will be better freedom of movement than there is today, by removing checkpoints. Israelis and Palestinians use alot of the same roads today and that will continue to be the case. While land wise it seems pretty vast, alot of it is the area near the Jordan river which A. is extremely vital to Israel's security to an extent most people do not grasp, especially with the "arab spring" going on, and B. hardly has any Palestinian population in it, it is desert land almost as much as the Negev. So Israel gets to stay secure, and the Palestinians get freedom of movement and a much better economy. It's a win-win.

What are the Palestinians getting out of the above map, besides being surrounded and cut off from any access to water? Also there's all these islands of settlements that aren't connected geographically to Israel at all. I know you said that it's not a final solution, but look at it! It's a joke. Also I can see by that map that I was right about that wall being more about grabbing land than security.

[OriZ 3,157]

Well, the only water in that map that Palestinians from areas A and B would not have access to is the Dead Sea. And well, it's not like anyone drinks water out of the dead sea, or use it for agriculture, nor do they have access to it today. However, the Palestinians in Area C do have access and will continue to have access. I myself have stayed in a resort last year that is located in the northern part of the dead sea and is part of Area C. There were more Palestinians there than there were Israeli Jews, and we all got along.

What are they getting out of the map? They are getting to run their own lives in Area A and B, and they are getting to be Israeli citizens in area C. They are getting calm, peace, quiet, freedom of movement, economic development, everything people need to better their lives. What are they getting out of the status quo? None of the above. Will they be better off? For sure. Will it be how it should stay for centuries? No.

[Karee 4,190]

Well, the only water in that map that Palestinians from areas A and B would not have access to is the Dead Sea. And well, it's not like anyone drinks water out of the dead sea, or use it for agriculture, nor do they have access to it today. However, the Palestinians in Area C do have access and will continue to have access. I myself have stayed in a resort last year that is located in the northern part of the dead sea and is part of Area C. There were more Palestinians there than there were Israeli Jews, and we all got along.

What are they getting out of the map? They are getting to run their own lives in Area A and B, and they are getting to be Israeli citizens in area C. They are getting calm, peace, quiet, freedom of movement, economic development, everything people need to better their lives. What are they getting out of the status quo? None of the above. Will they be better off? For sure. Will it be how it should stay for centuries? No.

Generally in compromises both sides have to give up something. What is Israel giving up with the plan above?

[OriZ 3,157]

Generally in compromises both sides have to give up something. What is Israel giving up with the plan above?

Claim to Territory(areas A and B), no more settlements(except for area C which will now be annexed), the wall, checkpoints(which mean a higher risk of attacks), offering citizenship to 70,000 people...

[Karee 4,190]

Claim to Territory(areas A and B), no more settlements(except for area C which will now be annexed), the wall, checkpoints(which mean a higher risk of attacks), offering citizenship to 70,000 people...

So if I take something form someone else, and then offer to give some of it (but not all of it) back, that's considered a concession?

That's like me stealing my neighboour's chain saw and lawn mower, and then me saying that I'm giving something up because I'm giving him his lawn mower back ,but keeping the chainsaw. That's a pretty flawed negotiating tactic if you ask me. Or maybe it's brilliant depending on who you are. Doesn't seem fair to the guy that is out his chainsaw though.

[The Nature Boy 4,224]

So if I take something form someone else, and then offer to give some of it (but not all of it) back, that's considered a concession?

That's like me stealing my neighboour's chain saw and lawn mower, and then me saying that I'm giving something up because I'm giving him his lawn mower back ,but keeping the chainsaw. That's a pretty flawed negotiating tactic if you ask me. Or maybe it's brilliant depending on who you are. Doesn't seem fair to the guy that is out his chainsaw though.

Be careful. You may be accused very shortly of calling the OP a chainsaw and lawnmower thief. Low information morally outraged posters don't do analogies very well, it seems . If this happens a modification will surely follow.

BTW you misspelled neighbor.. Payback

Peace ..