After Israel unilaterally pulled out of Gaza, leaving it for the Palestinians to govern, they elected in a monitored election, Hamas, a terrorist organization according to the US, EU as well as Israel to lead them. A Palestinians Civil War with Fatah ensued with many resulting Palestinian deaths. That was in 2006. There were supposed to be elections in 2010 but Hamas did not allow them to happen.
There have been 3 Hamas/Gaza to Israel wars since.
None of this is Israel's fault -- it was the Palestinian people who elected Hamas.
The government of The West Bank, Fatah, has spent $300 million of US taxpayer money year after year for "pay to slay" incentives for Palestinian terrorists and their families. This year Congress passed a bill, The Taylor Force Act, that withdraws these funds *until the Palestinians agree to stop incentivizing terror*.
The Palestinians by electing Hamas destroyed their own chances of statehood.
Ultimately, there must be new elections with for a single government that is committed to finalizing an agreement with Israel.
Israel tried for peace by pulling out of Gaza. The results were catastrophic.
14
The PA wants you to believe Israel has mis treated them.
They aren't
They do not live the way they do because of Israel.
They live the way they do is because they have very little resources.
Why can't Iran or some other Muslim country if they really cared that has a lot of money give them some so they can build schools Hospitals and housing.
Even if they were a separate state the way they live would not change as their economy would be what it is now and they would need a lot of help which if it isn't being given now most likely will not be given if they were a separate state.
9
Many of the family members of the over thousand Israelis who were murdered Palestinian Arab terror attacks committed in the 2nd Intifada (post-Oslo), the majority of which fatalities were comprised of civilians, might disagree that Israel has benefited greatly from the Oslo Accords.
21
"The dominant right wing debates whether merely to manage the occupation in perpetuity or to declare victory and annex much of the West Bank." The fact that the Right Wing refers to it as 'victory'. shows their mind set from the beginning. Israel never has wanted or expected anything other than total obeisance from the Palestinians.
11
@Richard Mclaughlin
I guess you forgot that, in 1947, the Jews were willing to accept a vastly reduced territory to accommodate the two-state solution in exchange for peace.
The Arabs said ‘no’ and have been perpetrating war and terrorism ever since. Now they got what they signed up for. It’s called ‘consequences’.
7
The Palestinian leaders never miss an opportunity to seize defeat from the jaws of victory.
23
Good effort, but in declaring Israel the winner fails to regard the 1,000 dead Israeli citizens in he wake of Oslo, how peace giddiness was quickly replaced with Arafat’s return to terror, how terrorists pushed Israel to the right and built the wall, cost Israel diplomatic currency in a world that fails to hold Abbas accountable. Those who project out a narrative that Israelis are celebrating their reality in their tiny corner of the middle east should do some more objective homework.
26
The 1993 Oslo Peace Accords show how the passage of time has relativised the significance of such a historical moment in the pursuit of peace in the Middle East. Critics said the effort to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict came with a hidden cost for the Palestinians. They believed that Israel merely used the agreements over the next 20 years of negotiations to justify the further expansion of illegal settlements in the territories it occupied in 1967.
In August 1999 the Syrian defence minister, Mustafa Tlass, called Yasser Arafat the "son of 60,000 whores" for making one concession after another since the signing of the 1993 accords with Israel. He lashed out at Arafat for not insisting on Jerusalem as the capital of the future Palestinian state, but instead being “as quiet as a mouse”.
In Israel, doves and supporters of the peace deal left or were unseated in the course of the years. No doubt Netanyahu was to blame for not fulfilling the terms while he was in office between 1996-1999.
8
It's little wonder that nothing has been done in the last 25 years to bring peace to the Middle East - or any other part of the world for that matter. Until the world comes to truly understand the role of beliefs - all beliefs - in human conflict, nothing will change. Our senseless wars will continue. In the near future, we will program the human mind in the computer, and then have irrefutable proof about such things like the real causes of war in our societies. Only then will we have a real chance of ending these stupid wars. The computer mind will be based on a "survival" algorithm, and when this is programed in the computer, we will be able to see how we have tricked this program with our ridiculous beliefs about just exactly what is supposed to survive. When we see this, we can begin the long road back to reason.
See RevolutionOfReason.com
1
In the picture of the Jericho hospital, there are two items hanging on the wall - one with Mahmoud Abbas (representing the PLO) being caressed by a dove. Next to it, is a map of a one-state geography - Palestine.
Wow. Whoever took that picture, captured the Palestinans' approach to the peace process in a thumbnail picture. Incredible.
24
@Andy. Incredible indeed. Imagine how people feel when they see the below and reach a wholesale condemnation
https://www.nytimes.com/2010/06/22/us/22iowa.html
This is actually a very fair and balanced primer on what has gone wrong in the quest for peace.
The Palestinians have refused, again and again, every offer of a peace settlement. After the Clinton talks ended, Arafat unleashed the intifada as a response. And the Israelis are justifiably fed up with bombs and missiles.
On the Israeli side, Netanyahu panders to his right-wing parties so that they’ll remain in his coalition. And part of the ultra-right-wing dream is more settlement, although the average Israeli wants no part of it.
And the Gulf States and Saudi Arabia are washing their hands of the Palestinians. They have bigger fish to fry: Iran.
And Egypt, often left out of the Gaza discussion, has sealed its own border against the Palestinians, primarily due to Hamas.
I have no solution. But having visited many times, I’m pleasantly surprised that Israeli Arabs attend the same universities as Israeli Jews. Ditto for medical clinics, stores and markets, beaches and buses. They are very much a part of Israeli society.
19
As long as both sides play the blame game there will be no progress. Unfortunately, that seems to be acceptable or even advantageous to the leaders of Israel, America, and most of the region’s powers. The situation is beyond Palestinian control, but possibly not beyond Israeli control.
2
@O. Ellis
You say "The situation is beyond Palestinian control". How so? Their acts of murder are somehow not intentional? They are robot-zombies with no volition when they explode bombs, cut people with knives, shoot people, commit acts of terror, teach race hatred to their children?
I praise Israel for not pushing the Pals all the way into Jordan or Egypt in response to the Pals' incessant acts of warfare. Every day, notwithstanding "Jews must be evil" comments and mindsets like yours, the Israelis show themselves to be the best Christians living on this planet.
25
As, I said, no progress will be made as long as the blame game continues. It’s even worse when it’s combined with dehumanization and wild assumptions. Shalom...
4
Whenever there is longstanding conflict, it is generally as a result of intransigence from one if not both parties. Looking at the past 100 years, the Palestinians clearly come out as the irresponsible, aggressive and intransigent party. Arab riots and pogroms against Jews during the British Mandate, the Grand Mufti conspiring with Hitler to kill the Jews of Palestine, rejection of the just and fair UN Partition Plan, multiple failed invasions to drive the Jews to the sea and finally Arafat's rejection of a final settlement comprising 97% of the West Bank. The Palestinians could have had a state 70 years ago, that they still don't is squarely on their shoulders.
26
Hamas did not take over Gaza for nothing. In the 2006 parliamentary elections the PA was defeated by Hamas by a wide margin. It was the PA that clung onto that which was not theirs, with the help of the U.S. and Israel.
The Camp David negotiations in 2000 were a sham. Clinton acted as Israel's lawyer and presented Arafat with a take it or leave it. Negotiations continued after Camp David between the PA and the government of Ehud Barak but was sabotaged by Ariel Sharon who led a group of Jewish extremists to the mosques that sit on the Temple Mount/Noble Sanctuary. That is what partly caused the second intifada. The Israeli Jewish right wing was and is completely against a two-state solution.
6
@Mark Ryan There is no reason why Sharon or anyone else, should not have gone up to the Temple Mount. You can go. I can go. But I can't show a Jewish star or a bible. Or close my eyes lest the Muslim soldiers think I'm praying. Only Muslims can reveal their religion.
5
Peace died when Sadat was assassinated in 1981.
5
Israel totally evacuated Gaza in 2005 with the hope that this would be the start of a Palestinian state. The evacuation was not "so abrupt". It takes time to move people out. Nor could this total evacuation have contributed to the Hamas hard line rejectionist takeover that happened later on. The PLO was in charge at the beginning. They could have declared it part of a sovereign state but did not.
13
Since when do the vanquished in a war they started....and lost...get to dictate the terms of the peace to the victors? I’ll tell you when...Never.
The Arabs should take their cue from Germany and Japan. Surrender unconditionally, accept what’s offered, and enjoy peace and prosperity. It ain’t rocket science!
24
The answer is simple and in front of our eyes. I'm an architecture and mu business partner is Palestinian.
I am also a Holocaust Survivor's son.
First of all lets work together, lets love one another, lets marry, lets have children together. That's a significant help in relieving tensions.
Secondly - Jordan really and truly can and should be a joint state - Jordan/Palestine. Then at least a part of the West Bank easily goes to Jordan.
It will take "normal" folks - meaning reasonable folks - from the Palestinian side as well as the Israeli side for this to happen. But there's no reason - no logical reason- it can't happen. Only reasons of hate.
Gaza should go to Egypt. Same logic.
Peace is fully possible. Its the governments- always- that stink.
11
Ah, the world as it “should” be. Like Oslo. Unfortunately we also got to deal with the world as it is.
1
WHAT "historical Jewish rights in Jerusalem"? With the exception of a very brief period of time (two hundred years at most, in a very, very long history), Hebrews were historically a MINORITY in Jerusalem. (The word "Jews" is a fairly recent one in historical terms.) It is only since 1967 that they've been essentially rewriting the history to reflect their chosen "new reality".
6
@WebSkipper - Well no.
In Jerusalem in 1844 the Jewish population was 7,100, the Arab/Muslim was 5,000, Christians 3,400; 1922 Jewish 34k, Arab/Muslim 13k. You get the idea. Numbers for the ancient world, in contrast, are quite hard to pin down.
10
At the end of the Roman Forum in Rome, which is an ancient archaeological site that was built by the romans approx 2000 years ago, there is an enormous arch called the Arch of Titus. It was built in AD 82 to celebrate the Romans defeat of Jerusalem in AD 70. The largest and most bold element of it is a giant frieze showing the romans hauling off an enormous gold Menorah from the Jewish temple on the mount. Here you have evidence of the ancient history of the Jews and their lives in Jerusalem. Deny the ancient existence of Jews themselves or their existence in Jerusalem all you want but the evidence is literally written in stone.
5
The NY Times is an excellent newspaper in all respects except two: I am an MD and the I do not recognize the Medical Profession or its problems as described by the New York Times and Israel. I lived in Israel for 5 years, 4 of these during Oslo, and Oslo and the related pull outs from Gaza and South Lebanon have proven to be an unmitigated disaster for EVERYONE. At least 10,000 people have been killed on both sides related to terror attacks and two wars, each, with Gaza and Hezbollah which would not have happened if Israel had just stayed put and not done Oslo. Before Oslo, 500,000 Arabs from the West Bank and Gaza came into Israel
every day and worked decent jobs. Thousands of Lebanese crossed the border and worked in Israel, also. The pull outs
ended day passes for Gazan, West Bank and Lebanese workers because of the impossible security situation created by Oslo. Israel, itself, prospered because of its own investment in hi-tech and engineering. It has replaced Arab workers with machinery. The Arab workers needed Israel and "peace process", which has been more of a war process, ended that avenue of employment. The settlements have nothing to do with this situation. And, of course, terrorism and 4 wars ended any notion of a Palestinian State until such time as there is acceptance of Israel as a permanent reality by the Arabs and Iran. Which also means Al Qaeda and ISIS no longer exist. At that time, Israel would be delighted to help set up a Palestinian State.
12
Even if Arabs, generally, accepted the existence of Israel, it would be naive to think terrorist groups will ever be fully extinct.
The idea that you can perpetually occupy an area until such a time comes ensures there will never be progress towards peace.
3
There is no solution as long as Iran continues to play the warmonger in the region.
To call it an Israeli-Palestinian question ignores the 21st century reality that it's no longer a localized regional problem but a wider proxy conflict with big players. Anywhere America is, the Russians and the Chinese are also. That's the big bit that Trump doesn't get (mixed with all the other bits he doesn't get).
Israel has to protect itself. It sometimes gets it wrong when it does so, just like any other country. But there are few countries on earth more at risk and more repeatedly attacked than Israel since 1947, so Israel's mistakes are amplified.
Israel only has to lose one war and it will not exist. Few other nations can say that.
Those are the unbiased basics. Nevertheless, if any one of us had been a Palestinian prior to 1947, you know what side you'd be on.
Lloyd George and Churchill both suggest that the Balfour Agreement, which afforded Jews a homeland in Palestine, was given credence in part because America was double-billing cordite that Britain needed during WWI. Chaim Weizmann, a chemist at the time (later President of Israel), devised a solution -- the Weizmann process -- that dramatically helped Britain prosecute its war against superior German artillery as well as maintaining Britain's naval supremacy. (Some people think this untrue, yet Lloyd George writes about it at length in his lengthy memoirs. The fact stands that cordite was needed and Weizmann provided it.)
3
The Oslo Accords were a sham. Arafat never intended to carry out his part of the accord. In fact, in that brief period, which saw the development of the Palestinian economy, an increase in tourism and the steady flow of goods between the two sides, Arafat saw instead the loss of his authoritarian rule. He decided to unleash the first Intifada, thereby sealing the fate of the Palestinian people.
17
The Palestinian cause today can be summed up as trying to get 100% of your ask is a guaranteed failure.
14
The United States is an occupied territory stolen from Native Americans.
8
Wasn’t Jared Kushner going to fix all of this?
3
There has never been a sovereign nation nor an independent political entity with the name "Palestine" in all of world history.
UNSCR 242, the major resolution created as a direct result of the 1967 war, describes the current status of the territory referred to in this article, as legally administered by Israel as of 1967, "until a just and lasting peace is established." In resolution 242, Israel is required to withdraw "from territories" obtained as a result of the war - expressly not from "all the territories" nor from "the territories". The words chosen and voted on, and accepted as legally in force, were accepted after lengthy discussions.
Israel has withdrawn from "territories" obtained from that war. It withdrew from Sinai, Gaza and certain areas won in that war in locations west of the Jordan River.
The Arabs who live in the area speak the same language, practice the same cultural rituals and adhere to the same religion as do the other Islamic majority nations throughout the region.
The root of the word "palestine" and, "philistine" is a biblical era Hebrew verb still used in modern Hebrew :"פלש", transliterated as "palash" - "(to)invade". The Romans invaded and took a contextual Hebrew verb whose meaning was known to the defeated inhabitants to use for the name of their invasion and conquest.
15
@Robert Arnow.
You seem to be doing cartwheels to build a case for the indefensible. The UK arbitrarily drew lines and a map of the Middle East without any concern for historical or religious antecedents, for which we are now seeing its consequences
Following your logic, you seem to suggest that since EU Members speak English as a lingua Franca -though, it may be their second, third, fourth language, and are primarily Christian, then say Italians should renounce their history and assume a synthetic sameness with all other English speakers in the EU
When archeologist excavate the Palestinian region, including Israel, the findings are not of some “ancient” Israeli / Hebrew culture, but other cultures -see today’s Times on the discovery of an ancient brewery.
The issue is not to destroy or disrespect the country of Israel; Jews need it, but to find a workable, fair solution that accounts for Palestinian destiny. Lay off the hyperbole.
6
@Sam
"You seem to be doing cartwheels to build a case for the indefensible."
I don't know what you believe is "indefensible" and honestly I can't imagine what in this world you could possibly be referring to.
I need not do "cartwheel"(what???) and I don't know what that is either. Don't need to know what it is as well.
You appear to be ignorant of both international law, current military facts and additional indisputable facts about today's world. The historical politics of mandate era Britain are irrelevant, if you're even slightly paying attention to current events.
2
@Sam
You are way over the line and it is clear that your ability to understand facts and salient and enforceable law is absent, to put it civilly. You need to learn how to argue your opinions respectfully and, research what the word "hyperbole" means. You've grossly misused it or chosen by design to use the wrong word.
2)You've not been to Israel. Were you to tour the Israel Museum as one example, you would see thousands of pieces of evidence of ancient Jewish culture.
3)What the UK did was what they chose to do politically i.e., what interested them at the time. It was inconsiderate then and it is irrelevant now.
3
Growing up in the verdant landscapes of the Chesapeake estuary, I'd see photo's of the Mideast and wonder why people would fight over it.
Since Israel became a State in 1948, many people have been blaming them for subsequent developments and conditions in the Mideast. Near as I can tell, that is due to indignation that, against often overwhelming odds, Israel has refused to lay down and die.
I can't make any sense of it and am inclined to suspect the clue lies in the ancient mysticism's that haunt the area; it's simply cursed.
5
@Kirk Bready
The clue lies in the Arab conquest of the Levant. Apparently, they and their descendants thought it would last forever. It didn’t.
10
Trump with his bullying tactics has only moved peace further into the future; items that should have been negotiated such as Israel's capital have been taken off the table. Additional browbeating tactics--e.g.,cutting PLO funds --will increase estrangement and eviscerate the "honest broker". But even without Trump's interference, peace seems remote and unattainable. To me it seems that the Palestinian's quick acceptance of violence and hatred is the hard-to-remove core of the problem. The major acts of Israeli violence your article mentions--the 1994 Hebron Massacre of 29 and the assassination of Rabin in 1995--were acts of individuals, both widely condemned among Israelis. The Intafada on the other hand was an uprising of the masses, its participants lauded by Palestinians, granted Sahid status. The Palestinian argument seems to be "grant my wishes or I will turn violent and throw all of you into the sea." In your article you write and repeat twice that the Arabs now are doing a big favor for Israel by taking over the security arrangements for the West Bank. You say this reduces the need for Israeli soldiers in the hostile areas. You say that Israel security is vastly improved "at no cost to Israel." Security and non-violent cooperation is a two-way street and the Palestinians gain as much if not more from the avoidance of war---albeit with fewer portraits of Sahids to paint their streets. Only a love of their own children will bring peace to Palestinians.
5
Imagine if the Arabs had accepted the 1947 UN partition plan for Mandatory Palestine instead of going to war against Israel.
The Palestinians would have had their state in 1948 and under those borders, it is doubtful that Israel would have survived as the Middle East has little mercy for the weak and the State of Israel would have been perilously weak in that form. But they chose war.
The Palestinians live in a constant do-over mentality. Playground rules do not govern real life.
21
Here is how to settle this horror story.
Have the Palestinians renounce violence but continue in the vein of MLK and Ghandi and stage continuous peacefully civil disobedience and demonstrations in Israel and in the territories expressing their grievances, wishes and desires to be treated as equals in the general area.
Israel will initially refuse, even use force against them but the world will turn against them including Europe and the US and they will be forced to negotiate a settlement they can live with.
You say this will not happen? Well you are right there are no MLKs or Ghandis or even a Lincoln in the general area.
That is the problem.
4
This article absolves Israel of any fault in scuttling the Oslo agreement and revives the bogeyman Arafat as the all-purpose villain. I am not heavily invested in the politics of the region and Israel's doings, so I may be wrong, but I remember things differently.
The initial elements of the agreement were implemented successfully with both Israel and the Palestinians reaping benefits . As in all international agreements the hard parts were pushed back and avoided in order to facilitate signing the agreement. When it came time, according to the time table, to start doing some of those hard parts, Israeli fears about their own security and internal political opportunism came into play, and Israel dragged its feet.
Netanyahu back then helped scuttle the agreement, Sharon stabbed it to death with the settlements, the Bush administration gave Israel the green light and told the Palestinians to get lost, which has led to the current hopeless intractable mess.
The Clinton administration initially tried to pressure Israel into abiding by the agreement but ran into a furious storm of domestic pro-Israel lobbying and arm-twisting, and for domestic political concerns failed to continue the pressure.
The New York Times columnist Thomas Friedman wrote some fairly open-eyed and honest columns back then.
Israeli settlements, the wall, the blockade, the ongoing military incursions, indiscriminate punitive bombings, and general obstructionism bear responsibility as well.
5
The last time I looked Israelis were still surrounded by many determined enemies bent on their destruction.
There is still time for the Palestinians to achieve a state of their own.
But first they must fully own the catastrophe they created for themselves by rejecting the re-establishment of the Jewish State in 1948 and relentlessly pursuing without pause since that time their efforts to overturn what now has become a well-established historical fact.
After this, many good things will become possible for them just as they did for Germany after World War II.
Failing this, the only alternatives left to them will be to continue building tunnels and wandering in the desert.
32
@A. Stanton. When US Admnistration after US Administration has asked Israel NOT to build in the occupied territories, the Swift, undeviating response is: you can’t dictate to us what to do.
The partition of Palestine was not done in a fair manner to begin with, which is not to say that there was a great need fo the creation of Israel, nor that the world shoul abandon support for the Jewish state. But, more should have been done for the Palestinians. Not sure digging tunnels is particularly practical or necessary anymore, not when war can be waged digitally
The more things change: Remember how the British divided the Middle East without any care to historical ethnic or religious considerations with the current attendant conflicts.
3
The "re-establishment of the Jewish state"? Sorry Stanton. The people who created Israel are not the same as the people of the Kingdom of David. Drawing a line between the two is nothing short of ahistorical.
If you want to go that route we can draw a line from the people who conspired to have Jesus of Nazareth killed and the people who died in the Holocaust.
2
@Joe
"The people who created Israel are not the same as the people of the Kingdom of David."
Your understanding of the human life cycle is commendable.
You weren't the same as those who created "NOLA" or wherever else you reside. Are you also an "ahistorical"?
I am not a zionist nor particularly sympathetic to palestinians, who, as the article mentions, should be unhappy with their own leadership. Frankly, Trump's move s in this area don't upset me. Both populations are out of control given the size of the area. Granting "right if return" to all of the Palestinians descendents is clearly not a real thing. It's as likely as Native Americans getting their territories back.
11
If the PLO and Hamas can't get along or work together how are the Israelis even supposed to deal with them? And don't forget when Israel withdrew from Gaza Hamas greeted their move with rocket fire into Israel. And when they withdrew from Lebanon they were also greeted by rocket fire from Hezbollah. So why would the Israelis make any concessions?
28
The Palestinians never had a chance - the deck was and remains stacked against them. The mediator is the source of strength of Israel. The United States with it's veto power in the Security Council and it's generous $3 billion plus annual aid package to Israel controls the outcome of the negotiations. In truth we Americans have not been honest with our dealings and peace proposals and together with Israel have simply our negotiated and them. The shame also belongs to Europe for not taking a stand against the injustices committed by the Israelis & Americans in the scam negotiations.
8
@Ken Wood
The United States uses it's veto power in the Security Council because the UN is prejudiced against Israel.
For example, the UN criticized only one country for its treatment of women. It was not Saudi Arabia where women were not allowed to drive. It was not Egypt or Iraq or Yemen where girls suffer from female genital mutilation. It was not Palestine or Jordan or Iran where women are subjected to honor killings. It was Israel – a country that has had a female prime minister & female fighter pilots.
The 10 worst countries for human rights are: Syria, Sudan, DR Congo, Pakistan, Somalia, Afghanistan, Iraq, Myanmar, Yemen & Nigeria. So why are there more UN Resolutions against Israel than against the 10 worst countries combined?
There is no boycott of China even though China invaded Tibet & transferred millions of Chinese settlers into Tibet.
There is no boycott of Turkey even though Turkey occupies part of Cyprus and Turkish settlers have moved into occupied Cyprus.
There is no boycott of Morocco which occupies part of Western Sahara.
Unlike China, Turkey and Morocco, the Israel's occupation began because Israel was attacked. Also, unlike China, Turkey and Morocco, Israel offered to end the occupation if Palestinians would sign a peace treaty.
4
Soon following the 1967 war that brought Israel's occupation of the W. Bank and Gaza, and then the famous Khartoom's summit, (q.v.)
I believe it was Israel foreign minister who quipped that "it is the first time in history that the victor sued for peace and the vanquished sued for unconditional surrender".
26
The signing of the Oslo “peace” accord reminds me of Bob Rubin’s grand promise that by signing the elimination of the Glass-Steigel law, great prosperity would come to all!
Of course, by “Prosperity”, they meat prosperity for me, not thee.
@Sam
Believe in a one government world? Looks that way from your comments. Hubris?
Find reality (recommended).
2) Have some teenagers throw rocks at your house and have them try to set your house on fire every week.
And give them the basic essentials- food, etc., so that they can approach your family and your house each week to try again and again to burn down your house and kill your family.
And, in a few weeks, let us know how that turns out for you, and how you feel about it.
6
@Robert Arnow. If arbitrarily, someone comes in my house and says, we’re spliting it in half and giving the other half to family “X”,and btw, there won’t be any compensation for you, nor any means or right to protest, I would be incredibly.... mad for what I would consider thievery
@Sam
I replied to your post earlier but it has not appeared; your reply is unintelligible and unrelated.
The situation we have been in for the past decades is 100% due to the inability of the West to accept reality. There was a war. Israel won, so Israel calls the shot. The Palestinians can not demand anything.
The fact that Europeans and past American administrations kept casting this as a negotiation among equals, just caused things to drag on.
Only the Trump administration provided the needed clarity. Our ally is Israel. Israel won the war. The US has no interest whatsoever in what happens to Palestine. The Palestinian need to swallow their pride and come to the table demanding nothing.
Until that happens, let them eat crow. It is harsh, but that is the ONLY reality. Everything else is fantasy.
17
This article goes much farther than most NYT analyses in actually giving acknowledging agency on the part of the Palestinians. It could go even farther and quote Bill Clinton, "I killed myself to give the Palestinians a state," but Arafat rejected it.
The reason for this rejectionism is that Palestinism is not a nationalist movement. It is an annihilationist movement. Zionism has always been a nationalist movement. Thus Jews have a state and Palestinians have a quasi-bureaucracy and quasi-terror sponsor in the PA.
Peace will come when a Palestinian STATEsman (or woman) decides that statehood and well being is more important than obliterating Israel, and that a Palestine carved ouy of Judea and Samaria is strong and democratic enough to have a Jewish minority. Also reducing corruption, respecting womem and LGBTQ minorities and policing honor killings would be nice too!
31
As a neutral observer, my opinion is that Israel has tried hard to make things work with the Palestinians. Israel is a democracy where all citizens of all religions have their basic rights. You can argue that the Jews are more equal than other citizens but for the most part it should not matter in day to day life. Palestine on the other hand is a hard line fundamentalist state which lives by intimidating its own citizens and the neighborhood. They are always out with their begging bowl trying to blackmail the rest of the world to give them a living without making any effort of their own. The PLO, Hamas or Palestinian Authority has zero contribution to humanity as far as culture, human rights, progress or upliftment of its citizens is concerned. They have only one issue, give us the land we claim. Even if this land is given to them, are they capable of forming a modern state or will they regress into a Yemen or Pakistan? Dividing people on the basis or religion or race does not work. Palestine and Israel are going to be neighbors, they have no choice. Palestine needs to work more sincerely with Israel in resolving issues. Violence is not a solution because the response to violence can only be violence.
101
@Rahul, but most of the protesters recently killed by Israeli snipers were nonviolent and unarmed. Just where is the violence coming from? You might want to take another look at how the modern state of Israel came into being. It was born of ethnically cleansing the indigenous arabs out of there homes, farms and villages.
4
@Rahul if the PA were to become Pakistan, that would be a huge step forward.
Good grief - you blew right off when you called yourself “a neutral observer”.
2
Both sides need to check their religious, cultural and tragic historical narratives at the door and admit they neither have lived up to the expectations of Oslo.
If that is possible, then they could come up with a solution.
It is a BIG if.
6
IF there were democracy in the Palestinian Authority, if Mahmoud Abbas would retire with grace, if Hamas could tolerate an opposition in Gaza. Too many "ifs" and not enough reality on the Palestinian side. As for the Israelis...IF they could trust the Arabs, if the settlers could be returned, if the religious parties in Israel did not hold so much sway but that is not the Israeli reality either. I don't foresee change for a very long time, if ever.
29
@Stephen Kurtz. Why can't "Palestine" have a Jewish minority?
6
The Palestinian statehood dream appears to have been crushed under the ruthless march of history made more harsh and cruelsome by the intriguing global power play in West Asia.
10
@Prof. Jai Prakash Sharma
If statehood were important to the Palestinians, they would have declared independence in 1948. Instead, they asked for union with Jordan.
22
@Prof. Jai Prakash Sharma you are basically the problem- you infantalize them as victims of history. nothing stops them from seizing their own destiny. nothig. in 1776, americans went to war against the greatest empire on the planet. israelis fought and won their freedom. so did plenty of other countries. you are guilty of soft bigotry of low expectations.
5
Oslo was never a real negotiation. There was already a Madrid negotiation going on when Israel went around the true Palestinian stake holders and a deal was made in Oslo which was presented to Bill Clinton. Israel never had any intention of honoring any agreements as its plan from the beginning was all the land without the Palestinian people. It was more like hostages trying to negotiate with their hostage taker.
8
@penney Albany
The PLO never accepted a Jewish state, and Abbas has said this, repeatedly. Israel remains an illegitimate obstacle to them, not a reality they choose to live with. The entire notion of the right of return by 5+million Palestinians is the Trojan Horse to invade and oust all the Jews from "their" Palestine. Knowing this, and hosting over 1.5 million Palestinians in Israel proper as citizens, do you expect Israel to give the Palestinians everything and receive violence in return?
9
Israel is basically Apartheid-era South Africa with one difference -- South Africa didn't have the United States subsidizing its economy with billions of dollars every year and blocking any effort of the international community to force it to end its racist policies.
As alert people knew at the time, Oslo was nothing more than a stall tactic to allow the appropriation of the West Bank to continue, and a cynical ploy to get out from under the costs of policing the occupied territories.
20
@Philboyd
All citizens within Israel have equal rights. The control over the Palestinians is the result of decades of wars, threats, and disputes with a separate people who are not Israelis, nor want to be. It is not remotely like Apartheid.
And by the way, what other country on earth is subject to the "international community forcing it" to change any policies? Oddly enough, only the Jewish one.
7
Saw an ad for travel to Israel. Maybe they offer a tour of the seized Palestinian territories - the "settlements" as Israelis call them.
Apparently Israel is well on its way to eliminating an entire culture - you know - like the Americans have done.
Only Israelis have rights and land...
Only Arabs are terrorists...
15
@Dry Socket
Jordan illegally ‘seized’ the territory in 1948...occupied it for 19 years...until 1967, when they lost it the same way they gained it. It is now under Israeli authority...legally.
Meanwhile, there was never a disntinct ‘Palestinian’ culture. Linguistically, ethnically, culturally, and in every other way, the Arabs in this region are indistinguishable from Arab populations in neighboring Jordan, Syria, Iraq....’Palestinian’ is a political-nationalistic concept, not an ethnicity.
21
@Dry Socket
There has never been a sovereign nation nor an independent political entity with the name "Palestine" in all of world history. It was administered by various empires, most recently the British, who decided to also call the administered region by that name, up to the founding of the sovereign State of Israel and its recognition by the UN in 1948.
UNSCR 242, the major resolution created as a direct result of the 1967 war, describes the current status of the territory referred to in this article, as legally administered by Israel as of 1967, "until a just and lasting peace is established." In resolution 242, Israel is required to withdraw "from territories" obtained as a result of the war - expressly not from "all the territories" nor from "the territories". The words chosen and voted on, and accepted as legally in force, were accepted after lengthy discussions.
Israel has withdrawn from "territories" obtained from that war. It withdrew from Sinai, Gaza and certain areas won in that war in locations west of the Jordan River.
The Arabs who live in the area speak the same language, practice the same cultural rituals and adhere to the same religion as do the other Islamic majority nations throughout the region. There is nothing whatsoever that distinguishes them from the other Muslim majority political and religious groups, and the Arab and non-Arab Muslim majority nations found throughout the Middle East.
13
@Shenoa
If you are going to make an "illegal seizure" statement like that you need to go a little further back in history. Try starting with WW I, and the behavior of the French and British with their promises to the King of Jordan, and double dealings with the Zionists.
All the cultures must co-exist. No ethnicity has more right to any part the earth than another.
In the article, there is no mention of former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and the very close deal with Yasir Arafat. The deal breaker will always be Jerusalem and Arafat did not put that issue for further talks. Instead, he lost a big land deal and now after 25 years, there is nothing to show for it.
11
When will the world educate itself and come to know it has been the Palestinians all along who derail peace, reject peace offers and outrightly refuse to come to the bargaining table? Not just once or twice but routinely. Not only that, they refuse to even utter the words "Israel" from their lips, even the most moderate of Palestinians call Israel, the "Occupiers." That kind of insult demands an apology before any sitting at tables occur.
No, sorry, we need to call it like we see it and we see this: Palestinians are culpable. Wake up, world.
46
I was a big fan of Oslo at the time. and unfortunately, both sides have sabotaged the Accord.
recently I have concluded that facts on the ground have made a One State Solution the only viable alternative for resolving the conflict.
Look at the history of South Africa as the model.
7
@lah
What in heaven do you mean "both side have sabotaged the accord"?
Has Israel initiated a massive terror attack on Palestinians right after signing the accord?
How do your words of "both sides" reconcile with the article's "part of that failure is self-inflicted. An increase in terrorist attacks after Oslo’s signing, followed by the deadly Second Intifada that erupted in 2000, soured many Israelis on peacemaking and eventually led Israel to sideline the process."
Indeed how?
19
@lah
The one state would soon become majority Arab. The chance that a majority Arab state would be as democratic as Israel is virtually zero.
Israel was ranked 29 out of 167 on The Economist's Democracy Index.
That's better than Belgium, Greece, Cyprus & at least a dozen other European countries.
The highest Arab state is Tunisia which is ranked 69. Palestine is 108,
11
Firstly, the one state solution makes even less sense now than it did before Oslo. There is no example of a successful country built out of two similarly sized ethnic groups that hate each other. Until you think beyond platitudes to what actually happens the day after your solution is implemented your "solutions" are just so much blather. As for South Africa, it has no relevance whatsoever to this discussion.
7
i strongly urge anyone who is interested in any kind of peace between Israel and Palestine to see for themselves life in the occupied territories. As a Jew seeking knowledge and information to make a judgement for myself i did just that in 2016. What I found there both shocked an changed my sensibilities as to what freedom and justice might look like for those people without a country. Life on the West Bank (I could not enter Gaza) lacks any particle of freedom or choice. The occupation leaves any Palestinian with no civil rights, vulnerable in every sense to the Israeli military, As a Jew raised with values of my parents' faith - compassion, generosity and an absolute belief in freedom for the Jewish people and all others, what i found in the West Bank lacked all of those principles. The oppressed have become the oppressors, subjecting any Palestinian at any time to arrest and indefinite detention without explanation. The prosperous state of israel lives alongside the non-state of the West Bank and Gaza in diametrically opposite conditions. The permitting process for a Palestinian for the smallest construction or home is unbearably long often ending in denial.. Confiscation and demolition of Palestinian homes and land continues unabated. All of the West Bank is dominated by huge "settlements" which are actually substantial towns which on the highest land dominating the land below which Palestinians so far have been allowed to retain.
28
@Robert Weiss
There are consequences to waging perpetual war and terrorism against a sovereign state....in this case, Israel. If they don’t like the consequences, they can stop waging perpetual war and terrorism. Their choice.
Having said that...Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza territories are under the authority of the Palestinian leadership....the PA and Hamas, respectively.
9
@Robert Weiss
“He Who Knows Only His Side of of the case, knows very little of that”.
John Stuart Mill, “On Liberty”.
2
I have been to both the West Bank and Gaza many times and frankly you have just not been to the right areas. Ramallah is better than most other Arab cities in the middle east and there is more freedom there than in basically any other place in the region.
Unfortunately, your high flying rhetoric means nothing here. Until and unless the Palestinians cease trying to destroy Israel, they will not be given the freedom to try. Its really that simple.
33
"At the Camp David talks in the summer of 2000, the Israeli prime minister, Ehud Barak, made what most Israelis considered a generous offer for a final agreement, but the talks collapsed."
NYT, I think most readers would like to know how did 'most Israelis' consider the 2000 Camp David offer as ‘generous’ since there were no details available for several years?
After the collapse of the summer 2000 camp David meeting, the US blamed the Palestinians for having rejected Israel's “best and most generous offer." The details of this ‘most generous offer’ were not revealed until years later. In the deal the Palestinians would have received Gaza and about 75% of the West Bank, with Israel annexing the remainder. The Palestinian West Bank was to be broken up into four chunks of land completely surrounded by Israeli settlements and soldiers. The US–Israeli team demanded that the Palestinians renounce the right of return for refugees. The Palestinian ‘state’ was to be demilitarised, with Israel in control of its borders, air space and water resources. There was nothing whatsoever generous about the offer.
15
@Whoopsiedoo
"As Bill Clinton later wrote in his memoir:
It was historic: an Israeli government had said that to get peace, there would be a Palestinian state in roughly 97 percent of the West Bank"
That 75% may have been the initial amount. What's important is the final amount.
1
yep. That would have been a great deal for the Palestinians and more than they deserved.
9
Israel will never have peace because they don't want peace. They want everything but peace. I hope the USA stops giving them money. They should get not a penny of USA money.
16
@Angel. Agreed. And the US should not give a penny to the Palestinians either.
1
@Angel. Israel made paeace with Jordan and Egypt.
12
A successful negotiation needs at least two partners who both can bring something to the table, and the Palestinians simply don't have that, and haven't had that since long before Oslo. Given that, the current situation might well be the best possible for the time being. This is an overall excellent article, but the suggestion that the Israelis are partially at fault for Hamas rule in the Gaza is slightly hilarious. The residents there voted for nihilistic Islamist representation, and that's what they got. The PA could not enforce their rule there, and until that split in fact is taken care of, there's no point in negotiating anything else.
9
I abhor all terrorists activity. However, go back to 1948 when the Palestinians were driven off their own land. As anyone would do to an occupying force, they fight with everything they've got, i.e., French Resistance in WWII. Hezbollah was founded in 1985 and Hamas in 1987 not in 1948. The despicable '72 attack in Munich was in retaliation -- "Black September called the operation "Iqrit and Biram",[9] after two Palestinian Christian villages whose inhabitants were expelled by the Israel Defense Forces (IDF) during the 1948 Arab–Israeli War", after Israeli oppression, destruction of family farms and homes for 24 years. The Israeli government has spit in the faces of three U.S. presidents by refusing to stop the illegal occupation and settlements. I read Haaretz daily and it appears a majority of Israeli's want peace and a two-state solution, willing to go back to the 1967 border. The Israeli government is looked upon as the more sophisticated "adults in the room", they should act like it. To keep up the illegal occupation and now with Trump and Bolton in power, threatening the international court of law, stomping on a race of people who throw rocks against tanks, is pouring more fuel on the fire of hatred and discontent. Israel and the U.S. have to take the lead, make peace, use resources to build and promote self-determination and end the illegal occupation or be prepared to be stay on this vicious, costly cycle of death and destruction for another generation.
19
@sunburst68
Your second sentence is false and therefore discredits your entire argument.
4
@sunburst68. I believe the US should stay out of this conflict, and not lead it. The US has tried that for decades and gotten nowhere. Not a penny from the US to either party. The international community continuing to “help” is now just prolonging it.
@Shenoa
What about it is false? Just because you dont like it doesnt make it true.
No group in recorded history ever had worse leadership over decades than the people living in Gaza and the West Bank.
13
There is certainly blame on both sides, but let’s be real. Israel controls every variable, and they have owned US foreign policy in the region for many years. They receive over $4.1 billion in military, and economic aid each year, mostly from US taxpayers. Strategic members the US Congress are bought with campaign finance. How else do you explain the recent actions by Bolten and Trump to move the embassy, and cut off Palestinian aid, without a peep from congress. Now the Israelis want us to focus on Iran instead, and they may drag us into a war there.
Because they’re in control Israel has three options:
1. Negotiate a fair peace, which means removing a lot of zealous and heavily armed settlers from land that they believe God has given them. You think getting the settlers out of the Sinai (desert) and Gaza (slum) was hard, how about fertile land where they occupy the high ground.
2. Make the Palestinian people so truly miserable that they will just leave. Despite recent Israeli efforts like a policy of changing laws, shooting protesters, etc. this just isn’t going to happen.
3. Become one state with all the territory, where everyone of voting age gets an equal vote.
Is Israel so valuable to us strategically that we spend this kind of money, instead of using it to build roads, or create better educational opportunities for our citizens? Maybe the best thing we could do as Americans to help the situation is to raise the volume of this discussion.
21
At Camp David2 Clinton tried very hard to bring the two sides
together but was defeated by Arafat, who instead encouraged the
deadly second intifada. Barak's consequent loss at the polls thus put Sharon's Likud back into power in the ensuing Israeli election, thus preventing a positive outcome to the talks at Taba, which both Ben Ami and Erekat agree would have provided a viable agreement if given six more months. Throughout the villain
was and remains Yasser Arafat, who alone amongst the actors
undid what he and Rabin had resolved to do at Oslo. Subsequent
events, particularly the failure of Israel's pullout from Gaza to
encourage the peace process - as Hamas's takeover there did
just the reverse - only led to the stalemate that has resulted.
But it was during those crucial years between Camp David2
and the reascension of Netanyahu to power that spelled the
dismal failure, and much as I hate to say it I continue to fault
the Palestinians far more than the Israelis for this.
18
There will be no progress until the Israeli conclude they need progress for their own security. That is a harsh truth, but it has been proven time and again by the only moments that progress has ever been made.
The US assurance of Israeli security is an assurance that no progress is needed.
Israel needs to feel just insecure enough that it will move to make progress. There is a fine balance between feeling insecure and having many innocent dead. That terrible risk is on those who will act in no other way.
8
@Mark Thomason
The conflict has provided great wealth for Palestinian leaders. Arafat’s net worth was $1 billion. Abbas’ net worth is $100 million. Hamas’ Khaled Mashaal, head of Hamas’s political wing, net worth $2.6 billion. Ending the conflict means ending the money.
12
I support BDS and a Palestinian State, but I am NOT antisemitic. I am anti fascist Israeli government, and opposed to US support of that government. Our government should be ashamed of its support of that government, especially since Netanyahu has been in power.
34
@ChesBay
Thank you.
@ChesBay
The BDS cult denies the right of the Jewish people to self-determination upon their own indigenous land...while promoting Israel’s elimination. That’s antisemitic.
Falsly accusing Israel’s democratically-elected government of fascism is likewise antisemitic.
38
@Shenoa -- Yes, it denies what you call self determination on what you call its own indigenous land. You are assuming the answers to all the final questions, and those entirely one-sided answers, and blaming them because they don't agree to that starting point.
A picture is worth a thousand words, just look at the body language in the “famous handshake at Oslo”. It is Rabin reaching across to shake Arafat’s hand, no movement forward at all from Arafat.
22
i disagree with you. IMO, it appears that Arafat is standing tall with his outstretched arm and pulling Rabin closer to him.
3
Nearly every country in the world, including Israel, supports the establishment of an independent Palestinian state alongside a secure Israel. Yet Palestinian "leadership" has refused to say yes to such a state since the 1940s-- long before any settlements or occupation. Since the 1980s Egypt and Jordan have concluded treaties and established peaceful relationships with Israel. What's wrong with the Palestinians that they can't get what everyone wants them to have?
46
@SHK So exactly what have the Palestinians refused to say yes to? The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative perhaps. Please show me what you are referring to?
1
Israel has never agreed to the two state solution and, in fact, has worked consistently against it by occupying the West Bank. If they had agreed on two states they would have ended the occupation and withdrew to the ‘67 borders.
6
@Whoopsiedoo
re" So exactly what have the Palestinians refused to say yes to?"
Answer: a five letter word which describes something vital-
p
e
a
c
e
"But nothing has turned out as they expected."
They expected? They made a deal. They were made promises. The deal was not kept. The promises were broken. By Israel.
13
@Mark Thomason
"But nothing has turned out as they expected."
They expected? They made a deal. They made promises. The deal was not kept. The promises were broken.
BY the PALESTINIANS
7
@Mark Thomason
By the Palestinians!
Ten days after the accords were signed on the White House lawn, under the auspices of then-President Bill Clinton, the terrorist attacks began. The first man killed was Yigal Vaaknin. Two weeks later, Eran Bahar and Dror Porer were murdered. The attacks continued, with more and more people murdered every few days. By the end of 1993, 15 deadly terror attacks had been recorded.
Arafat told South African Muslim leaders that the Oslo accords “fell into the same category as the Treaty of Hudaibiya that was signed by the Prophet Muhammed with the people of Mecca in 628, only to be reneged on a couple of years later when the situation titled in Muhammad’s favor.” Arafat’s words were recorded by a member of the Jewish community who had infiltrated the meeting posing as a Muslim — provoking demands from Israeli officials that he repudiate them. Arafat never did.
8
“In fair Verona, where we lay our scene...”
The choice is between hope, and nihilism. The State of Israel holds all the cards.
8
@ubique. Actually, "Palestine" holds the card of accepting ANY Israeli state and supporting peace.
7
@TMDJS
I agree. The failure to secure Statehood for all of the citizens of ‘Palestine’ prior to 1948 was the moment that the dream of Theodor Herzl died, if it hadn’t been killed in the previous years of extremist violence at the hands of the Irgun.
Why is it assumed that this population is entitled to statehood?
Jordan, situated upon 80% of the former province aka ‘Palestine’, was carved out of the British Mandate in 1920 for the exclusive benefit of the Arab population, and is therefore the defacto Arab Palestinian state. Why should they be entitled to yet another state west of the Jordan river?
35
@Shenoa
"Why is it assumed that this population is entitled to statehood?"
One could ask the same for Israelis.
5
@Shenoa Good question. Why is it assumed this population is entitled to statehood? You could be talking about Israel, yes? The Jewish population of Palestine in 1920 stood at about 70,000 and was a small minority.
6
@Al M
The Jews agreed to the UN partition plan. They even agreed to a vastly reduced territory in exchange for peace.
The Arabs have rejected every overture in favor of waging war and terrorism. They’re still at it 70 years later. Meanwhile, Israel thrives.
Arafat went on a murderous terrorist spree after signing theses accords as funds flowed in and restrictions were lifted...Arafat had no intention of making Peace work as then he would have to actually govern. The Palestinian people are plagued by just horrific leaders who have no interest in seeing children get clean water, education or statehood. It’s been 70 years and they’re still refugees and a political pawn of Arab and religious leaders...shame on the PA and Hamas.
50
“If Oslo has failed the Palestinians, part of that failure is self-inflicted. An increase in terrorist attacks after Oslo’s signing, followed by the deadly Second Intifada that erupted in 2000, soured many Israelis on peacemaking and eventually led Israel to sideline the process.”
“With the Arab world largely uninterested in coming to the Palestinians’ aid...”
These are the real key concepts — surrounded by lots of rationalizations and justifications.
One might additionally mention the thousands of rockets each year fired by the Palestinians into Israel to add some hard-core reality to this analysis. Presumably, for the average human being a mere single rocket fired into their backyard might make them less than sanguine about working with their “neighbors.”
56
This is a balanced article, there is enough blame to go around on all sides. Who knows where we would be without Rabin's assassination on the Israeli side, which probably would have kept Arafat more grounded and responsible, and kept the Israeli-right in check, until the peace process could unfold a bit more.
But worth more than the entire article is the NYT photograph of the Jericho hospital. In that picture, there are two items hanging on the wall: (1) a portrait of Mahmoud Abbas being caressed by a dove and (2) a map depicting a one-state jurisdiction, Palestine.
Genius - both the person who took the picture, and the editor who selected it to appear along side this article. Wow.
13
The Palestinians have been used as pawns by their corrupt leaders who never wanted peace. Because of UNWRA, the Palestinians have been kept as perpetual refugees, a status not applied to any other refugees on earth. Surrounding Arab nations refused to allow assimilation and has forced them to live in generational refugee camps.
In Gaza, Hamas’ educational curriculum teaches children that Israel should be “cleansed of Jews,” and that killing Jews is worthy of martyrdom creating generations for whom hatred of Jews is intrinsic.
And finally, the false hope of return incentivizes violence and devalues investment in Gaza, the “temporary home,” where Hamas prioritizes spending millions on terrorism over quality of life for Gazans.
The world must now accept the indisputable fact that Hamas and PA do not want peace.
They want Israel.
51
@FJM -- And Israel wants the whole West Bank, it wants the Palestinians gone, and it is getting that slowly but steadily because it has all the power.
7
@Mark Thomason
"it wants the Palestinians gone..."
And just how do you prove your opinion?
@Mark Thomason
I'm sure that Israelis wanted to keep the large areas of Biblical Israel that they relinquished to Jordan & Egypt, but they gave up all this territory in return for peace. According to Bill Clinton, they were willing to give up 97% of the West Bank.
Arabs, after having rejected statehood repeatedly, are still trying to win the war they started....and lost....70 years ago.
You’d almost conclude that ‘statehood’ was not really their goal.
77
@Shenoa
In 1948, Palestinians could have declared independence, but they didn't. Instead, they asked for union with Jordan.
4
@Shenoa And what did the U.S. do after winning the war with Japan and Germany? Defanged their militaries and rebuilt their countries -- not occupy them under continued military rule.
1
@sunburst68
Both Japan and Germany surrendered....unconditionally.
Sorry, but my introduction to the Palestinians was at the 1972 Munich Olympics where the Black September group brutally murdered 11 Israeli athletes, one of which was an American from Cleveland, OH - David Berger.
If this how the Palestinians wanted to demonstrate to the world their beef with Israel then they certainly lost all sympathy from people like me who grew up in NYC with Jewish friends. To this day I cannot shake the feelings I got from watching how the events unfolded that day in Munich, not to mention much later hearing the details of how they were slaughtered...
87
@John E. Ask WHY this even happened? It was a retaliatory strike against 24 years of Israeli occupation and oppression. The Israeli's are partially to blame. They reap what they sow. Stop the violence and the hatred -- end the occupation. Go watch the Spielberg film MUNICH.
1
There is no justification for murdering the Munich 11. None. Appalling that you would suggest that there is.
13
@John E. Imagine if you judged all Americans by Hiroshima and Nagasaki. Do you still hate all Germans because of the Nazis? All British because of the devastation of imperialism? If you don't, but you do judge the Palestinians by the acts of the 1972 terrorists, you might want to ask yourself if that's reasonable.
1
At the time of the Israeli declaration of independence, the entire American foreign policy establishment except Truman was opposed to recognizing the new state. George Kennan, Chip Bohlen, Averell Harriman, Dean Acheson, and George C. Marshall were all in agreement: the United States should not recognize Israel because it would become an expansionist, militaristic power, inflame the Arab world, and create a miasma of hate and violence.
They were correct.
The Israeli state has never negotiated in good faith. If memory serves, the Israeli destroyed the Oslo accords by attacking the security infrastructure (police stations, etc.) of the Palestinian Authority and then blaming the Palestinians for renewed terrorism.
Since 1967, the Israelis have talked peace while continuing to colonize the West Bank, the Golan Heights, and Shebaa Farms. Every year, the Israelis consolidate their control of the Occupied Territories.
It is time for the taxpayers of the United States to review the costs of our support for Israel, both financial and moral. We have empowered racism, hate, and imperialist aggression by our support for this oppressive state.
We should rethink our positions. It would be in our interests to do so.
26
@Mark Hungerford
Palestinian terrorists murdered more Israelis during the five years following the Oslo accords than they did during the 15 years that preceded the Oslo accords. Gee, that might have something to do with Oslo’s failure.
26
@Mark Hungerford I have lived in Israel since the Oslo Accords were signed. Israel has maintained security cooperation with the Palestinian Authority and I do not remember Israel attacking police stations. Please provide proof. And of course the Palestinians must take the blame for suicide and other terrorist attacks which slaughtered innocent men,women and children and turned many Israelis against the Oslo Process. These Israelis would have happily given up the West Bank and Gaza in return for real peace.
21
Um...name ONE Palestinian leader who hasn’t vowed the destruction of Israel and who hasn’t tried for Peace? Jordan and Egypt are far harder on the Palestinian leadership as they know they are dealing with terrorists and not a partner Israel has agreed to 2 state solution for 70 years and what has the Palestinian leadership offered? The Promise of a 2nd Holocaust. In 1948, Israel took in and made citizens the 500,000 Jews ejected without their property. How many Palestinians were accepted into What became Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt? None. This says EVERYTHING. Lame to be still blaming the Jews.
32
I remember when Clinton boasted he had solved the Middle East crisis. My husband got mad when I made fun of his statement, but I was sceptical that such a fundamental problem was settled and done. Now we both just sneer and scoff whenever the Prez opens his mouth. Who knew political quagmires could be so hard to resolve?
The article points out how incompetent the Palestinian leadership has been and how this corrupt, inept "government" has betrayed the Palestinian people over the years. Neither Fatah nor Hamas has any legitimacy as they refuse to face re-election.
Nonetheless, it's in the interest of all parties to support a two state solution along the lines of previous Israeli offers. A weak Palestinian people only allows Israel to indulge its worst impulses and the status quo is untenable.
6
Many opinion pieces, just like this one, have been written over the years about this conflict. But opinions don't matter: facts do. The Palestinians could have had a state with east Jerusalem as a capital if Arafat and Abu Mazen hadn't walked away from the Israeli offers in 2000 and then again, in 2008. These are indisputable facts.
113
Could you please enlighten us as to what was wrapped up and offered to the Palestinians in 2000 and 2008?
3
@JVV In 2000, at Camp David (you can google it or read one of the many books and articles written about it for more exact details) the Israeli PM Ehud Barak offered Yasir Arafat a state on about 95% of the territory of the West Bank and Gaza with Israel retaining the remaining area of large settlement blocks with other land given as compensation. The deal included a capitol for the Palestinian state in East Jerusalem. Arafat said no. I believe he did so because he could not look the Palestinian refugees in the face and tell them the "right of return" would only be to the Palestinian state and to Haifa, Jaffa, Acre and other places that refugees left in 1948. I think also his awareness that Anwar Sadat was assassinated for making peace with Israel made him afraid to give up on the idea of Palestinian sovereignty over all of Jerusalem.
@Jack
These may be facts, but isn't it your opinion, as to why they may have walked away, If someone was given your house, and offered you a small % of it back, what would your opinion of that deal be?
1
The "brilliant future?" That's funny!
As Marcus Aurelius noted almost 2000 years ago,
“No one can lose either the past or the future - how could anyone be deprived of what he does not possess? ... It is only the present moment of which either stands to be deprived: and if this is all he has, he cannot lose what he does not have.”
8
It's very simple. The Palestinians were offered statehood in 1937 (Peel Commission) 1948 (UN Partition Plan) 2000 (Camp David) and 2008 (Olmert Plan). All of these were rejected by the Palestinian Authority, a body that maintains unrealistic minimalist goals. No further offers of statehood should be made until the Palestinians unequivocally reject violence and recognize inherent rights of Jews (who are indigenous to the land) to have their own state. Moreover, the 1,000,000 Jews expelled from Arab lands (and their descendants) need to be compensated by the Arab nations for their losses.
108
@Ari
Its very simple. The British proposed one single state in the 1940 White Paper and the Zionists rejected it. Instead various Zionists groups such as the Irgun began a violent terrorism campaign, throwing sticks of dynamite into crowded markets and kidnapping and murdering British soldiers. Israel has never apologized for this terrorism and should be shunned from all civilized nations until it does.
Jews from Poland and Russia were not "indigenous" to Palestine. They were indigenous to Poland and Russia.
Israel expelled hundreds of thousands of Palestinians from Palestine before the Arab states expelled their Jews. They both happened and both sides deserve compensation. Try to be consistent.
Rabin never intended to implement the treaty. He walked away as soon as Israel was required to actually do something. But the Israelis did accomplish a major task of transferring the cost of occupation to others. Gaza is a perfect example, create a mess then walk away and blame the breakdown of civil authority on the victims. Much as the recent massacre on peaceful protesters at the gates of Gaza. The Israelis blame the victims. Now Trump has given Jerusalem as the recognized capital of Israel and the money has rolled into Jared Kushner's pockets.
23
@c harris
What fury! How does recognition of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel feed into Kushner's pockets? On the contrary. His family gives millions in charity for various institutions, such as Shaarei Zedek hospital in Jerusalem, which, BTW, treats a disproportionate number of Palestinians and Israeli Arabs.
13
This is possibly one of the most inaccurate renderings of the Gaza situation ever written.
9
@Rosalie Lieberman I happened to visit a clinic at Shaarei Zedek today (in the building named for Kushner's parents) and was struck by the diversity of patients - women in hijabs, Ultra-Orthodox men in sidelocks, modern Orthodox women in headscarves and secular Israeli Jews and Arabs in jeans.
In the age of modern journalism, especially regarding this particular issue, I find this article to be both valuable and balanced. There is blame on all sides for the horrible relationship between Palestine and Israel and often times you hear either 100% pro Israel or 100% pro Palestinian voices. There will be no peace until fault is laid at the feet of both parties. Kudos to the NYT for this article.
20
The moral of the story is: grab the opportunity the moment it comes. For lost opportunities seldom come back. Only regrets keep coming back again and again.
14
The Palestinians never got the government they needed. Instead their leadership continued to enrich itself, skimming from the vast sums that came in as aid. I have spoken to several Palestinians about the shakedowns that the were subjected to by their leadership.
Instead of investing in the infrastructure for a future state, much of that money was used to support tribal factions in intra-Palestinian power struggles.
The Palestinian Arabs are intelligent, and if they ever get leaders willing to invest what they have in educating their populace the jobs in the 21st century over power struggles the change could be dramatic. The example can be found in some of the Eastern European states, which though resource poor in terms of land, struck it rich in how they have invested in the next generation for the tech world.
15
''It was a mistake not to insist on an explicit clause in the interim agreements freezing further Israeli settlement expansion where the Palestinians envisaged their state. ''
How is it a mistake to believe that the people you are negotiating with are not going to encroach and take your land ?
The entire international community believes that the settlements are illegal, yet they continue unabated, along with provocations against the Palestinian occupied people.
There is not going to be any peace process achieved (let alone even started) until all of the present leaders (on all sides) are changed or removed from power. That is a given.
It is also probably a given, that the new leaders will have to be left/Liberal in nature/politics, AND that Jerusalem and the withdrawal of settlements are put back on the table. (not that they were taken off of it in the first place)
A two (2) state solution is the only acceptable answer to a millennia old religious conflict that has been upended in the last 70 years. That is a fact.
What is also a fact, is that everyone is going to chime in (to my comment) and to anything that is remotely close to achieving the goal of the above.
God told them so.
18
@FunkyIrishman
Jews have lived in Palestine for thousands of years. Palestinians ethnically cleansed Gaza of its Jews in 1929 and the West Bank & East Jerusalem of their Jews in 1948. Why is it illegal for Jews to rebuild their homes in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem?
26
@FunkyIrishman
I agree with your vision completely. I would like to add that when Israel was in the process of statehood, the late great German Martin Buber was asked for his advice about the Palestinian people. He told them, and I believe in his wisdom, that it was of vital importance that the people of Israel learn their language, customs, embrace them as brothers and sisters, to live in peace as a family together and share with them. No one listened or respected his advice but for me this is the great failure--from the very start. Instead just the opposite was done and you can't oppress a people and take land away and expect friendly relations to insue. You can't take trust or love out of this picture. Impossible to do so. People, any nation of people, need respect and thoughtful dealings daily for their to be any peace.
6
@C T In fairness, and this is the crux of one of the problems, there has never been a Palestinian Martin Buber. Nor for that matter has there ever been a Palestinian version of Israel’s Peace Now.
The reason is that, after the Arab imperial conquest if the 7th century, the Arabs consider all that land to be an Islamic Waqf that simply cannot be surrendered to non-Muslims. That is why - though strangely missing from this article - Arafat justified the Oslo Accords by reassuring his Arab audiences that this agreement was part of the PLO’s infamous phased strategy to destroy Israel. It is also why he told President Clinton that any peace treaty he signed would be his death warrant, turning that President’s hopes into failure.
And yet people are surprised Oslo failed.
1
''It was a mistake not to insist on an explicit clause in the interim agreements freezing further Israeli settlement expansion where the Palestinians envisaged their state. ''
How is it a mistake to believe that the people you are negotiating with are not going to encroach and take your land ?
The entire international community believes that the settlements are illegal, yet they continue unabated, along with provocations against the Palestinian occupied people.
There is not going to be any peace process achieved (let alone even started) until all of the present leaders (on all sides) are changed or removed from power. That is a given.
It is also probably a given, that the new leaders will have to be left/Liberal in nature/politics, AND that Jerusalem and the withdrawal of settlements are put back on the table. (not that they were taken off of it in the first place)
A two (2) state solution is the only acceptable answer to a millennia old religious conflict that has been upended in the last 70 years. That is a fact.
What is also a fact, is that everyone is going to chime in (to my comment) and to anything that is remotely close to achieving the goal of the above.
God told them so.
11
It is not the Oslo Accords that has been a boon for Israel but rather the effect of a continuing democratic functioning democracy. This is in contrast to a dysfunctional and corrupt government that is unwilling to concentrate their efforts on improving the lives of their citizens. It is not that different than what was previously seen between West and East Germany and is currently seen between South and North Korea. The added obvious complication is the relentless focus on destruction of the functioning state as a distraction from corruption and lack of representation for the Palestinian people.
60
A well laid out summary.
The pro-Israel and Pro-Palestinian groups are sure to supply their version of the facts, especially those the authors missed.
For me (pro-Israel) the salient points are that the Palestinian leadership rejected offers of a state in 1948, 2000, 2008 - all for a state near or at the green line that included east Jerusalem. And the past 10 years, Netanyahu hasn’t made any offers (at least publicly).
I expect that a future Israeli government will make the offer again. And the question will be, will there be anyone on the Palestinian side to accept it?
62
@Steven Roth
I think you summed it up well. And you are right. There's Palestinian willing to answer the phone when it rings.
2
@Steven Roth. And who would he make it to?
The solution is one non-sectarian democratic state.
They all want all of the land from the river to the sea. It can be a homeland for both peoples. The key to safety that the state is thought to give is found in a governance of love, not in a state that favors, by definition, one group of people over all others.
And the United States taxpayers ought to stop funding Israel who them kicks back money to support the military industrial complex in the United States.
63
@Valerie Elverton Dixon "... money to support the military industrial complex ..." is only part of the reason. Our religious connection to the region is a major reason too.
2
@Valerie Elverton Dixon
You must believe in fairy tales to think that a single-state solution is possible. Neither side wants it.
6
@Valerie Everton Dixon. A one-state solution will eventually become an overwhelmingly Arab state. With the unique history (and persecution) of the Jews, a two-state solution with security guarantees and respect for human rights is a far better option. That the Palestinians have never been willing to accept multiple offers of a two state solution is as regrettable as it is revealing.
26
What is so shocking 25 years later is how the Arab world has so completely abandoned the Palestinians.
Once a cause celebre for rich Gulf shieks and businessmen, a way to show they were "down" with the common struggle, these mega millionaires now fund far flung madrassas and fighters in Syria/Uzbekistan/Afghanistan.
I don't have an answer to why the profligate spending of the Arabs has turned away from the West Bank, where a $ goes quite a far way and the edifice to for building institutions remains strong given the highly educated population.
But I suspect that if the Saudis and Emiratis don't want to spend there, they probably know something we don't...
41
Like elections, the results of wars matter. The Israelis won, but the Palestinians want to make the results go away.
The article is exactly correct as it apportions blame. The Palestinians either do not have a government that can control violence against the Israelis or more likely the government encourages fighting. The right wing Israeli government placates religious extremists by building "settlements" and using abundant force to punish Palestinians for transgressions.
Both sides would rather fight than switch.
43
@Boston Barry
Israel signed peace treaties with Jordan & Egypt even though that meant giving up large areas of Biblical Israel. This shows that Israel values peace more than territory.
39