Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumPresidency Spokesman: Any Israeli Unilateral Measure is Unacceptable
RAMALLAH, May 30, 2012 (WAFA) - Presidential spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh Wednesday told WAFA that any Israeli unilateral measure leading to the establishment of a state with temporary borders is unacceptable.
Abu Rudeineh’s statements came in response to earlier statements by the Israeli Minister of Defence, Ehud Barak, that Israel should consider unilateral moves and withdrawal from the West Bank if negotiations with the Palestinians failed.
This Israeli policy leads to the continuation of the conflict; it does not lead to a solution, rather it ends the concept of the two-state solution, added Abu Rudeineh.
He emphasized that the Palestinians are “committed to a just and comprehensive solution of a state within 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital and without Jerusalem nothing will be accepted.”
http://english.wafa.ps/index.php?action=detail&id=19939
[font color = "red"]Sorry folks, Israel cannot end the occupation. The Palestinians won't agree to any reasonable peace offer and they will not accept another unilateral withdrawal either. The show must go on... [/font]
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
shira
(30,109 posts)Ghassan Khatib, a spokesman for the western-backed Palestinian Authority, said: "It's illogical, unacceptable and unconstructive for an Israeli official to threaten unilateral acts while the main reason that the peace process is not moving is unilateral Israeli acts like settlement expansion."
.....
In Israel, the notion of a unilateral withdrawal from the West Bank has emerged as a much-discussed option. In April, Ami Ayalon, a former chief of the Mossad spy agency, and Gilad Sher, an ex-top adviser to Mr Barak, wrote in a joint opinion piece in The New York Times that Israel must act to advance the two-state solution regardless of whether the Palestinians accept it.
"Through a series of unilateral actions, gradual but tangible changes could begin to transform the situation on the ground," they wrote.
Mr Netanyahu's more moderate predecessor, Ehud Olmert, had also floated on the idea of an Israeli withdrawal from large parts of the West Bank, but the plan was abandoned after Israel engaged in the war with Hizbollah.
more...
http://www.thenational.ae/news/world/middle-east/palestinians-condemn-israeli-unilateral-plan-to-withdraw-from-some-parts-of-west-bank
shira
(30,109 posts)It was bound to happen. The Israelis, growing weary of looking for a Palestinian leader actually committed to negotiating a two-state solution, are starting to consider laying down their own parameters for an interim situation and then waiting for Palestinians to come to the negotiating table.
No less a figure than Ehud Barak, the current defense minister and a former prime minister, this week floated the idea of Israel adopting “a provisional arrangement or even unilateral action” setting borders.
He’s not the only one. In forming a national unity government a few weeks back, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu elevated to deputy prime minister Shaul Mofaz, a former paratrooper who saw action in three of Israel’s wars and who favors establishing a temporary Palestinian state on about 60 percent of the West Bank. And in April three prominent Israelis, including Ami Ayalon, a former official of the Mossad intelligence agency, advocated “unilateral actions” in an op-ed in the New York Times. They argued the Jewish state can transform the stalemate, writing, “Israel can and must take constructive steps to advance the reality of two states based on the 1967 borders with land swaps — regardless of whether Palestinian leaders have agreed to accept it.”
more...
http://www.suntimes.com/news/huntley/12887065-452/israel-could-setborders-unilaterally.html
shira
(30,109 posts)In response to Barak's remarks, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas' chief aide Nabil Abu Rudineh said later Wednesday that an "Israeli unilateral moves will lead to the formation of a Palestinian state in temporary borders, to which we object."
"This policy will lead to the conflict's continuation and not to a solution, burying the two-state solution," Abu Rudineh said, adding that the Palestinian Authority was committed to "a final agreement in which a Palestinian state will be formed with Jerusalem as its capital."
"Without Jerusalem, we won't agree to anything," he added.
more...
http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/israeli-unilateral-withdrawal-from-west-bank-will-perpetuate-mideast-conflict-palestinian-official-says-1.433401
shira
(30,109 posts)In its recently released annual report, Amnesty International accused Israel of a laundry list of human rights violations, almost all of which had to do with the occupied Palestinian territories. Most interesting was the list of complaints related to Gaza.
“The humanitarian crisis affecting the Gaza Strip’s 1.6 million residents continued due to Israel’s ongoing military blockade...36 Palestinians were killed in accidents or in Israeli air strikes on tunnels used to smuggle goods between Egypt and Gaza...the Israeli authorities hindered or prevented hundreds of patients from leaving Gaza to obtain medical treatment.”
The continuing saga of Gaza is an important symbol of a larger phenomenon. The occupation of the Palestinian territories can never end because of the vested interest many organizations have in maintaining the fiction of Israeli control, even when control is withdrawn. It is well known that Israel does not control the border between Egypt and Gaza and yet the condemnation for not providing access to hospitals for Gazans assumes that Israel is responsible for providing medical treatment for people in Gaza; once again perpetuating the idea that Israel’s occupation can never be allowed to end.
Human rights organizations and the peace industry are beholden to the occupation, addicted to it – no less than Israel’s most extremist right-wing voices. This may seem a contradiction: how can organizations devoted to ending the occupation in fact support the occupation? The answer: Because the occupation is their raison d’etre and without it they cannot exist. This is typical of the NGO world. For example, those organizations that devote their existence to ending poverty require that poverty be perpetuated because NGOs have become an industry and choice place of employment. That is why we see in the world of NGOs a multiplication of overlapping groups with “mission creep.” This multiplication becomes an intense lobby to support a professional class, to the extent that entire university degrees are now devoted to the phenomenon of the NGO profession.
more...
http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=272083
shira
(30,109 posts)
Mosby
(16,256 posts)Most likely the Israel haters will just ignore it or claim the statement is fabricated.
Hopefully though the pro-Palestinian DUers are paying attention to the implications of his statement, if the occupation can't end until a negotiated settlement it follows that the occupation is therefore legal, which is something we have argued about here many times in the past.
