Middle East Peace Talks

Einhard

Just seeing on the news that both Abbas and Netanyahu have agreed to direct talks in Washington next month, with Egypt and Jordan to have a prominent role, and the other members of Middle East Quartet also involved. It's always struck me as particularly tragic that, for all the bloodshed and hatred the conflict has engendered, the issues at stake are not all that intractable. It essentially boils down to a territorial dispute between two peoples, and although the emergence of Hamas in Gaza has complicated things somewhat, in objective terms the dispute should be far from unresolvable. Furthermore, both sides recognise the imperative of a two state solution, and have shown a willingness in the past to negotiate with each other. The roots of the difficulties in the North were, for example, far more complex than the situation which pertains in the ME. Given all that, it's doubly lamentable that the two sides have yet to achieve a just and lasting peace. One can can only but hope however, and perhaps these talks really do hold out the possibility for sustained progress, and ultimately peace in the region. I'm not going to hold my breath, but I do wish them luck, and on that at least, I think people of of every persuasion would agree.

Abbass hasn't been legitimate for a long time..he's just another puppet..why not one state?..you agree with israel having a state which discriminates on religious grounds?

Victor

It doesn't reach the headlines often, but sometimes you'll see human interest pieces in the media. I remember one piece, I think about the time of the Gaza withdrawal that spoke of Palestinian and Israeli security officers sitting down to a lunch (chicken IIRC), more or less on the front lines, while some of the local personalities (on both sides) were mouthing off (or more) about some secondary issue or other. It portrayed them as ordinary people trying to do a job, but frustrated by what was going on around them.

Both sides could do very well out of peace - the Palestinians make a ready work force have good will (not always practical) and connections in the Arab world and the Israelis have international connections and capital. Of course, each side not spending a chunk of their income on non-productive security doesn't help. Put those armoured bullozers towards building infrastructure, not knocking it down.

Its not going to be easy and there will be set backs, but if both sides do what is right - putting food on peoples tables, roofs over their heads and security at their backs, much could be achieved.

---

In comparing it to Northern Ireland, realise that there are 11.5 million people (compared to 1.7 million) in about twice the land area, a fair chunk of which is uninhabitable - and that some claim the good old Biblical rights.

Deleted User wrote: »

Abbass hasn't been legitimate for a long time..he's just another puppet..why not one state?..you agree with israel having a state which discriminates on religious grounds?

I take "one state" to mean one state covering Israel and Palestine.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/One-state_solution
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Two-state_solution

Neither side will really be too happy as they both lose power - better to be the big boss in a small country than a small boss in a big one. The Israelies won't go for it as they risk being a minority in their own country. While it would create relatively practical external boundaries, the internal boundaries might be another matter.

While Abbas might have legitimacy issues, so does everyone else.

Einhard

Deleted User wrote: »

Abbass hasn't been legitimate for a long time..he's just another puppet..why not one state?..you agree with israel having a state which discriminates on religious grounds?

Nodin

Deleted User wrote: »

Abbass hasn't been legitimate for a long time..he's just another puppet..why not one state?..you agree with israel having a state which discriminates on religious grounds?

Neither side could be trusted in charge of the other - single state just isn't possible.

irishh_bob

could be more about obamas drive for mid term elections than anything else , we all know nothing will come of theese talks

demonspawn

Einhard wrote: »

It essentially boils down to a territorial dispute between two peoples, and although the emergence of Hamas in Gaza has complicated things somewhat, in objective terms the dispute should be far from unresolvable.

I'm sorry man, but it's a bit more complicated than that. Israel has basically shot itself in the foot by being so stubborn. If it turns around now and makes peace with the Palestinians, it will be seen as weak by the hardcore right-wing lunatics that seem to be drawn to Israel like flies to feces, causing more problems than it will solve. The same can be said for Hamas and the hardcore Palestinians in Gaza.

Both sides need to get these extremists as far away from the conflict as possible before they even begin to move forward.

Also, there is so much going on behind the scenes, so many hidden agendas, that we can never be sure what's really going on. I reckon this is the stage for WWIII and there's no point in trying to avoid it. I realize I sound like one of those insane "end-timers" but maybe they're not wrong, except for the whole end of the world thing. As much as I hate war, I think this one may be necessary to clear the field so to speak and start on a clean page.

OhNoYouDidn't

Einhard wrote: »

Abbas lost the elections - he has no mandate to negotiate on behalf of anyone

irishh_bob

OhNoYouDidn't wrote: »

Abbas lost the elections - he has no mandate to negotiate on behalf of anyone

and the word negotiate does,nt exist in Netanyahu,s vocabulary

Einhard

Victor wrote: »

In comparing it to Northern Ireland, realise that there are 11.5 million people (compared to 1.7 million) in about twice the land area, a fair chunk of which is uninhabitable - and that some claim the good old Biblical rights.

Yes, but the underlying root of the conflct is relatively straightforward. It's about territory, and how that should be divided. Both sides actually agree to a large extent on a two state solution, and both sides have pressing reasons to seek a compromise, not least the Israelis who, as you state fear becoming a minority in their own land. The situation in the North is completely different. One can't divide the six counties into Nationalist and Loyalist areas. There's far more at issue than merely territorial conflict. Afterall, for all its success, the GFA hasn't actually resolved the situation, just parked it for a few years. Eventually it's all going to come to a head again, probably when the Nationalists gain a majority and demand re-unification as per the terms of the Agreement. Bar an independent Northern Irish state, it's very difficult to see how the problems in the North can be resolved. That's not the case in the Levant, where the majority on both sides agree broadly on the solution.

demonspawn wrote: »

I'm sorry man, but it's a bit more complicated than that. Israel has basically shot itself in the foot by being so stubborn. If it turns around now and makes peace with the Palestinians, it will be seen as weak by the hardcore right-wing lunatics that seem to be drawn to Israel like flies to feces, causing more problems than it will solve. The same can be said for Hamas and the hardcore Palestinians in Gaza.

The underlying root causes aren't actually that complicated though. At it's core, the conflict is one of territory. The majority on both sides understand that a two state solution is the way to a sustainable solution, and have actually come close to attaining that in the past. Yes, there are malcontents on both sides, but I seriously doubt that a war weary Israeli public are going to let their zealots stand in the way of a final peace. Similarly, should the talks prove successful the West Bank would become an independent state, with all the benefits that entails. Hamas obviously are going to hold out and refuse to compromise but if the Gazans see their fellow Palestinians go from strength in the West Bank, then it's only a matter of time before they are demanding the same too. Obviously, success is far from assured, and in all likelihood not going to be achieved this time around, but I still think that the core issues are far from intractable. Which makes the continuing stalemate all the more tragic.

Both sides need to get these extremists as far away from the conflict as possible before they even begin to move forward.

+1. Funnily enough, it'll probably be the Israelis who have most trouble in doing so. Netanyahu depends on some hard right parties to govern whereas Fatah don't seem to have a similar problem, what with their far right locked away in another territory. The success or otherwise of these talks, I think, will come to Netanyahu, and whether he is willing to face down the zealots in this ranks and, importantly, refuse to take the bait when Hamas inevitably try to disrupt the talks by goading Israel with rocket attacks.

Also, there is so much going on behind the scenes, so many hidden agendas, that we can never be sure what's really going on. I reckon this is the stage for WWIII and there's no point in trying to avoid it. I realize I sound like one of those insane "end-timers" but maybe they're not wrong, except for the whole end of the world thing. As much as I hate war, I think this one may be necessary to clear the field so to speak and start on a clean page.

Hmmm, I hope the fact that you're named demonspawn and prophesising an apocalypse is just a coincidence! :pac:

Einhard

irishh_bob wrote: »

could be more about obamas drive for mid term elections than anything else , we all know nothing will come of theese talks

Personally I think it's probably more to do with Obama's long term legacy than mid term elections. Imagine being able to claim a lasting peace in the ME as part of your achievements?! But really, hat does it matter what's motivating the Americans as long as the talks are held? And at least talking provides some chance at success, however small, whereas cynical inaction guarantees nothing but futher bloodshed. I'll take the former any day thanks.

sxt

Einhard wrote: »

It essentially boils down to a territorial dispute between two peoples, and although the emergence of Hamas in Gaza has complicated things somewhat, in objective terms the dispute should be far from unresolvable. .

It is not as simple as that. They are not just fighting over property, they are fighting for their ethnic, religious ,national ,cultural identity etc...They are fighting for everything that was uprooted and destroyed by the cynical Western nations.

Einhard

sxt wrote: »

It is not as simple as that. They are not just fighting over property, they are fighting for their ethnic, religious ,national ,cultural identity etc...They are fighting for everything that was uprooted and destroyed by the cynical Western nations.

I don't think they are actually. I think they just want a place that they can lay claim to, that will be recognised by the world, and in which they can go about their lives in peace, and try to bring some semblance of normality to their existence. Once this is in place, there's nothing to stop them building upon their ethnic identity.

demonspawn

Well, I really hope these talks will be another step in the right direction. I'll say one thing though, it's a sad state of affairs when children are the only voice of reason for an entire nation.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qNE7CXxcPZw

Children are our future and thanks to these young people our future looks a little bit brighter.

Edit: An interesting note: The second young lady in this video, Omer Goldman, is actually the daughter of Naftali Granot. He was deputy to Meir Dagan, director of Mossad.

Babydiva

sxt wrote: »

It is not as simple as that. They are not just fighting over property, they are fighting for their ethnic, religious ,national ,cultural identity etc...They are fighting for everything that was uprooted and destroyed by the cynical Western nations.

This is very true. I wonder if there was a war and we Israelis were losing would you restore our nation or sit by while the Arab nations slaughter us? I'll be brutally honest, you'd let us be annihilated without blinking an eye.

demonspawn

Babydiva wrote: »

This is very true. I wonder if there was a war and we Israelis were losing would you restore our nation or sit by while the Arab nations slaughter us? I'll be brutally honest, you'd let us be annihilated without blinking an eye.

I'd give you two choices. Surrender your country to the people it actually belongs to and we'd absorb your population as best we could, or you could stay and die for your ludicrous belief that you are God's chosen people and Israel is your god-given home. If you really are "God's chosen people", surely he'll help you out when you need it most, right?

Oh, and your post gives the impression that we have some sort of responsibility for the survival of the state of Israel. We do not. Your holocaust guilt trip isn't as effective as it once was in light of current events in Gaza and the West Bank.

Einhard

demonspawn wrote: »

I'd give you two choices. Surrender your country to the people it actually belongs to

Neither the UN specifically, nor the general international community have a problem recognising the state of Israel, so I'm not really sure who you think it "belongs to".

If you really are "God's chosen people", surely he'll help you out when you need it most, right?

Well considering the wars from which Israel has emerged victorious over the past 6 decades, perhaps Yahweh is up there pulling the strings!!

Einhard

Babydiva wrote: »

This is very true. I wonder if there was a war and we Israelis were losing would you restore our nation or sit by while the Arab nations slaughter us? I'll be brutally honest, you'd let us be annihilated without blinking an eye.

Don't be so ridiculously melodramatic. First off, two of your three Arab neighbours have peace agreements with Israel. Secondly, the vast bulk of the international community recognises Israels right to exist, and would safegaurd that. Implying anti-semitism or a desire to see Israelis slaughtered to people who disagree with you is an extremely lazy, foolish form of debate.

demonspawn

Einhard wrote: »

Neither the UN specifically, nor the general international community have a problem recognising the state of Israel, so I'm not really sure who you think it "belongs to".

I'd have to say the people who lived there for the past thousand years at least, the ones who were never consulted before the West handed it over to a population that had almost no connection to the region, other than questionable Biblical scripture. And that includes the large population of Jews that lived in the region quite peacefully until the illegal waves of European Zionists began arriving.

Well considering the wars from which Israel has emerged victorious over the past 6 decades, perhaps Yahweh is up there pulling the strings!!

Yeah, I'm sure the billions of dollars worth of military infrastructure and training provided by the West had very little to do with it.

Edit: All that being said, Israel is there now and will be there for the foreseeable future. They just need to stop acting like Nazis (yeah, I said it) and try to get along with their neighbors. Israel is actually a pretty nice country once you get past the religious fanatics and fascists. Unfortunately, they are the ones in power at this time.

Einhard

demonspawn wrote: »

I'd have to say the people who lived there for the past thousand years at least, the ones who were never consulted before the West handed it over to a population that had almost no connection to the region, other than questionable Biblical scripture. And that includes the large population of Jews that lived in the region quite peacefully until the illegal waves of European Zionists began arriving.

And obviously you equally demand that non-indigenous Australians leave that country forthwith, and hand the land over to the original inhabitants. Likewise those of Iberian descent in South America, and all those of non-Indian stock in the United States and Canada. I mean, that's only consistent right?

Yeah, I'm sure the billions of dollars worth of military infrastructure and training provided by the West had very little to do with it.

Ah, but who was pulling the strings of the western powers?

Edit: All that being said, Israel is there now and will be there for the foreseeable future. They just need to stop acting like Nazis (yeah, I said it) and try to get along with their neighbors. Israel is actually a pretty nice country once you get past the religious fanatics and fascists. Unfortunately, they are the ones in power at this time.

Wrong, and wrong again. The Israelis cannot be compared to the Nazis. It's an offensive analogy both from the point of view of historical accuracy, and in its connotations for the Israelis themselves. For one thing, were the Israeli's acting like Nazis, then the status of the Palestinians wouldn't be an issue would it?

It always amuses me how Western advocates for either side are often far more reactionary and entrenched than the Palestinians and the Israelis themselve.

demonspawn

Einhard wrote: »

And obviously you equally demand that non-indigenous Australians leave that country forthwith, and hand the land over to the original inhabitants. Likewise those of Iberian descent in South America, and all those of non-Indian stock in the United States and Canada. I mean, that's only consistent right?

Great comparison, because a third party handing over a country like it was a rent check is exactly like thousands of years of colonialism. And I would actually like to see portions of valuable land (not just desert) handed back to the displaced natives of Australia and the Americas.

Ah, but who was pulling the strings of the western powers?

Conspiracy Theories is that way. ---->
(I can't believe I just said that. )

Wrong, and wrong again. The Israelis cannot be compared to the Nazis. It's an offensive analogy both from the point of view of historical accuracy, and in its connotations for the Israelis themselves. For one thing, were the Israeli's acting like Nazis, then the status of the Palestinians wouldn't be an issue would it?

It always amuses me how Western advocates for either side are often far more reactionary and entrenched than the Palestinians and the Israelis themselve.

Racism, mandatory military service, death camps (by way Sabra and Shatila, as well as others), apartheid, cold-blooded murder in the name of national defense, fanatical obsession with a pure race....

What was I thinking?

Byron85

Einhard wrote: »

Wrong, and wrong again. The Israelis cannot be compared to the Nazis. It's an offensive analogy both from the point of view of historical accuracy, and in its connotations for the Israelis themselves. For one thing, were the Israeli's acting like Nazis, then the status of the Palestinians wouldn't be an issue would it?

I wouldn't have in the past but now I would. I'm currently reading a book which has extracts from Ben Gurion's diary and the archive of the Hagana and Maktal. They started developing chemical weapons to specifically use against the Palestinians as early as 1947. What other kind of analogy would one use?

wes

Hopefully the peace talks will work, but I don't see them working. Neither side is in any position to actually achieve anything. Also, the US is no honest broker, there on Israel's side 100%, and this make there involvement bad joke. The US being the honest brokers, makes as much sense as letting the Saudis be a honest broker for this conflict.

At this point, a UN imposed solution based on International law, maybe the only way to go.

irishh_bob

wes wrote: »

Hopefully the peace talks will work, but I don't see them working. Neither side is in any position to actually achieve anything. Also, the US is no honest broker, there on Israel's side 100%, and this make there involvement bad joke. The US being the honest brokers, makes as much sense as letting the Saudis be a honest broker for this conflict.

At this point, a UN imposed solution based on International law, maybe the only way to go.

the saudis are alot more impartial on this issue than the americans , a better example would be the iranians

OhNoYouDidn't

Babydiva wrote: »

This is very true. I wonder if there was a war and we Israelis were losing would you restore our nation or sit by while the Arab nations slaughter us? I'll be brutally honest, you'd let us be annihilated without blinking an eye.

Westen governments have let you 'slaughter and annihilate the Palestinians without blinking an eye', so you can't have it both ways....

You have lost all the latent sympathy for your cause with your barbaric behaviour and decline into apartheit. If boards was around 30 years ago, no doubt some white South African would be on here stating they would be all killed if they took the foot off the locals necks, and they would have been laughed at too.