Olmert: Settler blocs to be part of Israel forever

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"Interim Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, setting out government policy guidelines as he presented his new government for Knesset approval on Thursday, said that major settlenent blocs in the West Bank will be part of the sovereign state of Israel forever.

Olmert said the disengagement from the Gaza Strip and northern West Bank was a prelude to the core plan, his convergence proposal, which would move tens of thousands of settlers from enclaves scattered throughout the West Bank, to settlement blocs located closer to the pre-1967 war Green Line border.

<snip>

"The achievements of the settlement movement in main concentrations will forever be an integral part of the sovereign state of Israel, along with Jerusalem, our united capital," Olmert told the Knesset."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/712364.html

[Stockholm]

1. I would not bet on forever...

n/t

[ShalachEtAmi]

2. Forever is a long time,but i would bet WE will not be around ..

to see any differently...

[Englander]

3. Isreal's pariah status = forever. n/t

[ShalachEtAmi]

5. DID NOT REALIZE ISRAEL WAS A PARIAH STATE...

Business is booming. Trade is booming.

Google just signed a multi million doller deal with Israeli tech company to buy encryption technology.

I went to my supermarket yesterday in North America and bought Jaffa oranges.

I never saw so many Israeli goods available in the Non Jewish Non Kosher section before...soooo many.

`Teva lifted Tel Aviv stocks to new heights on Thursday` Largest generic drug company in the world,multinational.


`Big boom in real estate
Real estate stocks are the flavor of the year, so far. The Real Estate-15 index has risen 40% and the impending initial public offering by Big Centers tells it all. `Haaretz.

SPORTS : Israel advanced pretty far in World Cup soccer...

Entertainment: Eurovision champions a few time..

BOYCOTT? What BOYCOTT?

WHAT PARIAH STATE IS THAT AGAIN ?





:bounce:

[Englander]

7. Almost exactly the same themes were used 20ish years ago.

That is, in the case of apartheid-era SA.

Contd occupation = contd pariah state.

[ShalachEtAmi]

8. Nope South Africa was not allowed into the Worldcup,was barred..

From the Olympics,never had international stars visiting,never was allowed to compete in big business,...

....Israel won its 1st gold Medal ,Gal Friedman ,in the last Summer Olympics (well Done)

What boycott? Despite the best efforts of some the `boycott` doesn`t get any traction.

And when theres a brief success eg: AUT , they are repelled back to where they started...ask Sue :).

[Englander]

9. Yes, the same diversionary tactics were used, re SA.

Claim; 'There's Apartheid in SA! SA = pariah state!'

Diversionary response; 'Business is booming!! Trade is booming!! I went to my supermarket yesterday in North America and bought Outspan oranges! International cricket teams are playing in SA! The rock group Queen have played at Sun City! WHAT PARIAH STATE IS THAT AGAIN ?'

___________________________


I'll say this again, as it was completely ignored the 1st time;
contd occupation = contd pariah state.

[ShalachEtAmi]

6. More news from the` Pariah `Jewish State :Jim Carrey visits Israel....

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3246861,00.html



`Carrey’s visit marks the third by a Hollywood actor in recent weeks, after Ewan McGregor and Will Smith both spent a week in Israel. `




Pariah?

[barb162]

10. The Palestinian Hamas government has pariah status

A new Mideast pariah
The Edmonton Journal
Published: Wednesday, April 19, 2006
So much for shades of grey in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. By endorsing the suicide bombing that killed 10 people and wounded dozens Monday in Tel Aviv, the new Hamas-led government of the Palestinian Authority has shattered the last, lingering illusions that it might become part of the solution to the region's woes.
snip
http://www.canada.com/edmontonjournal/news/opinion/story.html?id=2def2ee5-41b2-4d48-82be-51ff51e17b86


I think you are getting your pariahs confused

[Englander]

11. Nice reactionary response.

What do you think about Olmert's comments, barb? Do you think that the settlements should become
'part of Israel'? Do you think that the occupation of the WB should continue? Do you think that
there's any justification in the view that the occupation should end?

[Englander]

12. ~~

[barb162]

13. Nice response will suffice.

We don't need to be tossing around words like reactionary now, do we?

[Englander]

14. So, what do you think of Olmert's comments, barbie?

I can repeat my questions if you'd like, if it's necessary to repeat them...

[Englander]

26. Thought so. n/t

[Englander]

15. 'Instinctive' might be an appropriate description.

Namely, the comments didn't address the subject, or points raised, but were merely a reaction
to them, they were just an attempt to change the subject, or avoid the issues raised.

[ShalachEtAmi]

17. Reactionary ?

n :one who opposes progress, one who seeks to return to a previous state or condition

Its not reactionary,its a pretty new developement,the PA as a `pariah` government since the election of Hamas government.

Doesn`t fit Barbs comment at all.

[Englander]

16. From the article;

'>snip

Hamas, in contrast, legitimized such attacks when spokesman Khaled Abu Helal declared: "We think this operation ... is a direct result of the policy of occupation and the brutal aggression and siege committed against our people." That attitude after Monday's atrocity proves Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper and other world leaders were absolutely right to withhold aid.

Israel moved quickly to occupy the moral high ground surrendered so abruptly by the Palestinian leadership; the government of acting Israeli prime minister Ehud Olmert pointedly decided against immediate military retaliation. Olmert obviously realized that Hamas didn't need any help damaging itself in the eyes of the world -- a world whose help it desperately needs to improve the lives of ordinary Palestinians.'

Now, *that's* what I call propaganda, the Conservative PM of Canada being praised, as being
proven to be right, & the international law-defying GoI being praised as having occupied the
high ground. Moral, that is, not the WB...

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Englander]

28. Please define 'anti-Semitic', &/or "anti-Zionist".

Hopefully that definition isn't 'What I say it is', or 'Any criticism of the illegal actions/policies
of the GoI'.

btw, there's a Uk Forum on Du, such an opinion as the one expressed about the Uk & a-S should be
shared, I believe. :)

State & Country Forums » Country: United Kingdom
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topics&forum=191

[Violet_Crumble]

29. You also claimed Carter was Antisemitic...

And then refused to give any links to examples. Which explains the particular red-herring attempt I'm now replying to :)

Violet...

[Tom Joad]

4. George Wallace said segragation will be "forever" too.

Injustice will not stand.

[Beezer]

21. Watch out what you say!

That Cracker was a Democrat! We dont talk about him! Ever!

[liberalpragmatist]

18. I doubt it

From everything in Olmert's record, he's a consumate politician and pragmatist; as mayor of Jerusalem, he was willing to concede Arab neighborhoods during the Camp David talks.

He'll continue to talk about retaining all the major settlement blocs, even if they "only" approach 10% of the West Bank. And in the aftermath of a unilateral disengagement they will be part of Israel. But my guess is that even Olmert would concede many of them in final status talks. Some of the larger ones near the border will probably be annexed - the Etzion bloc south of Jerusalem and Ma'ale Adumim, but the Palestinians are likely to demand territorial compensation from within Israel.

On a separate matter, it really doesn't make much sense for Israel to retain some of the settlement blocs that are deep within Palestinian territory, like the large settlement city of Ariel, south of Nablus. While many of the peace proposals, including some Palestinian proposals, have permitted Israeli annexation of Ariel, I have my doubts that it'll actually be annexed in a final status agreement - it would be highly vulnerable to Palestinian attacks as it would only serve as the extremity of a long finger of Israeli territory that would disrupt Palestinian contiguity and would be very hard to defend.

[Englander]

19. Link?

--'...as mayor of Jerusalem, he was willing to concede Arab neighborhoods during the Camp David talks.--

[liberalpragmatist]

20. Here

Not ideal, but it's a start...

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2006/04/01/AR2006040100010_2.html

As a fiery young Knesset member in the 1970s, Olmert had defied the venerable Menachem Begin over the 1978 Camp David accords between Israel and Egypt, which called for full withdrawal from the Sinai and offered a blueprint for Palestinian autonomy. And in 2000, he was furious over then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak's concessions in Jerusalem's Old City and on the Temple Mount as part of the "Camp David II" diplomatic effort. However, Olmert did not complain when Barak agreed to yield several Arab neighborhoods in East Jerusalem. He did not argue that the move violated the principle of what many Israelis consider "indivisible" Jerusalem -- though such a reaction would have been in keeping with his earlier politics.

***

Also, for reference are some possible final status arrangements:

1) Current route of the Fence/Wall



2) Camp David Proposals - disputed; no official map presented but the parameters discussed

http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/rossmap2.html
Israeli Characterization


Palestinian Characterization

3) Clinton Proposal - Maximum parameters (6% annexation; 4% annexation minimum)



4) Taba Offer by Israel



5) Geneva Accord (2003 - unofficial peace plan)

[Englander]

22. And what's the source for that, I wonder?

I can't find what the original source for that claim is, it doesn't really sound like something
Olmert would agree to, as was mentioned in the article. For instance, here's an interview with
Haaretz from last year, where the expected version from Olmert is put forward;

'>snip

In your opinion, what would a final peace agreement with the Palestinians look like? How much of the West Bank will be given to the Palestinians along with sectors of East Jerusalem? (A similar question was sent by Julius Koenig of Vienna, Austria, Ari Ne'eman of New Jersey, USA, and others.)
Ajay Usgaonker
Eagle Pass, USA

Ehud Olmert:
I think it will be premature at this point to give a comprehensive response on the issue of a permanent peace agreement between us and the Palestinians. It depends on so many uncertain elements that it would be simplistic and artificial. However, I already said a few times what I think the guiding principles should be for a permanent agreement.

We have to separate Jews from Palestinians. Therefore, we'll have to pull out of the areas densely populated by Palestinians and make sure that Israel has a stable and permanent Jewish majority in the State of Israel. Or in other words, maximum Jews and minimum Arabs.

Consequently, we will have to dismantle many isolated settlemetns in the West Bank and retain the major blocs of townships that were created.

I think that we should forever keep the city of Jerusalem undivided. The Old City, the Temple Mount, the Mount of Olives, Sheikh Jarah, Ras el-Amud, Beit Hanina and so on will remain part of the State of Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/QA.jhtml?qaNo=100

Many thanks for the maps, btw.

[liberalpragmatist]

24. Well, the government is considering just that

According to interviews with Olmert advisor Otneil Schneller. They're planning to withdraw from Arab neighborhoods of Jerusalem, with the exception of the Old City and a couple other areas. Granted, no deal over the Old City and Temple Mount will mean that the Palestinians won't recognize it, but it's a start:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/worldlatest/story/0,,-5799883,00.html

JERUSALEM (AP) - Israel's new government is drawing up a blueprint for dividing the holy city of Jerusalem - a once inconceivable notion - giving the Palestinians nearly all the Arab neighborhoods while holding onto Jewish areas and disputed holy shrines.

Otniel Schneller, an architect of the plan, described it in interviews this week with The Associated Press, giving the clearest picture yet of how Israel plans to separate from the Palestinians, abandoning most of the West Bank.

``We will not divide Jerusalem, we will share it,'' he said.

Most of Jerusalem's Arab neighborhoods would go to the Palestinians, he said. ``Those same neighborhoods will, in my assessment, be central to the makeup of the Palestinian capital ... al-Quds,'' Schneller said, calling Jerusalem by its Arabic name.

Israel would keep Jerusalem's Old City with its shrines sacred to Jews, Muslims and Christians alike - an unacceptable plan to Palestinians, particularly if carried out unilaterally.

[Englander]

25. I don't believe most of that.

Since this 'plan' probably hasn't actually been written, & the idea is only so much hot air.
The reality is most likely that the GoI will retain effective control over any areas that have
been 'left', or that there isn't really any intention to withdraw from any part of Jerusalem.
Since the speaker is a politician, it's very likely that he's spinning, for whatever reason.

[occuserpens]

23. Sharon's circus is over

2006-05-07 Sharon's circus is over