Gabrielle

It is indeed refreshing to read that you admit you don’t know the facts.

In those circumstances it is very dangerous for you to draw the conclusions you do.

Here are some facts for you to ponder:

1. Israel in 2000/1 offered to cede its claims in about 90% of the West Bank and all of Gaza and that offer was rejected by the PLO. Neither Jews nor Arabs exercises sovereignty in the West Bank and Gaza- whose last sovereign ruler was Great Britain until it handed back its Mandate to the United Nations in 1948.

2. Israel unilaterally disengaged from Gaza and some areas in the West Bank where it had exclusive administrative and security control in 2005 and has received thousands of rockets and missiles as a thank you present.

3. A similar offer to that made in 2000/1 in the West Bank and Gaza was made in 2008 but extended to about 95% of the West Bank – and that offer was rejected as well.

4. Jews have the legal right to live in the West Bank and Gaza under article 6 of the Mandate for Palestine and article 80 of the United Nations Charter and did live there until 1948 when they were driven out by six invading Arab armies – only returning there after the 1967 Six Day War.

5. The Arabs had 19 years to establish the State they now demand in 2015 – when not one Jew lived there – yet failed to do so.

6. Since the above offers and actual withdrawal were rejected – the Middle East has descended into chaos making the likelihood of those offers being renewed – with any ceding of claims by Israel being made in a lesser area for understandable security reasons.

7, The peace treaty with Egypt saw Israel return the entire Sinai to Egypt along with the oil fields discovered by Israel, the airfields built by Israel during its occupation, and the abandonment of Jewish settlements.

8. The peace treaty with Jordan involved Israel giving Jordan special rights on the Temple Mount Israel recognized the special role of Jordan in Muslim Holy shrines in Jerusalem and committed itself to give high priority to the Jordanian historic role in these shrines in negotiations on the permanent status.

9. Israel agreed to give Jordan 50,000,000 cubic metres (1.8×109 cu ft) of water each year and for Jordan to own 75% of the water from the Yarmouk River. Both countries could develop other water resources and reservoirs and agreed to help each other survive droughts. Israel also agreed to help Jordan use desalination technology in order to find additional water.

10, There has been no peace agreement reached with PLO and Hamas because neither accepts the right of Jews to have their own State anywhere within the area of land assigned to the Jews by the League of Nations as preserved by the United Nations.

11. Jordan and Egypt broke ranks with the remainder of the Arab League members who support Hamas and the PLO to sign peace treaties with Israel and received great benefits in return – as did Israel.

12. The PLO and Hamas have had their chances and blown them completely. Elections would give the long suffering populations the chance to either affirm or reject their decisions made in 2007.

13. If no such elections are held then Jordan and Egypt will now need to get involved in negotiations with Israel to resolve Arab and Jewish claims to the West Bank and Gaza. Such negotiations might not be successfully concluded but they represent the last possible solution standing that can peacefully resolve a conflict that has been unresolved for almost 100 years.

In summary – your one sentence throwaway conclusions are simply not borne out by the above facts.

Thanks David.
I don’t know the facts.
All I know that large parts of the West Bank are dotted with Israeli settlements. How would you draw the borders for a Palestinian state given the current picture?

Many Jews believe that the Palestinians do not want peace. Does Israel? If so why does it allow more and more settlements? Speckled through a Palestinian state?

Elections will not solve the problem.

The peace treaties with Jordan and Egypt were simpler. There were treaties with existing countries and sovereign nations. They involved small compromises for Israel.

A peace treaty with the Palestinians would require much bigger compromises by Israel.

Your broad brush ignores that Israel has had signed peace treaties with Egypt since 1979 and Jordan since 1994.Care to explain how this could have possibly come about – given your views?

Peace can exist between Israel and the Arabs but obviously not with those associated with Hamas and the PLO.

The stabbings are the result of the 2009 “popular resistance” policy formulated by t he PLO. That policy has got the Arab populations of Gaza and the West Bank nothing but an increase in their deceased, wounded and imprisoned numbers – a policy that would hopefully be reversed if elections were held.

If they choose to remain with either or both failed leaderships – so be it. They will have made their bed and will have to live with the consequences of their decision.

The issue of semantics is important and your comments are noted.

Danny

Perhaps you can explain then why Egypt and Jordan have both signed peace treaties with Israel.

Keeping West Bank and Gazan Arabs voteless plays into PLO and Hamas hands and entrenches them in power to pursue policies that impact their constituents in disaster after disaster.

Gabrielle

You have misunderstood me.

Jewish settlements actually only cover about 5% of the West Bank . Israel’s administrative and security control extends over 60% of the West Bank and the majority of Jewish settlements are located in this area.

Attempts by Israel to resolve the future sovereignty of this 60% with the PLO have failed one of the major reasons being that the PLO want it all – every square metre.

It is not “their land”. It is land under the Mandate for Palestine still remaining unallocated between Arabs and Jews.

Israel allowed free elections in Gaza and got Hamas, the Moslem Brotherhood franchise. It is a fallacy that elections would bring about democracy and because democracies do not go to war against each other, the outcome would be peace.

Feiglin was supposed to have said that you cannot teach monkeys to speak and you cannot teach democracy to Arabs. He didn’t say that but the sentiment, despite being insulting, is true. The Arabs are tribal and won’t act against their tribe or clan. Their religious leaders condemn democracy and call for rule by shari’a; the ISIS caliphate and the Iranian rule by the jurisprudent are examples of that. This call for religious rule is endorsed by the majority of mohammedans (who also incidentally approve of killing Jews) according to polls, but it is also enforced by the more violent members of their group. So forget about elections changing anything for the better.

Your argument that the stabbing violence is the result of Arab frustration is false. The Arabs are always frustrated by something and their uniform response is violence. The Arab war against the Jewish state is religion base and thus unsolvable by rational means. The war will go on until Israel ignores world opinion and gives the local Arabs a good hiding combined with a cull of imams; until such a cull occurs, Islam cannot depart from the 7th century.

Finally let us all cease to talk about the “West Bank”, “east” Jerusalem and “Palestinians”. We cannot win an argument, get justice or even conduct a rational debate while we use the propaganda terms of our sworn enemies.

According to your article the Israelis have populated 60% of the West Bank with settlers.

I agree the Arabs should have had an election while they still had most of their land. But now?

What are you trying to prove? How terrible the Arabs are and what an oppressed people the Israelis are?