Barrier to Stay, Israel Declares

[JohnLocke]

Barrier to Stay, Israel Declares
By THE NEW YORK TIMES

Published: November 20, 2003

JERUSALEM, Nov. 19 — Israel rejected Wednesday President Bush's criticism of the barrier it is building in the West Bank, saying construction would proceed as planned.

"We have reached a clear and unequivocal decision to build this fence to prevent the extremists from attacking us," Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom told Israeli Army radio.
--------------------------------------------------------------------
http://www.channelnewsasia.com/stories/afp_world/view/58296/1/.html
--------------------------------------------------------------------
Her's my Plan:

The West Bank and Gaza strip go to Palestinians, but Lebanon gives up any claims to Golan Heights.

The Palestinian state must be a liberal democracy and must break off any funding or support for Islamic terrorist groups. They must ban private paramilitaries and break up Hamas, Islamic Jihad, etc.

Any act of terrorism perpetrated by a citizen of Palestine will be considered an act of war and grounds for an invasion of Palestine by Israel.

A wall along the borders of the current West Bank and Gaza Strip with checkpoints and a DMZ.

A withdrawal of Israeli settlements from the West Bank over an ten-year period.

Jerusalem becomes an international city, administrated by UN. Both Israel and Palestine can have their capital there. Free access for Jews, Muslims, and Christians to the Temple Mount and other sacred sites.

If the Palestinians reject this plan, they give up any claims to Israeli territory whatsoever.

[tinnypriv]

1. Er, the Golan is Syrian

Slight difference.

[bluesoul]

3. Overdrawal over a ten year period of time?

LOL yeah that's a fair deal allright..

[JohnLocke]

6. OK, two years. Any other problems?

[Gimel]

11. The plan for UN in Jerusalem

This was rejected by Jordan and Israel long ago. The UN isn't a government of any land. Cannot take over in Jerusalem. NO way.

[Muddleoftheroad]

16. No way

There is no way Israel will give up Jerusalem, nor should it.

[Violet_Crumble]

25. Actually, it was a good plan...

And seeing everyone is aware that the UN isn't a government of any land, I'm not sure what yr trying to argue here. Jerusalem was never intended to be part of Israel or a Palestinian state, which I guess is due to it being considered a holy place by all three Semitic religions. The original plan for an international city appears to have shown more concern for the rights of the citizens of Jerusalem regardless of whether they were Jewish or Arab than the Israeli government has shown since it annexed the entire city...

Here's something for you to read...

The view has been held that the Commission's plan envisages a complete separation of Jerusalem from the political life and authority of the adjoining States. In fact, the Commission's plan, based on the present division of the City, leaves to the governments of the adjoining States virtually all normal powers of government within the Arab and Jewish parts of Jerusalem respectively and makes it possible for them to retain or alter the present local administrations without hindrance from outside. Provision is made, however, for limited measures designed to protect the proper interests of the international community in Jerusalem and to facilitate peaceful relations and normal intercourse between the authorities and inhabitants of the Arab and Jewish parts of the divided City. Nor is it intended by the plan directly or indirectly to deprive any inhabitants of the area of Jerusalem of their nationality. The plan, on the contrary, assumes that the inhabitants retain the nationality which they now possess. No article of the plan prevents the inhabitants from enjoying all the rights and privileges or from performing all the duties which such nationality entails. In particular nothing infringes their right to vote or their eligibility for all public offices of their State, or interferes with their duties to conform to its laws and to submit to the jurisdiction of its courts, or to fulfil their military and fiscal obligations.

It has been asserted that the plan is fundamentally opposed to the principles of democracy and the United Nations Charter in that it seeks to force a particular political regime on the inhabitants of the area of Jerusalem. In this connexion, it has been contended that the Commission proposes to make the Jerusalem area a non-self-governing territory. This is another misunderstanding of the plan, which neither imposes any political regime nor deprives the inhabitants of their right of self-government. The plan is based on the situation as it now exists and leaves to the inhabitants of the Arab and Jewish parts of the area of Jerusalem and to the Governments presently concerned with their administration the decision as to what political regime shall prevail in each part.

http://domino.un.org/unispalselect.nsf/0/d1eab3a8c5edd39d802563b90057406f?OpenDocument

Violet...

[BlackFrancis]

12. one..

Israel has zero credibility in following through on it's obligations as scheduled.

[Gimel]

13. On schedule

Not entirely true. The schedule becomes somewhat disrupted by attacks that are not part of the plan. The agreement to withdraw from Sinai was carried out on schedule.

[Jim Sagle]

24. Pot. Kettle. Black.

[JohnLocke]

5. Sorry

My goof. I wrote this in a hurry.

[Gimel]

19. Sheba Farms

This is the area contested. Lebanon claims that Israel did not return this area when the IDF pulled out of all of the security zone. Israel says this land was captured from Syria. The UN agrees. Lebanon is still sending missions there, capturing and killing three Israeli soldiers three years ago on the Israeli side of the border.

Seems like Lebanon should give up all claims.

[tinnypriv]

22. Eh?

And this has what to do with my post?

Is Shebba in the Golan now? :shrug:

[Gimel]

29. It concerns Lebanon

Lebanon CLAIMS that Israel has NOT returned all it's land. Sheba is not in the Golan, but in close proximity. Sheba belonged to Syria. Now it is Israeli. Your post was a comment on the point in John's plan. I clarified it. Okay?

[meegbear]

2. I thought it was a 'fence'?

Now it's a barrier. Why don't they just call it The Wall II and get it over with.

[JohnLocke]

4. A Short History

OK -- History Lesson

Berlin Wall -- Keep East Berliners IN
Israel Wall -- Keep Suicide Bombers OUT

[BlackFrancis]

7. right..

That's why it's in the exact shape of the Allon Plan to break the Palestinians into cantons so that Israel can keep the West Bank.

Any "security" benefit is secondary.

[JohnLocke]

8. Oh, puh-leese.

[BlackFrancis]

9. have you ever seen the thing?

Can you think of any logical security reason you would build a "fence" in a circle surrounding and breaking up Palestinian territory? Why are they putting Palestinians on the wrong side of it in places?

Sharon himself is the architect of the settlements. When different MP's questioned the wisdom of the far flung settlements he said "I put them where they are for a reason". This isn't some conspiracy, it's open Israeli policy.

[bluesoul]

10. Even many (if not most) in Israel

and even among the IDF see it as a big mistake. Not some posters here though...

[Gimel]

20. Support for the wall/barrier

Support is strong in Israel for the separation barrier. It can be called by various names, and it does serve as a separation structure, and looks like a wall in places and a fence in other places.


It is not a mistake.

[tinnypriv]

23. Gimel happens to be right on this one

Understandably, support for the fence-wall is pretty high - over 70% last I checked.

[Name removed]

27. Deleted message

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

[bluesoul]

28. LOL!

Brainshrub :yourock:

[JohnLocke]

30. I though this was interesting by-product of the wall

http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/in_depth/photo_gallery/3108635.stm

[bluesoul]

31. Interesting indeed

Like this from the same article about the wall:

A recent report by a group of 20 aid agencies has drawn public attention to one of the little reported aspects of the continuing conflict between Israel and the Palestinians – checkpoints and roadblocks in the West Bank and Gaza.
The report said these travel restrictions – some of them in place since the beginning of the intifada in 2000 - limit Palestinians' access to schools and medical care, increase frustration and destroy hopes for peace.

[beanball]

14. Where is Ray-Gun

when we need him?"Mr.Sharon tear down that wall."

[brainshrub]

26. You mean short "Revisionist" History Lesson

If it was meant to keep bombers out, the wall would be getting built behind the green line. If you look at a map, you will see that this wall is definately designed to keep the Palestinians in.

[Muddleoftheroad]

15. It's both

In places it's an actual wall. In others, it's an actual fence, depending on what's nearby.

[Suzette]

17. Just keepin' it real...

some posters won't be able to retain those 2 facts at one time

[BrokenSegue]

18. According to Who?

How would your plan work?
According to who would they loose their claims to the land?
Isreal?
The UN?
Common Law?
Who would decide to accept the plan?
The Palestinian Authorities consent doesn't mean much. Surely some Palestinians would dissent and continue their strife for land.
Your plan look scarily like N. Korea and S.Korea, without same capital. What makes you think a buffer will stop the conflict. How can you control what type of government the Palestinians establish? What could you do to stop a Religous Dictator?
If it were that simple it'd be done allready.
You still didn't take settlements into account. Not all of them NEED to be removed just ones too close to soon to be palestinian land, right?
Anyways kudos for your effort.

[Gimel]

21. The DMZ

Of course this is going to take up space. That means "stealing land" so it is essentially what is being done.

The last point about giving up claims to Israeli territory should be part of the deal, not the safty catch.