Response to shira (Reply #39)
Wed Jan 23, 2013, 07:06 PM
Ken Burch (45,726 posts)
40. The problem is, you're demanding that they give up ANY RoR as a precondition.
Not just give up FULL RoR(which the probably realize, of course, that they aren't ever going to get in the end anyway)but even a compromise of the sort I suggested, a compromise that wouldn't jeopardize Israeli security in the slightest.
What I'm saying is that, were they offered something REAL in return for giving up full RoR, such as the compensation, plus apologies and acknowledgment of harm, you could see a great deal more flexibility on that.
As it is, Netanyahu(with your apparent support)is demanding that the Palestinian side give up everything BEFORE any negotiations even start...give up everything WITHOUT any assurance of getting anything in return.
Real negotiations...the kind you have to have if you're trying to resolve a dispute on any terms other than one side agreeing to terms of unconditional surrender like Japan or Germany in 1945(i.e., the kind of terms no one has accepted since then in any conflict resolution and that no one will ever agree to again)you have to treat both sides with parity.
Netanyahu's demands are about denying the Palestinian side anything even CLOSE to parity-with everything he's demanding they give up at the beginning of talks, BEFORE anything is agreed to, there's nothing at all they'd actually get FOR talking. When you combine the preservation of those blocs with Netanyahu's arrogant demand for permanent IDF control of the Jordan River Valley, it would be impossible to form a viable Palestinian state on the pathetic remnants that are left, especially if that country couldn't even have control of its water supply OR commercial airline service(countries that don't aren't actually countries, shira).
Demanding that a Palestinian leadership accept ALL that, before any negotiations could start(which is still what Netanyahu is demanding and which you still haven't ever even questioned in this group). is the same thing as demanding that the Palestinian leaders who agree to that commit political(and possibly literal)suicide as a gesture of good faith. No leadership anywhere on the planet has ever agreed to anything comparable to that without permanently discrediting itself in the eyes of the people it was negotiating on behalf of. Certainly Ben-Gurion and Co. never agreed to anything remotely as humiliating or debilitating in 1948.
In my view, this is why the Palestinians aren't interested at all in negotiating with the current Israeli government...what that government is proposing isn't really negotiations at all, but surrender talks. Netanyahu doesn't WANT to end the war with a humane, dignified compromise that both sides could save face with(the only type of resolution that has any chance of success)-he just wants to be able to tell his hate-based party that he stuck it to the Pals. And, in a way, he kind of HAS to want that...because if a real peace was made, Likud Beteinyu would have no reason anymore to exist as a party and his political career would be over.
How about...this is just one idea off the top of my head...offering to get rid of the major settlement blocs IN EXCHANGE for the type of compromise on RoR that I suggested above? Is there any reason to not at least CONSIDER that idea?
And also...as a general note...if you REALLY want Palestinians to change their leadership...calling on the Israeli government to make it explicitly clear that a less-violent Palestinian leadership would be assured of getting a BETTER deal for the Palestinian people than Hamas or Fatah could get? Do you not realize that your insistence that, whoever leads them, Palestinians today should get less just because their leaders made bad choices in the past, even if they were to choose different leaders, is the WORST possible way to get those people to choose somebody else to lead them?
Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#14|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#21|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#17|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#26|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#31|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#34|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#36|
|R. Daneel Olivaw||Jan 2013||#37|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#15|
|R. Daneel Olivaw||Jan 2013||#3|
|R. Daneel Olivaw||Jan 2013||#8|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#19|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#38|
The problem is, you're demanding that they give up ANY RoR as a precondition.
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#40|
|R. Daneel Olivaw||Jan 2013||#27|
|R. Daneel Olivaw||Jan 2013||#33|
|R. Daneel Olivaw||Jan 2013||#7|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#20|
|Ken Burch||Feb 2013||#42|
|Ken Burch||Feb 2013||#46|
|Ken Burch||Feb 2013||#47|
|R. Daneel Olivaw||Jan 2013||#30|
|Ken Burch||Jan 2013||#18|
|Ken Burch||Feb 2013||#45|
Please login to view edit histories.