Peace Talks - Will Israel Really Withdraw?

You are correct. At the same time American influence in the middle east is waning. Israel will either collapse or go to war. I think war is the most likely outcome.

 

It is absolutely provable. Perhaps the greatest example of diplomacy was the Cuban Missile Crisis where the United States and the former USSR were on the very brink of nuclear war. It was diplomacy that ultimately resolved the matter when the USSR agreed to remove the nuclear missiles from Cuba in exchange for a promise by the United States to never again attempt to overthrow the government of Cuba and to remove our nuclear missiles in Turkey that threatened the USSR.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cuban_Missile_Crisis

There are literally hundreds of historical examples of diplomacy preventing wars and yet none was more important than the prevention of an all-out nuclear war between the USA and USSR in 1962.

 

Your example of diplomacy is inapposite. The Cuban Missile Crisis was not a dispute based on contested claims over territory. Some territorial disputes can be resolved by diplomacy and some can't.

The territorial dispute between Cyprus and Turkey does not lend itself to diplomatic resolution. The territorial dispute between Armenia and Azerbaijan over Nagorno-Karabakh does not lend itself to resolution by diplomacy. The Indian-Pakistani dispute over Kashmir cannot be resolved by diplomacy. The Chinese-Indian dispute over Arunachal Pradesh cannot be resolved by diplomacy.

The Israeli-Palestinian dispute cannot be resolved by diplomacy because the two competing ideals and nationalisms cannot coexist. One must triumph and one must be defeated.

 

Virtually all long standing borders between nations were ultimately determined by treaties achieved through diplomacy. The US-Canadian border, for example, had numerous treaties related to establishing it as it developed over time.

 

The US/Canadian border was established by two parties, one of which did not see the matter as an existential question. For the British Empire the US/Canada border was just business.

For the Israelis and Palestinians the dispute is existential. A Jewish State cannot coexist with the Palestinian Right of Return because Palestinian demographics would swamp the Jewish State, and terminate its Jewish character.

Even if the PA reached agreement with Israel on the borders of Palestine there is no evidence that Hamas would accept such imposed borders.

 

Israel has never addressed the Right of Return for individuals that were citizens of Israel based upon birth and residency in 1947-1949. Instead of addressing this violation of the Rights of the Individual Israel has simply denied the existance of the Right.

Of course the issue can be addressed and resolved. To believe that the tyranny of government (i.e. the violation of natural Rights) is mandatory for the existance of a State fails based upon logical deduction.

 

So the argument is that an aparthied state cannot exist in Israel if all people that have a ligitimate claim of citizenship are allowed equality in the country? We must ask why apartheid is acceptable in Israel when it was unacceptable in S Africa and is unacceptable in other nations? For example I oppose the apartheid State of Jordan which denied Jews that were natural born citizens equality and forced their eviction after the Arab-Israeli War of 1948-49.

Israel has refused to negotiate with Hamas so obviously a diplomatic resolution is not going to be reached between Hamas and Israel. The diplomatic solution must involve all of the concerned parties if it is to succeed.

 

The issue can be addressed and will never be resolved because some Palestinians will never accept the existence of Israel. And the Palestinians who do sign agreements will never suppress the Rejectionists. So my friend I can't agree.

Also, I would like to apologize to you for our private contretemps. But that doesn't mean you are right about the futility of diplomacy in the Israeli/Palestinian dispute.

 

Your argument is hung up on theoretical legalisms. Such arguments don't meet the test of street level reality. The Right of Return means the end of the Jewish State. The Right of Return is existential for Israel. The Jewish identity will end. They will become at best like the Coptic Christians of Egypt. This is where legalisms fall down.

South African whites have the options of emigrating to other predominantly white nations or of adopting the identity of the majority in SA. The Jews of Israel don't have the option of emigrating to other sanctuaries. History has demonstrated that there is no other sanctuary for the Jews in the final analysis.

Israel and Hamas aren't going to negotiate any more than the chickens are going to negotiate with Colonel Sanders. How absurd!

 

Israel and Palestine negotiating reminds me of the treaties between the US and the Sioux Indians. Did the Americans respect their solemn promises given to the Sioux? Of course not. Same thing.

Disputes like the Israeli/Palestinian conflict can only be resolved in the same way the Roman/Carthaginian dispute was resolved.

 

What is the difference between the Palestinians and the Irish Republicans?

 

the partition plan does not take into account the Arab started wars, the borders as they are in 1967 could be acceptable but they wont be, hardly defensible. People should stop demanding stupid things of Israel..

No nation will agree to their own destruction.

 

That's the flaw in the argument of those who call for a hudna. They believe in magic.

 

Well, I guess that settles the matter. There is no reason to have talks between the Jews and Muslims. Let this be settled by war.

 

I agree. Only defeat and diaspora of one side or the other will settle the issue.

 

The Arab-Israeli war of 1948-49 was started by the Zionist Jews with the unilateral Israeli Declaration of Independence based upon UNGA Resolution 181 which was a recommendation that required acceptance by both the Jews and Arabs in Palestine. The Arabs rejected this recommendation by the UN General Assembly.

The 1967 War was started by the invasion of Egypt and Jordan by Israel and followed by the invasion of Syria by Israel. UNSC Resolution 242, which is binding on all UN member nations and was not a recommendation, required Israel to withdraw from the occupied territories.

Israeli settlements outside of the UNGA Resolution 181 territorial boundries by Israel is a violation of th 4th Geneva Conventions.

Ultimately it is the attempted acquisition of territory through acts of war by Israel that are the cause of all of the Arab-Israeli wars. These actions by Israel violate the UN Charter and international law.

Those that would argue that the Arabs are responsible for the wars are making the argument that if someone breaks into your house and you resist with force then you are responsible for starting the fight. Sorry but this is a logical fallacy.

 

Given your repetition of Let this be settled by war. in quite a few threads, kinda makes one wonder if you are the CEO of a company producing military weapons!

 

If I can reduce this to simplistic terms; there is conflict for a reason, and the reason is ultimately Israel's intransigence and total refusal to address the settler and occupation question. Remove the reasons for conflict and the Palestinians thus will have no reason for continuing resistance. It really is that simple.
The only cure for Israel's arrogance is a change to a moderate leadership which has the brains to see beyond the absurd biblical justification for a 'promised land'. Unfortunately we have seen what happens to moderate, thoughtful leaders in Israel...

 

Well you're a scholar and a gentleman.

 

Assume for the sake of argument that everything you've posted is true. It still doesn't make a difference for several reasons.

First, America won't cut Israel off. Period.

Secondly, there will be no internationally approved sanctions against Israel as there were against South Africa. This is a very different world now compared to then.

Thirdly, Pax Americana is ending. American influence is waning in the Middle East. Israel knows it is on its own except for weapons and diplomatic cover.

Fourth, Israel has never been in as big a trouble as it is now. And it can't ever trust the Palestinian promise of land for peace because the Palestinians will not keep their word. And no one exists who can provide a guarantee.

 

This isn't rocket science. All analysis leads to the same conclusion. I don't need to watch the weather report to know which way the wind is blowing.

Btw, the American arms industry is in for some tough times in the coming decade or so. Not a good investment unless you buy real shares cheap.

 

You are a good analyst. Very good. Yes this was Israel's fault. But that no longer matters. Israel missed its window of opportunity for peace.

There's a flaw in your analysis. You rely on one faulty premise that brings the house of cards down. It's a sad truth that the moving finger having writ, moves on.

The Palestinians are part of the Arab world. The Arab world is not frozen in time. What was once possible is no longer possible.

The PA is basically Fatah. Fatah is a product of an era in history. Secular Arabism is one of a long line of ideas the Arabs have tried on and found not a good fit. It has been replaced by Islamism.

Hamas is Islamist. They can engage in kitman or call for a hudna, but they will never accept the existence of a non-Muslim force in the Middle East which is not subordinate to them. Think of the relationship of the Muslims and Copts in Egypt.

Israel will never accept the role of the Copts in Egypt. Think Masada.

Now this would be where you normally say that the Arabs will change over time. That's true, except for one thing. There is no more time.

Pax Americana is over. Look at history. Whenever a hegemon retreats the era of generalized peace ends. Major wars follow. This ain't rocket science.

A new era is upon the world. The old Western dominated era is through. Nuclear weapons technology and ballistic missile technology are and will continue to proliferate like crazy.

Only a fool won't have nuclear weapons and speak in terms of throw weight. With the Iranian and North Korean nuclear break outs the Nuclear NonProliferation Treaty is kaput.

 

Can't anyone answer this question?

 

Except that the Palestinians could have accepted the resolution, they never had a land and the division was quite fair. Not to mention the Jews were not planning to become 2nd rate citizens in a Arab state / Empire like in the past.

in 1967 Egypt and Syria pushed daily threats, send hundreds of thousands of troops to the Israeli border and more, plenty and enough to start a pre-emptive strike.

You would make a poor leader of any nation and lead it in despair with your simple minded right / wrong thinking. Every action and war Israel started ( bar Suez) was to protect it nation from total destruction and a new holocaust.

the Israeli settlements are a shame, but removing them never brings peace, look at gaza Israel removed all settlements but the violence only increased.

 

I think that according to many anti-Israel types this argument is irrelevant because they don't beleive the British had the right to just divide the land up and give it away to non-arabs and the Israeli state itself is completely illegitimate and should've never been created in the first place.

Therefore, the Israelis are to blame, merely because they exist in the first place. Such "black and white" interpretations absolutely destroy the debate because you can't debate against that sort of thinking.