|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
OP
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1081998818390
Quote:
Apr. 16, 2004 4:01 | Updated Apr. 18, 2004 17:16
Prime Minister Sharon's plan for unilateral disengagement
By JPOST.COM STAFF
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's aide, Government Secretary Yisrael Maimon, faxed copies of the prime minister's unilateral disengagement plan, as coordinated with US President George W. Bush, to Likud Ministers on Thursday ahead of the crucial Likud vote on May 2.
The letter's main points were leaked to Yediot Ahronot's website Ynet on Thursday night. What follows is a direct translation of the document leaked to Ynet.
1. General Principles
Israel is committed to the peace process and is aiming to reach a negotiated agreement on the basis of two states for two peoples: the State of Israel as a Jewish state and a Palestinian state for the Palestinian people. This is in keeping with President Bush's vision for a two state solution. Israel believes that it must act to improve the current reality. Israel has come to the realization that at present there is no Palestinian partner with whom to proceed along a bilateral peace process. In this light, a unilateral plan of disengagement has been prepared with the following considerations in mind:
A. The current situation is untenable. In order to move beyond the current situation, it is incumbent on Israel to proceed along a path not reliant on Palestinian cooperation.
B. The disengagement plan will lead to an improved security reality, in the long term at least.
C. In any future final status arrangement ,there will be no Israeli settlement activity in the Gaza Strip. On the other hand, it is clear that there will be areas in Judea and Samaria that will be part of the State of Israel, and there will be civilian communities, security zones and other places in which Israel has further interest inside those areas.
D. The withdrawal from the Gaza Strip and from an area in northern Samaria (four settlements and military installations in their vicinity) will diminish the friction with the Palestinian population and has the potential to improve the living conditions of the Palestinians living there and the Palestinian economy.
E. Israel hopes that the Palestinians will succeed in taking advantage of the disengagement process in order to break out of the cycle of violence and reenter a process of dialogue.
F. The disengagement process will negate the force of the arguments regarding Israel's responsibility for the residents of the Gaza Strip.
G. The disengagement process does not detract from the existing agreements between Israel and the Palestinians. The relevant existing agreements will continue to be in effect. At the time when there is visible evidence of a readiness, ability and implementation on the Palestinian side of fighting terrorism and the implementation of reforms on the basis of the road map peace plan, it will be possible to return to the path of negotiations and dialogue.
2. Main points of the plan
A. The Gaza Strip
1. Israel will withdraw from the Gaza Strip, including all the existing Israeli settlements, and will redeploy in territory outside of the Strip. The withdrawal excludes a military presence in the area along the border area between the Gaza Strip and Egypt called 'The Philadelphia Corridor' as will be detailed later.
2. Once the process is complete, there will be no permanent land-based Israeli military or civilian presence in the Gaza Strip.
3. A fact emanating from this move will be the lack of a basis to the claim that the Gaza Strip is occupied territory.
B. Judea and Samaria
1. Israel will withdraw from an area in northern Samaria (Ganim, Kadim, Homesh and Sanur) and all permanent military installations in this area, and will redeploy outside this area.
2. Once the process is complete, there will be no permanent Israeli military or civilian presence in northern Samaria.
3. The process will allow for a continuous Palestinian territory in the area of northern Samaria.
4. Israel will improve the transportation infrastructure in Judea and Samaria with an eye to allow continuous Palestinian transportation in Judea and Samaria.
5. The process will ease Palestinian economic and commercial activity in Judea and Samaria.
C. The Security Fence
Israel will continue building the Security Fence in accordance with the decisions of the government. The route of the Security Fence will take humanitarian concerns into consideration.
3. The security reality following the withdrawal
A. The Gaza Strip
1. Israel will supervise and secure the outer envelope of the geographical land mass, will exclusively control the airspace of the Gaza Strip, and will continue to carry out military operations in the territorial waters of the Gaza Strip.
2. The Gaza Strip will be demilitarized of weapons whose existence are not in accordance with existing agreements between the two sides.
3.Israel retains the basic right to self defense, including preemptive steps and response, with the use of force, against threats emanating from this area.
B. Judea and Samaria
1. With the removal of the settlements in northern Samaria (Ganim, Kadim, Homesh and Sanur) there will be no permanent Israeli military presence in the area.
2. Israel retains the basic right to self defense, including preemptive steps and response, with the use of force, against threats emanating from this area.
3. The existing security activity will continue in the remaining areas of Judea and Samaria. However, if circumstances allow, Israel will consider reducing its activity in Palestinian cities.
4. Israel will work towards reducing the number of checkpoints in Judea and Samaria as a whole.
4. Military installations and infrastructure in the Gaza Strip and northern Samaria
These will be dismantled, except for those that Israel decides to keep for the decision of another body.
The nature of security assistance to the Palestinians
Israel agrees, following coordination, to allow security consultations, assistance and training for the Palestinian security forces, for the purposes of fighting terrorism and maintaining public order, to be given by American, British and Egyptian authorities, or other experts, in accordance with agreements reached with Israel. Israel stands firm on the principle that there will be no foreign military presence in the Gaza Strip and/ or Judea and Samaria, without coordination and without Israeli agreement.
6. The border area between the Gaza Strip and Egypt (The Philadelphia Corridor)
In the first phase, Israel will continue to maintain a military presence along the length of the border line between the Gaza Strip and Egypt (The Philadelphia Corridor). This military presence is an essential security presence. In certain areas, it may be necessary to physically enlarge the area in which military operations are conducted. In the future, Israel will consider the possibility of withdrawing from this area.
Any withdrawal from this area will be conditioned, amongst other things, on the security reality and on the level of cooperation granted by Egypt in the creation of a more trustworthy solution. If and when the conditions for a withdrawal of this area arise, Israel will be ready to consider the possibility of the establishment of a seaport and an airport in the Gaza Strip, in accordance with agreements reached with Israel.
7. Israeli settlements
Israel will aim to maintain the assets of Israeli settlements. The transfer of Israeli economic activities for use by Palestinians includes the possibility of expanding Palestinian commercial activity. Israel suggests the establishment of an international body (along the lines of the AHLC) which will be agreed upon between Israel and the United States, that will take possession of the settlements, take calculations and make assessments of their overall commercial value. Israel retains the right to ask compensation to the value of all the economic assets that remain in areas it withdraws from.
8. Infrastructure and civilian arrangements
The infrastructures of water, electricity, waste management and communications serving the Palestinians will remain in place. Israel will work towards leaving in place the similar infrastructures present in the Israeli settlements it withdraws from. As a rule, Israel will allow the continuation of the supply of water, electricity, gas and petrol to the Palestinians, in accordance with existing agreements. The existing agreements, including water and electro-magnetic fields, will remain in effect.
9. The activities of international civilian organizations
Israel sees positively the continued activities of international humanitarian organizations working towards civil development, and who are assisting the Palestinian population. Israel will coordinate with these humanitarian organizations to assist their activities.
10. General arrangements
As a rule, the general arrangements currently in place between Israel and the Palestinians will remain in effect. These arrangements include, amongst others:
A. The entrance of Palestinian laborers into Israel in accordance with existing criteria.
B. The flow of goods between the Gaza Strip, Judea and Samaria, Israel and overseas.
C. Monetary policy.
D. Taxation and customs arrangements.
E. Postal and communications arrangements.
In the long term, and in accordance with Israeli interests of increased Palestinian economic independence, Israel aspires to diminish the number of Palestinian laborers entering Israel. Israel will support the development of commercial sources in the Gaza Strip and in Palestinian areas of Judea and Samaria.
11. The Erez Industrial Zone
The Erez Industrial Zone, which exists inside the Gaza Strip, employs about 4, 000 Palestinian laborers. The continuing activity of this industrial zone is first and foremost a clear and significant Palestinian interest. Israel will consider maintaining the status quo of the industrial zone under two conditions:
A. The existence of suitable security arrangements.
B. A clear recognition by the international community that the continuing operation of the industrial zone under its present conditions will not be viewed as a continuation of Israeli control of the area.
Or, the industrial zone will be handed over to the responsibility of agreed upon Palestinian or international authorities. Israel will consider, together with Egypt, the possible of establishing a joint industrial zone on the border of the Gaza Strip, Egypt and Israel.
12. International crossings
A. The international crossing between the Gaza Strip and Egypt:
1. The existing arrangements at the crossing will remain in place.
2. Israel is interested in moving the crossing to a "tri-border" point, about 2 kilometers from its current location. The process will be carried out with Egyptian coordination. This will allow an increase in the hours of operation at the crossing.
B. The international crossings between Judea and Samaria and Jordan; the existing arrangements in place at the crossings will continue to be in place.
13. The Erez crossing
The Erez crossing will be moved into the territory of Israel at a timetable agreed upon separately.
14. Timetable.
The process of withdrawal is planned to end at the end of 2005. Stages of withdrawal and the detailed timetable will be brought to auspices of the United States.
15. Conclusion
Israel expects wide international support for the disengagement process. This support is crucial in order to bring the Palestinians to implement their responsibilities in the areas of fighting terrorism and carrying out reforms according to the road map peace plan. Only then can both sides return to the path of negotiations.
<sub>Will Eisner's last work - The Plot: The Secret Story of the Protocols of the Elders of ZionRDCW Profile"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000
5000+ posts
|
|
OP
5000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2003
Posts: 5,000 |
Here is Jordan's reaction to President Bush's backing of the Israeli disengagement plan:
http://aolsvc.news.aol.com/news/article.adp?id=20040419185509990001
Quote:
Updated: 05:19 PM EDT
Jordan's King Postpones Meeting With Bush
Abdullah Wants Clarification on America's Mideast Position
By JAMAL HALABY, AP
AMMAN, Jordan (April 20) - The king of Jordan, one of America's closest allies in the Middle East, postponed a White House meeting with President Bush this week, questioning the U.S. commitment to ending the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The snub from King Abdullah II is the most recent expression of Arab anger at Bush for endorsing an Israeli proposal to withdraw unilaterally from all of the Gaza Strip but from only parts of the West Bank. That would leave Jewish settlements on some West Bank land claimed by the Palestinians.
Abdullah is under pressure at home to demonstrate his U.S. ties can further Arab positions on the Israeli-Palestinian question as well as on the U.S.-led occupation of Iraq.
The White House played down any hint of friction with Jordan, saying the Wednesday meeting with Abdullah was rescheduled to the first week of May ''because of developments in the region.''
''The king decided this week it was better for him to be in Jordan and we understand that,'' National Security Council spokesman Sean McCormack said.
On Tuesday, Bush press secretary Scott McClellan told reporters the president did not feel slighted or offended by the king's move.
''We respect King Abdullah's decision,'' McClellan, traveling with Bush to Buffalo, N.Y., told reporters aboard Air Force One.
McClellan said the changed plans were a result of ''domestic issues'' in Jordan.
Abdullah returned home Tuesday from a tour of United States, where he had been meeting in California with businesspeople and information technology experts and delivering lectures about Mideast issues.
Government spokeswoman Asma Khader told The Associated Press that Jordan wanted a White House meeting but felt more time was needed to prepare for it because ''there had been urgent developments since last week, when President Bush made remarks on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict and that necessitated more consultations with the American administration, to have it clarify its positions on Mideast issues.''
A statement from the palace late Monday said Abdullah had instructed his foreign minister to remain in Washington to continue discussions with officials in the Bush administration and to prepare for the king's return to the United States in May.
The Abdullah-Bush meeting would not be held ''until discussions and deliberations are concluded with officials in the American administration to clarify the American position on the peace process and the final situation in the Palestinian territories, especially in light of the latest statements by officials in the American administration,'' according to the palace statement.
Bush's statement after a White House meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon last week constituted a historic shift in U.S. policy, and Palestinian leaders accused the administration of undercutting the possibility of a negotiated settlement.
Jordan is considered a key moderate ally of the United States and is one of only two of Israel's Arab neighbors to have a peace treaty with the Jewish state. But some Jordanian citizens question their government's relationship with the United States, which they accuse of siding with Israel against the Palestinians.
Jordan is especially concerned that a final peace settlement would be at its expense if refugees were dumped into the kingdom, exhausting its meager resources and disturbing its demographic balance. Roughly half of Jordan's 5.1 million population is composed of Palestinian families who fled or were forced out of their homes in 1948 and 1967 Mideast wars.
The rift between the Bush administration and its moderate Arab allies over Bush's statement on Israeli settlements is one of the worst to emerge in years - and has exacerbated the already tense relations between the United States and Arab countries over the war in Iraq.
Arab leaders have accused the administration of essentially taking away from the Palestinians their primary negotiating levers in any final peace deal - the disputes over whether Israel must remove all settlements from the West Bank, and whether Israel must allow back some Palestinian refugees.
Bush embraced Israeli rejection of any ''right of return'' for Palestinian refugees after his meeting with Sharon. Tensions also were inflamed in the Arab world by an Israeli helicopter strike that killed the Hamas leader Abdel Aziz Rantisi.
On Saturday, Palestinian Foreign Minister Nabil Shaath, also canceled a trip to Washington for meetings in the wake of the Bush announcement on settlements. Secretary of State Colin Powell had been expecting to meet with Shaath on Wednesday.
Last week, Jordanian Foreign Minister Marwan Muasher said his government wants assurances that Washington is still committed to an Arab-Israeli settlement based on exchanging land-for-peace and creating a Palestinian state by next year in line with the U.S.-backed road map peace plan.
The palace statement said the king sent a letter to Bush on April 8 in which he stressed the Jordanian position regarding ways to end the Palestinian-Israeli conflict through implementing the internationally backed ''road map.''
In his letter, Abdullah said an Israeli withdrawal from Gaza must be part of the peace plan and not an alternative to it.
Despite the dramatic step of postponing a meeting with the president, the palace statement said, ''Jordan sees that the contents of his majesty's letter to Bush comprises significant elements for the continuation of discussions between the American and Jordanian sides.''
Relations between the two countries also were close under Abdullah's late father, King Hussein. The United States is Jordan's largest Western aid donor, with contributions estimated at $456 million this year. The United States gave Jordan $1.1 billion last year to offset the kingdom's losses because of the war on Iraq.
04-20-04 1203EDT
Why are they acting like children with this all or nothing game? It's over. Israel is done playing. Jordan is actually a part of Israel anyway. It belonged to the tribes of Reuven, Shimon, and half the tribe of Menashe. It's time for Jordan to grow up, take back the so called palistinians, who are actually mostly Jordanians, and shut the fuck up.
<sub>Will Eisner's last work - The Plot: The Secret Story of the Protocols of the Elders of ZionRDCW Profile"Well, as it happens, I wrote the damned SOP," Illescue half snarled, "and as of now, you can bar those jackals from any part of this facility until Hell's a hockey rink! Is that perfectly clear?!" - Dr. Franz Illescue - Honor Harrington: At All Costs"I don't know what I'm do, or how I do, I just do." - Alexander Ovechkin</sub>
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,230 Likes: 1
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,230 Likes: 1 |
I doubt the Pals who were forced out of their homes where they had been living for generations would agree.
Isn't it the same as if someone gave Native Americans gunships and tanks, who forced people out of Arizona and Texas and told them to shut the fuck up and live in Mexico because you're all Mexicans anyway?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949
2500+ posts
|
|
2500+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 2,949 |
There's one problem with your analogy:
The Jews were forced out of their homes in Israel long before the Palestinians - first they were exiled by the Babylonians, then by the Romans. That's not just Biblical text talking. That's historical fact.
So wouldn't that make the Jews the more accurat equivalent to the American Indians, instead of the Palestinians?
"Well when I talk to people I don't have to worry about spelling." - wannabuyamonkey
"If Schumacher’s last effort was the final nail in the coffin then Year One would’ve been the crazy guy who stormed the graveyard, dug up the coffin and put a bullet through the franchise’s corpse just to make sure." -- From a review of Darren Aronofsky & Frank Miller's "Batman: Year One" script
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
|
|
Officially "too old for this shit" 15000+ posts
Joined: May 2003
Posts: 43,951 Likes: 6 |
Darknight is correct. The Palestinian tale of an ancient homeland stolen by Jews is dramatic and affecting, but it is a myth. The truth is that there was never an Arab country of Palestine and that Palestinian Arabs were never a nation. Prior to the re-establishment of Israel, Syria was considered the homeland of Palestinian Muslims, not the area around Jerusalem (ie, the West Bank). What we think of as "Palestine" was stagnant and mostly barren. Its Arab population was small, nomadic and declining. Arab leaders even went so far as to reject the notion of a unique Palestinian Arab identity, and used the term "Palestinian" to refer to the region´s Jewish residents. With Jewish development, however, came economic opportunity and better living conditions, which, in turn, made the area "attractive" to Arabs. Finally, it should be noted that there are valid philosophical and strategic reasons for providing arms to Israel. The middle east is very important region strategically for numerous reasons. "Israel is the only country in the Middle East with true free elections, a free press, freedom of religion, protection for individuals and minorities and other safeguards typical of a free society." http://www.aipac.org/facts2.PDF As a general rule, Israel engages in military action only when attacked by others. On the other hand, many Arab leaders have openly expressed a desire to obliterate Israel. For example, last June, Palestinian television broadcast a sermon in a Gaza mosque in which the imam, Ibrahim Madi, made the following statement: "God willing, this unjust state Israel will be erased." Many of these same "leaders" express similar sentiments towards the United States. As such, it behooves us greatly to support the only nation in that region whose values and beliefs strongly mirror our own.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,230 Likes: 1
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,230 Likes: 1 |
Support is one thing. I support the state of Israel, and Zionist ideals of a Jewish homeland. I support Israeli security, too. I see no reason why Israel should hand back the Golan Heights while it is still at war with Syria and Lebanon. Egypt is at peace with Israel (hurrah for Jimmy Carter): Egypt got the Sinai Peninsula back.
But the idea theat there were only a few Arab tribes in Palestine is just not right. It would be hard to explain that to the hundreds and thousands of refugees sitting on Israel's borders.
Some people argue that Jordan, Egypt and Lebanon should absorb those people. The same argument could be mounted for the US and Haiti.
As for the overthrow of the Jewish kingdom by the Romans in the 50s BC or whenever it was, that is not within contemporary memory. It happened over 2000 years ago. Go blame the Roman Empire, and sue it in the world court. In comparison, the removal of Palestinians happened within living memory.
I do understand Israeli frustration in dealing with a dysfunctional PA. But part of the Authority's dysfucntion comes from trying to manage a bankrupt economy with extremely high unemployment, population dislocation and extremists with grudges to settle.
Assisting Palestine in trying to get an operating economy, reducing unemployment and security should be a paramount consideration for Israel. Germany and France are now friends and partners after centuries of war, as strong partners in Europe. And who did that? The US, post WW2.
If people in Palestine have nothing to live for, then they will be quite happy to die in terrorising Israel.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 |
a couple of things wrong with those assumptions, 1 the French are cowards of course they made up, they in general lack back bone, 2 germany and france can exist seperately for the palestinians to get what they want Israel cannot exist.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 194
100+ posts
|
|
100+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 194 |
Is it reasonable to assume that the reason so many Middle eastern towleheads have a problem with the US is your funding Israel?
Or would you feel happier thinking that they find your dress sense offensive?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 |
its a known fact that why they dislike us, we wont let them destroy Israel and it really irks them, but thats the good thing about the US we arent in a popularity contest but doing what is right....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 194
100+ posts
|
|
100+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 194 |
Quote:
britneyspearsatemyshorts said:
its a known fact that why they dislike us, we wont let them destroy Israel and it really irks them, but thats the good thing about the US we arent in a popularity contest but doing what is right....
If you're not in a popularity contest, perhaps you should stop whining about the rest of the world hating you, then.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 |
who was whining? im proud of the fact that we are of high moral standards, you the guy who cry babies about us this and us that, if we have a problem we take care of it.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 |
you have alot of US envy issues dont you?
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 194
100+ posts
|
|
100+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 194 |
Don't make me fucking laugh.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 |
its actually quite obvious, but thats to be understood....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 194
100+ posts
|
|
100+ posts
Joined: Jun 2003
Posts: 194 |
Perhaps you could try answering the points that are raised instead of coming out with cheap digs and then changing the subject when something's mentioned you can't answer?
Shutting up wqould be good as well, but that's probably too much to hope for.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
|
|
Educator to comprehension impaired (JLA, that is you) 50000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2000
Posts: 53,734 |
cheap digs? i agreed with you the extremist hate the US because we wont allow Israel to be destroyed your the one who went on the insult spree.....pot meet kettle.....
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
|
|
brutally Kamphausened 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2001
Posts: 25,011 Likes: 31 |
When Israel did a similar pullout of Southern Lebanon in 2000 (previously established in the early 1980's to halt artillery shelling and terror raids into Northern Israel), you would have expected the Arabs/Palestinians to take Israel's pullout at that time as a movement toward peace, and reciprocate.
But instead, it was the beginning of the Intifada (or "uprising"), done with a belief that Israel's withdrawal was a sign of weakness, which simply encouraged further intimidation and terrorism of Israel, to try and force Israelis from the West Bank and Gaza as well.
Regardless of any token lip service by Palestinian leadership otherwise, the Palestinian goal was and remains the complete annihilation of Israel.
In Yasser Arafat's words: "To drive them into the sea".
So I don't have any confidence that withdrawing from Gaza will bring Israel any goodwill from the Arab side.
~
Regarding Israel's lands being "taken from" Palestinians, and the need to "restore" a Palestinian homeland: as others here have already said, there never was a Palestinian homeland.
The region was a largely unpopulated and undeveloped backwater of the Ottoman Empire from 1516-1918, largely a trade route that people traveled through on their way to somewhere else (the Ottoman Turks fought on the side of Germany and the Austro-Hungarian Empire in World War I, and lost, and their Ottoman territories, all except for Turkey itself, were divided between the British and French Empires. What are now Israel, the occupied territories and Jordan, became a British colonial region called "The British Mandate")
Jewish settlers arrived in Jerusalem and the surrounding region in the late 19th/early 20th century, forming settlements, and developing desert lands into fertile farms and other industry (what was then called "the desert miracle")
No one even thought to settle there or develop the land before the Jews arrived. The economy developed by the Jews drew Arabs into the region seeking work.
When Israel was given its independence by the U.N. in 1947, and war began on Israel (its war of independence) Egypt seized the Gaza area, and Jordan seized and annexed the West Bank.
Quote:
( population statistics, from National Geographic, July 1972 issue: )
.
British Palestine, 1922:
Jews: 84,000
Arabs: 557,000
.
British Palestine, 1947:
Jews 609,000
Arabs: 1,076,000
.
State of Israel, post-independence, 1948:
Jews 879,000
Arabs: 140,000
( the other Arabs that had been in Israel, fled before the 1947-1948 war; these non-combatants were not driven out by the Israelis, and ended up permanently in refugee camps in West Bank, Gaza, Lebanon, Jordan, Syria, and surrounding nations. The 20% of Israel's present-day population, Arabs who did not flee and chose to remain in Israel, are citizens of Israel, and vote in Israeli elections )
.
State of Israel, 1971:
Jews: 2,561,000
Arabs: 404,000
(Arabs in occupied West bank, Gaza and Sinai: 1,000,000 )
State of Israel, 2000
Jews: 4,900,000
Arabs: 1,200,000
Quote:
( From TIME magazine, April 22, 2002:
Palestinian population in occupied territories and surrounding nations: )
.
Quote:
Gaza:
total Palestinian population: 1,022,000
853,000 of them refugees (460,000 of these in camps)
.
West Bank:
total Palestinian poprulation: 1,545,000
608,000 of them refugees (163,000 in camps)
.
Jewish settlers in West Bank and Gaza combined:
214,000
.
other neighboring countries:
Lebanon: 383,000 refugees ( 215,000 of these in camps )
.
Syria: 392,000 refugees ( 110,000 of these in camps )
.
Jordan: 1,640,000 refugees ( 288,000 of these in camps )
Israel (due to relentless invasions and terrorism from these neighboring areas) in the 1967 war annexed and continues to occupy the West Bank and Gaza.
(It should also be pointed out that Israel captured these areas in the 1956 war and immediately gave them back. But since they continued to be used for continued terrorism and war on the Israeli state, Israel elected to keep them after the 1967 war).
Israel began settlements in the West Bank and Gaza in the late 1970's, a policy which I don't agree with. Israel should eliminate its settlers and move them back into Israel proper. Military annexation of these areas I agree with the necessity of. But not settlements, which equates to colonization of the West Bank and Gaza.
If Israel did so, I think it would eliminate the one area of Israeli policy that cannot be argued to be defensive and necessary.
But I'm sure others would disagree with my assessment of Israeli settlements.
~
Here's a link to a series of maps, that really help to visualize the history of Israel, from the days of the Ottoman Empire up through each stage of Israeli/Arab conflict up through 2000.
http://www.jajz-ed.org.il/100/maps/ottoman.html
There is a separate map for each significant event, that you can follow chronologically.
I find these maps tremendously helpful in visualizing Israel's sometimes complicated partitions of land, and the nature of invasions from neighboring Arab countries. They are far less complicated when you can visualize them.
And with the formation of Israel in the 1947 partition, it is quite clear that a holy war in the name of Islam was declared, in the accompanying text, quoted from Arab leaders.
Last edited by Dave the Wonder Boy; 2004-04-24 4:05 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
|
|
terrible podcaster 15000+ posts
Joined: Sep 2002
Posts: 17,801 |
Damn Lawrence of Arabia for starting this trouble! 
It's hard to say which side to take on this. Ideals aside, military posturing aside, there are real people stuck in the imddle of this. That's what I'm concerned about.
And it's hard to decide this based on religious convictions, if you're having trouble making up your mind. Most Christians believe in the preservation of a Jewish political state called Israel, and I for one am in agreement with that. But at the same time, there are many Palestinian Christians, which I think many of us in the US overlook, as many I know think the entire Middle East is populated by militant extremist Muslims who all hate us and want us all dead. Same thing in Iraq and in fact a lot of places in the Middle East. Do we choose to advocate a position that will prolong a conflict that takes the lives of not just civilians, but people we claim are our 'brothers and sisters in Christ'? And what about the Jewish civilians? If we believe Paul's words that Christianity is the fulfillment of OT Judaism, don't we owe it to these people to protect them long enough to share with them what we believe?
Oh, sorry - I forgot sharing one's faith is a PC no-no.  
But seriously. The only thing that upsets me as much as hearing about how American men and women are dying in Iraq and Afghanistan is hearing how many innocent people are being massacred as collateral damage in a war that ultimately will bring them negligible benefits at best. The Palestinians can't hope to win, and the Israelis can't hope to completely silence the suicide bombers and relentless yapping of clerics whose own more orthodox peers don't endorse their radical policies. (By the way, if Muslim clerics claim to be soldiers in a holy war, does that mean they're fair game for the soldiers carrying rifles instead of the Koran?) This is not a war either side can completely win, and I honestly don't know what sort of diplomatic solution would bring peace to all these people.
As a Christian, I hold out one hope, however. I believe that God is returning - physically, tangibly returning - to this planet someday, and when that happens, nothing else will matter.
But until that happens, what do we do down here? 
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896
10000+ posts
|
|
10000+ posts
Joined: Oct 2001
Posts: 14,896 |
Is it wrong that I get a very different image when I see the thread title?
MisterJLA is RACKing awesome.
|
|
|
|
|
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,230 Likes: 1
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
|
|
Banned from the DCMBs since 2002. 15000+ posts
Joined: Jan 2002
Posts: 15,230 Likes: 1 |
Some might argue that there is a fucking involved.
Dave, there may not have been an historical Palestinian homeland in the sense of an independent state, but there was a Palestinian home to the hundreds of thousands of disenfranchised who sit upon the borders waiting to return. Just because a place is a backwater (and it is - this would be easier to understand if the argument was over the south of France) doesn't mean its not someone's home, where they raised their children, built a life and formed bonds with their community.
If there were only a small amount of people involved who were kicked out fo a backwater, then this wouldn't be such a global issue. With the Palestinian population boom, it involves millions of people now. Even Israel acknowledges that Gaza and the West Bank are "occupied" - that is, foreign territories.
Now these millions want their own independent homeland. I don't see that as unreasonable, provided that there is peaceful co-existence afforded if necessary by security.
|
|
|
|
|
