Trending Topics:

‘One state for two people’ — Tom Friedman’s crystal ball

Israel/Palestine
on 126 Comments
Friedman

Friedman

A remarkably realist/detached Tom Friedman suggests that John Kerry’s mission is a “fantasy.” The Times columnist places chief responsibility for the likely failure on the more powerful party to the talks, Israel, saying that Netanyahu lacks the political ability to forge a new, centrist governing coalition to back up Kerry’s ideas, while the Palestinians lack the ability to mount another intifada to force Israel to withdraw.

(So the intifada is suddenly resistance to occupation. Palestinians said as much a long time ago.)

Friedman holds a candle for two states, but if Kerry fails, the secretary of state must “declare the end of the negotiated two-state solution” and then? Israel will face 3 choices, do nothing and face global isolation, withdraw unilaterally (which would also mean global isolation), or “design a new framework of one-state-for-two-people[s].”

Friedman excerpt:

[H]as Israel become so much more powerful than its neighbors that a symmetrical negotiation is impossible, especially when the Palestinians do not seem willing or able to mount another intifada that might force Israel to withdraw? Has the neighborhood around Israel become so much more unstable that any Israeli withdrawal from anywhere is unthinkable? Has the number of Israeli Jews now living in East Jerusalem and the West Bank become so much larger — more than 540,000 — that they are immovable? And has the Palestinian rhetoric on the right of return become so deeply embedded in Palestinian politics? So when you add them all up, it becomes a fantasy to expect any Israeli or Palestinian leader to have the strength to make the huge concessions needed for a two-state solution?..

If and when [these talks fail], Israel, which controls the land, would have to either implement a unilateral withdrawal, live with the morally corrosive and globally isolating implications of a permanent West Bank occupation or design a new framework of one-state-for-two-people.

So that’s where we are: Israelis and Palestinians need to understand that Kerry’s mission is the last train to a negotiated two-state solution. The next train is the one coming at them.

This column reminds me of Obama’s speech in Jerusalem last March. Here’s the deal, take it or we’re done. Tom Friedman is getting ready to wash his hands of the conflict. I can write that column for him: I was a Zionist when I was a kid, I believed in the miracle. After all, I grew up right outside the town that was declared the capital of US anti-Semitism. Now that miracle has been transformed– it’s apartheid, the corruption of the US government by the Israel lobby, and an albatross on the U.S. national interest. And we’re doing fine in the U.S.; at the last State of the Union speech, most of the Supreme Court Justices in attendance were Jewish. Basta!

philweiss
About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

126 Responses

  1. Ira Glunts
    Ira Glunts
    January 29, 2014, 11:45 am

    Ha’aretz article on Friedman piece above leads with the fact that Friedman says Kerry’s plan includes part of East Jerusalem as the capital of a future Palestinian state. This is a surprise considering most of the leaked reports. I personally do not think Friedman is all that reliable in these kind of reports. In my view he has grown too fat and lazy, and knows few will call him on errors.

    What do you think Annie?

    • annie
      annie
      January 29, 2014, 1:40 pm

      hmm, thanks for asking ira. i’d trust tom’s sources more than i’d trust reports ‘leaked’ to the msm, simply because preempting big news by leaking lies to the msm is a very common tactic of the lobby, especially the most extremist factions of lobby. not that friedman couldn’t himself be a victim of leaking lies, but generally the kinds of leaks i am referencing are the leaks that support the hopes of the the emergency committee for israel. like for example when everyone was on pins and needles waiting for the big IAEA report a couple years back and multiple sources reported it damned iran and they had ‘proof’ when they had nothing (remember nanodiamonds, outted by a blogger!) .

      and this leak happened about a week before, allowing plenty of time for it to repeat and seep in to the public mind. so that even when it was clearly refuted it became melded in people’s minds. so this idea jerusalem is already israel’s or a done deal is a effective tactic. they even say in the hasbara handbook that people believe what they hear first and loudest.

      so claiming jerusalem is a done deal would be exactly the kind of lie i would expect to be leaked. plus, idiot that i am, i hold out hope. not that they will reach consensus because i think that’s a fantasy (tom and i used the same word!)but because i would like to think team US would not go so far as to nix east jerusalem from palestine. and i think israel knows that which is why they are on speed dial wrt land theft lately.

  2. flyod
    flyod
    January 29, 2014, 11:54 am

    he must have retired both the camp david crystal ball and his iraq crystal ball.. round and round we go

  3. giladg
    giladg
    January 29, 2014, 12:04 pm

    The Palestinians once again get off scot-free. The distance to a peace deal can be narrow, and it is in the hands of the Palestinians, not Israel to take the steps required to bridge the gap. And yet Friedman, Weiss and others have zero demands and expectations from the Palestinians. Having such low expectations is actually quite racist if you think about it, as if they, the Palestinians, are either not capable of making life altering decisions for themselves or should not be held responsible for decisions they do make.

    This what the Palestinians need to agree to:
    1) West Jerusalem and the Old City with some of the neighborhoods around the Old City remain united. Other East Jerusalem neighborhoods fall under Palestinian control.
    2) Palestinians recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people and recognize the 3,500 year connection Jews have to Jerusalem.
    3)The Palestinians setup shop in Abu-Dis, just a short distance from the Old City.
    4) Special access (tunnels, underground trains) are build from Abu-Dis giving access near to the Temple Mount, on certain days and times.
    5) Palestinian refugees can return to Palestinian controlled areas in Gaza and Judea and Samaria, or be compensated and remain where they are.
    6) The major settlement blocks in Judea and Samaria are annexed by Israel.
    7) Water sharing arrangements
    8) Demilitarized Palestinian controlled areas.
    9) Israeli army in strategic positions in the Jordan Valley and areas on the hills overlooking the valley.
    10) Palestinians agree end-of-conflict.
    11) Special security arrangements in strategic areas, like the airport.
    12) Train from Gaza to Palestinian controlled areas in Judea and Samaria.
    13) Land swaps

    Go through the list and you will soon realize that the ball is in the hands of the Palestinians. They need to know this is no uncertain terms. They are doable. Palestinians need to climb down from their tree. They will not control the Temple Mount. Special access yes. Control, never and this is THE KEY to peace.

      • giladg
        giladg
        January 29, 2014, 12:32 pm

        Philip, enough with your cynical comments, really. Go to Google Maps satellite view and you will see how few the number of pools their are in the region. And once a pool is filled with water, so it remains only to be topped up from time to time. If you bothered to calculate how much water is then used in a pool over 10 years you will begin to realize how pathetic your focus is on pools in Jewish areas. Most of the water, in any case is used for agriculture and the percentage of that water in pools is literally a drop in the ocean. And guess who does most of the agriculture in the Judea and Samaria. The Arab Palestinians.
        Most of the water in aquifers in the region just happen to be located under Arab towns and cities. This means that the Palestinians will need to be flexible on this point.
        Enough with your games Philip.

      • philweiss
        philweiss
        January 29, 2014, 1:26 pm

        Most of the oil just happens to be located under Arabs. So should the US go steal it?

      • giladg
        giladg
        January 30, 2014, 4:12 am

        The areas with the water happen to be same lands Abraham, Issac and Jacob lived on. This makes these lands central to Jewish history and heritage. The Jews have a right to this land and water. Jews were on this land and drank this water, long before Palestinian Arabs came along. What has this got to do with the US stealing Arab oil?

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 30, 2014, 5:05 pm

        The areas with the water happen to be same lands Abraham, Issac and Jacob lived on. This makes these lands central to Jewish history and heritage.

        So what? The story of the “Samaritan” woman at the well in Ain el Askar from the Christian scriptures illustrates that the descendants of Jacob had ceased to consider themselves to be “Jewish” more than 2000 years ago, i.e. Our ancestor Jacob dug this well for us. John 4:12.

        This “Our Abraham, Not Theirs” mentality only illustrates that you are puffed-up by your own conceitedness, narcissism, and racism. It’s anachronistic to even apply the term “Jewish” and its narrow tribal interests retroactively to Abraham, Issac and Jacob or to suggest that “the Jews” are the only group that can claim their heritage. The bottom line is that mythology doesn’t convey any water rights.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 29, 2014, 2:13 pm

        @ giladg Go to Google Maps satellite view and you will see how..”

        How green it is in and around the settlements and in Israeli residential and agricultural areas and; how ungreen it is elsewhere

        ” the number of pools ..” are 99.9% in illegally settled areas

        “And once a pool is filled with water, so it remains only to be topped up from time to time” surrounded by miracle grass that never needs watering

        Amnesty
        http://rtsf.wordpress.com/2009/10/27/no-water-for-palestinians/

      • adele
        adele
        January 29, 2014, 3:46 pm

        Thanks for posting that report Talknic, I’m reading it now. When I lived in the West Bank, waking up to find no water coming from the taps was a common occurrence. Funny how giladg says that Palestinians should be “flexible”. SMH.

        The Benevolent Occupation, all the Occupiers need is your cooperation:
        We need your land for our settlement, please be flexible. We shot your son, yanni, please be reasonable. Oh those settlers, they uprooted your trees again, c’mon, show a little understanding. Sorry folks, checkpoints closed due to military orders, don’t complain, think of it as a holiday. You Palestinians in Gaza are misbehaving so we’re putting you a restricted caloric intake diet, look on the bright side, everyone could use a diet now and then. Sorry, no Palestinians on this road allowed, but you get to take the longer scenic route, aren’t you lucky! Honestly, we don’t want to have to build factories in the settlements, but we do it for your own good so that we can provide you with work.

      • adele
        adele
        January 29, 2014, 3:27 pm

        “Most of the water in aquifers in the region just happen to be located under Arab towns and cities. This means that the Palestinians will need to be flexible on this point.”

        If most of the water aquifers are located under Palestinian towns and cities then why is Israel stealing it from them?

      • giladg
        giladg
        January 29, 2014, 5:04 pm

        The British stabbed the Jewish people in the back multiple times. It is no co-incidence that the most fertile land in the region as well as most of the aquifers was not allocated to the Jews in the 1947 Partition Plan. Much of the land allocated for a Jewish state included swamps and desert. Go look at the 1947 Partition Plan. The local Arabs, now called the Palestinians, rejected the plan. They went to war with their Arab and Muslim brother, multiple times. They should be forced to pay the price for this. Many people have died and suffered because of their action and bad decisions. Too many people have died to now say okay, we can trust the Arabs.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 29, 2014, 11:30 pm

        @ giladg “The British stabbed the Jewish people in the back multiple times”

        By giving them the right to immigrate to Palestine, acquire Palestinian citizenship, buy land and settle anywhere in Palestine? Ending the Mandate so the Jewish People’s Council could declare an independent state. AMAZING!

        ” It is no co-incidence that the most fertile land in the region as well as most of the aquifers was not allocated to the Jews in the 1947 Partition Plan”

        That’s right, it was no coincidence. The partition plan was based on where Jews and non-Jews lived and owned property.

        Jewish folk were a minority. They were granted 56% of Palestine 1947. Do you think the minority should have gotten ALL the best land, when they didn’t own it and didn’t live on it?

        ” The local Arabs, now called the Palestinians”

        Strange, all citizens of Palestine were Palestinians from at least the Roman era. It’s only ghastly little bigots who deny the 2,000 year existence of the Palestinians

        “They went to war with their Arab and Muslim brother, multiple times. They should be forced to pay the price for this.”

        You’re really full of ziopoop buddy. By May 15th 1948 Jewish forces were already outside of territory slated for the Jewish state. They have never left those non-Israeli territories. 65 years usurping the Palestinians from their rightful territories is nothing to be proud of.

        “Many people have died and suffered because of their action and bad decisions. Too many people have died to now say okay, we can trust the Arabs.”

        Israel started all its wars. Israel fought all its wars in territories according to the ISRAELI GOVERNMENT were “outside the State of Israel” http://pages.citebite.com/x1r0b4d1y6mkv

        Israel illegally acquires non-Israeli territory, illegally annexes non-Israeli territory, illegally settles non-Israeli territory, ignores hundreds of UNSC resolutions giving Israel the opportunity to comply with the law and the poor little ziopooper cries victim. It’s pathetic.

        You’re bitching at the wrong people pal. Go whine to the Zionist Federation who, by demanding a separate Jewish state, deprived all Israelis of the right to settle anywhere in Palestine.

      • richb
        richb
        January 29, 2014, 4:23 pm

        “Most of the water in aquifers in the region just happen to be located under Arab towns and cities.”

        The National Water Carrier diverts the water from the aquifers.

        https://twitter.com/rblinne/statuses/402090357174726656

      • Naftush
        Naftush
        January 30, 2014, 3:47 am

        Acute truth decay. The NWC draws water from Lake Kinneret and directs it toward the coastal plain. If anything, it can be used to recharge the aquifers.

      • richb
        richb
        January 30, 2014, 8:17 pm

        Correct. It does divert water from the Sea of Galilee away from the West Bank.
        As National Geographic Magazine put it:

        Upstream, at the Sea of Galilee, the river’s fresh waters are diverted via Israel’s National Water Carrier to the cities and farms of Israel, while dams built by Jordan and Syria claim a share of the river’s tributaries, mostly for agriculture. So today the lower Jordan is practically devoid of clean water, bearing instead a toxic brew of saline water and liquid waste that ranges from raw sewage to agricultural runoff, fed into the river’s vein like some murky infusion of tainted blood.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 30, 2014, 8:48 pm

        Naftush ” If anything, it can be used to recharge the aquifers”

        Wonder why it’s not…

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 29, 2014, 3:42 pm

        Yeah, no 7 is funny; so is no 8. Will Israel be demilitarized also? Goose gander? Why should the Palestinians settle for less of a state than Israel has? Gildag needs to clarify this for us, so we know what his first principles are.

      • puppies
        puppies
        January 30, 2014, 10:41 am

        @Citizen – Why discuss anything on Zionist’s terms?
        That is exactly why the fake negotiation is conducted with a Zionist puppet called PA, or non-state of Palestine.
        The only starting position for any negotiation is the one where you establish all your rights –before any talk of any concessions, which may follow later. And that is that Israel has no legitimacy at all. They were not invited by the local population but only by GB, and the partition was rejected by both sides. Once this is established, one may make clear that any concession away from this principle is being extorted with armed threat by the Zionists and the US. I am convinced that an unwavering stand along these lines, against whatever most governments say, would have produced a much more favorable worldwide opinion. It would also have prevented the Oslo disaster.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 30, 2014, 6:15 pm

        Why discuss anything on Zionist’s terms?
        That is exactly why the fake negotiation is conducted with a Zionist puppet called PA, or non-state of Palestine.

        Get back to us when Mondoweiss joins the international community and agrees to recognize the existence of the occupied State of Palestine. The editors only recognize one state between the river and the sea, but have noticed the PA ceased to exist as such:
        * Palestinian Authority officially changes name to ‘State of Palestine’: Abbas signs presidential decree in first concrete move after successful UN bid
        http://www.haaretz.com/news/middle-east/palestinian-authority-officially-changes-name-to-state-of-palestine.premium-1.492065
        * ‘PA officially changes name to State of Palestine’
        http://www.jpost.com/Middle-East/PA-officially-changes-name-to-State-of-Palestine
        * Palestinian Authority rebrands itself ‘State of Palestine’ after U.N. vote
        http://www.cnn.com/2013/01/07/world/meast/palestinian-name-change/
        *Abbas changes name of Palestinian Authority to ‘State of Palestine’: Under new decree, all stamps, signs, and official letterheads will be changed to bear the title
        http://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-changes-name-of-palestinian-authority-to-state-of-palestine/
        * Abbas Signs Decree to Change PA Name to ‘State of Palestine’
        http://www.algemeiner.com/2013/01/04/abbas-signs-decree-to-change-pa-name-to-%E2%80%98state-of-palestine%E2%80%99/
        * Changing PA’s name to ‘State of Palestine’ raises questions on where Gaza stands in PLO’s political vision
        http://mondoweiss.net/2013/01/palestine-questions-political.html

      • puppies
        puppies
        January 30, 2014, 10:10 pm

        @Hostage (no reply button) – No disagreement. Thank you for the series of legal facts, much of which are legal fiction. One important tool that statehood seemed to provide, as per your analyses, was access to the international court of justice. It is precisely the only apparent advantage provided by statehood that is not being used by the Zionists’ puppet administration in these pseudo-negotiations.

    • amigo
      amigo
      January 29, 2014, 12:23 pm

      “10) Palestinians agree end-of-conflict.”giladg

      So Israel will not agree to end the conflict.

      I hoe you are not involved in any form of negotiating fella.

      • Naftush
        Naftush
        January 30, 2014, 3:48 am

        It was Arafat at Camp David, not Barak, who stomped out when confronted with the finality-of-claims demand. It is the PLO/PA, not Israel, that proposes using Palestinian statehood as a springboard for continued hounding of Israel via the ICC.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 30, 2014, 7:04 pm

        It was Arafat at Camp David, not Barak, who stomped out when confronted with the finality-of-claims demand.

        You do realize that Jewish militia members and leaders, like Rabin, published memoirs in which they publicly admitted they committed atrocities and war crimes against Palestinians?

        It is also relevant to mention that Israel and the US never accepted the principle that the post-WWII reparations agreements were final or that the compensation the refugees received had ended all private claims. In fact, Jews have insisted on their right to collect billions of dollars in additional claims even after the Paris Reparation Agreement was concluded and the Mandated State of Palestine received Great Britain’s entire share (more below).
        See:
        * Yitzhak Rabin, The Rabin Memoirs, Appendix A Passage Censored From the First Edition, University of California Press, 1996
        http://books.google.com/books?id=Gb8sjKSTvFwC&lpg=PP383&dq=&pg=PA383#v=onepage&q&f=false
        *Yerachmiel Kahanovich, Palmach soldier
        YK: You know what’s a PIAT? You know this gun? I used it to shoot the mosque where they were [sheltering].
        http://zochrot.org/en/testimony/yerachmiel-kahanovich-palmach-soldier
        * 100-Year-Old General: We Razed Arab Villages, So What?
        Brig. Gen. (res.) Yitzhak Pundak: If we hadn’t done it, there would be a million more Arabs and there would be no Israel.
        http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/168912
        * 100-Year-Old Becomes Israeli Major-General
        * 100-year-old finally gets rank of “Major General” that he earned 60 years ago. Nearly 60 years later, Pundak sat flanked by Defense Minister Moshe Yaalon and IDF Chief of Staff Benny Gantz and finally received the long-awaited rank. He was the first person in Israeli history to be raised to the rank of Major-General after retirement.
        http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/171126
        * Gen. Pundak: Kill 500 in Gaza and They’ll be Quiet
        Newly promoted 100-year old general who was Gaza Governor supplies his formula for peace.
        http://www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/171139

        There was really no reason for the US to honor Israel’s claim that it was the only country that could represent Jews in connection with Holocaust claims. Israel and the officials managing the funds simply misappropriated the money in some cases:

        The Government of Israel, in support of its request for reparation from Germany, alleges that it is the only state which can speak on behalf of the Jewish people and that the claims of the Jewish people were disregarded in the allocation of reparations from Germany. In connection with those allegations, the Government of the United States calls attention to the following considerations:
        (a) Throughout the period of Nazi domination of Germany, the United States and other Countries offered sanctuary to many thousands of persons of Jewish origin fleeing from their Nazi persecutors. At the end of the war it enacted special laws to open its doors to the flood of unfortunate people made homeless, destitute and infirm by the ravages of war and oppression. Furthermore, the Governments of the United States, the United Kingdom, and France have made the major contribution to the International Refugee Organization, which has facilitated the resettlement of Jews in Israel. These voluntary acts of assistance demonstrate the concern for and the large measure of responsibility which the Government of the United States has assumed for the welfare of the Jewish victims of Nazi oppression.
        (b) Although they were not represented at the Paris Reparation Conference, the claims of the persecutees were given special consideration. The Paris Reparation Agreement allotted all non-monetary gold found in Germany, a fund of $25,000,000 from German external assets to be liquidated in the countries which remained neutral during the
        war, and all assets in neutral countries of victims of Nazi action who died without heirs for the relief and rehabilitation of non-repatriable victims of German action. It was recognized at the time that the overwhelming majority of these victims were Jewish, and immediately thereafter the Five Power Agreement of 1946 provided that ninety percent of the $25,000,000 fund and non-monetary gold and ninety-five percent of the heirless properties should be used for such victims. Furthermore, the Government of the United States notes that pursuant to the agreement between the Government of Israel and the Government of the United Kingdom of March 30, 1950, the latter turned over to the Government of Israel the proportion of reparation in respect of the mandate for Palestine which was received by the British Government under the Paris Reparation Agreement.
        In bringing to the attention of the Government of Israel the reparations and indemnities thus far received by the Jewish refugees, the Government of the United States does not imply that it regards them as full compensation for their sufferings. It concurs in the view of the Israeli Government that no material compensation can be sufficient. It would point out, however, that many nations and peoples experienced tremendous losses and sufferings at the hands of the Nazis and that none can expect its reparation receipts to reflect compensation in any substantial measure.
        The Government of the United States must also point out the bearing of certain agreements, to which it is a party, on further reparation demands on Germany. Immediately following the termination of hostilities, the Occupying Powers established the form of reparations to be exacted from Germany; in so doing they agreed that reparations must be of a character which would not impose a financial burden on the Allies, and that policy is unchanged. They then convoked a conference of those nations which made the greatest contribution to winning the war, for the purpose of distributing the share in German reparation allocated to the three Western Powers under the Potsdam Protocol. From that conference emerged the Paris Reparation Agreement, which not only determined the percentage share in reparation of the signatories but also provided that the reparation receipts shall be regarded as covering all their claims against Germany arising out of the war but without prejudice to the final settlement of German reparations. The effect of these decisions is to preclude the assertion by the Government of the United States, on its own behalf or on behalf of other states, of further reparation demands on Germany pending a definitive settlement in the nature of a peace treaty. It is impossible to predict when such a settlement will be possible.
        The Government of the United States therefore regrets that it cannot impose on the Government of the German Federal Republic an obligation to pay reparation to Israel as a condition to implementation of the decision reached by the Foreign Ministers at their conference in Brussels to place Allied-German relations on a new basis.
        The Government of the United States wishes to emphasize, however,
        that the new relationship will not effect a definitive settlement of all problems arising out of the war and that it will not prejudice the consideration of further claims for reparation in the negotiation of a
        final settlement with Germany in the nature of a peace treaty.

        — Foreign relations of the United States, 1951. The Near East and Africa, Page 749 http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=goto&id=FRUS.FRUS1951v05&isize=M&submit=Go+to+page&page=749

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 30, 2014, 7:31 pm

        It is the PLO/PA, not Israel, that proposes using Palestinian statehood as a springboard for continued hounding of Israel via the ICC.

        The fact that Germany paid reparations didn’t prevent its officials from being held criminally responsible by the Nuremberg tribunal. You’re pretty naive to suggest that a peace treaty can give war criminals a “get out of jail free card”.

    • amigo
      amigo
      January 29, 2014, 12:25 pm

      “12) Train from Gaza to Palestinian controlled areas in Judea and Samaria.”giladg

      Help giladg, where the hell is this Judea /Samaria place.

      You mean the area that is occupied Palestine, yeah.

    • eljay
      eljay
      January 29, 2014, 12:32 pm

      >> The Palestinians once again get off scot-free.

      No, they don’t. They have to accept that Palestine has been partitioned. They have to work to get their lives and society in order after 60+ years of ON-GOING aggression, oppression, theft, colonization, destruction, torture and murder by Zio-supremacist Jews and their supremacist “Jewish State”. And they have to forgive Zio-supremacist Jews for all that shit they put the Palestinians through.

      >> This what the Palestinians need to agree to:
      >> …
      >> 2) Palestinians recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people and recognize the 3,500 year connection Jews have to Jerusalem.

      No, they most definitely do not have to recognize Israel as a supremacist “Jewish State”. No-one should have to recognize Jewish supremacism (or any other form of supremacism).

    • talknic
      talknic
      January 29, 2014, 1:06 pm

      giladg “The Palestinians once again get off scot-free”

      They have nothing of Israel’s and only ask for their legal rights according to the UN Charter and International Law Israel obliged itself to uphold … but hasn’t

      ” it is in the hands of the Palestinians, not Israel to take the steps required to bridge the gap”

      See above and; Israel is occupying Palestine. Israel is illegally acquiring Palestinian territory. Israel is illegally settling Palestinian territory. There are no steps the Palestinians are legally obliged to take. There are steps Israel is obliged to take. Israel refuses

      “This what the Palestinians need to agree to:
      1) West Jerusalem and the Old City with some of the neighborhoods around the Old City remain united. Other East Jerusalem neighborhoods fall under Palestinian control”

      The demand has no legal basis

      “2) Palestinians recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people and recognize the 3,500 year connection Jews have to Jerusalem”

      The demand has no legal basis

      “3)The Palestinians setup shop in Abu-Dis, just a short distance from the Old City.”

      The demand has no legal basis

      “4) Special access (tunnels, underground trains) are build from Abu-Dis giving access near to the Temple Mount, on certain days and times”

      The demand has no legal basis

      “5) Palestinian refugees can return to Palestinian controlled areas in Gaza and Judea and Samaria, or be compensated and remain where they are”

      The demand has no legal basis

      “6) The major settlement blocks in Judea and Samaria are annexed by Israel.”

      The demand has no legal basis

      “7) Water sharing arrangements”

      What about ’em?

      “8) Demilitarized Palestinian controlled areas”

      The demand has no legal basis

      “9) Israeli army in strategic positions in the Jordan Valley and areas on the hills overlooking the valley”

      The demand has no legal basis

      “10) Palestinians agree end-of-conflict”

      Read the Israel/Egypt peace treaty. Israeli withdrawal before peace is assumed

      “11) Special security arrangements in strategic areas, like the airport”

      The demand has no legal basis

      “12) Train from Gaza to Palestinian controlled areas in Judea and Samaria”

      The demand has no legal basis. Judea and Samaria ceased to exist 1950.

      “13) Land swaps”

      The demand has no legal basis. Swapping non-Israeli territory for non-Israeli territory so Israel can keep non-Israeli territory is stupid and the Palestinians are not legally obliged to forgo ANY of their territory

      “Go through the list and you will soon realize that..”

      You’re insane and there is no legal basis for any of your stupid ziopoop demands

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 29, 2014, 2:49 pm

        “You’re insane and there is no legal basis for any of your stupid ziopoop demands”

        And I’m sure you’ll continue to repeat that mantra up to the last Palestinian.

        Ziopoop. That’s how grown-up people speak. I have no idea why your supporters in the United States are outnumbered 8-1.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 29, 2014, 11:41 pm

        hophmi “And I’m sure you’ll continue to repeat that mantra up to the last Palestinian”

        You seem really keen to kill them all. WOW!!

        The truth deserves repeating. You’ve never disproven any of the Laws, UN Charter, relative conventions, UNSC/UNGA resolutions. LoN Mandate for Palestine articles, LoN Covenant articles or Israeli Government quotes I’ve given.

        “Ziopoop. That’s how grown-up people speak”

        It’s apt. All your lies have been disproven time and again. Yet you come back for more.

        “I have no idea why your supporters in the United States are outnumbered 8-1”

        I support a law abiding Israel. You don’t. People who are supportive of a state in breach of hundreds of UNSC resolutions are either morons, ignorant of or purposefully chose to remain ignorant of the bullsh*t they’re being fed

      • Naftush
        Naftush
        January 30, 2014, 3:54 am

        If your way prevails, Conflict-nic, we’ll be heading for additional decades of bloodshed. Who are you calling insane?

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 30, 2014, 7:21 pm

        Naftush “If your way prevails, Conflict-nic, we’ll be heading for additional decades of bloodshed”

        There have been Jewish forces outside the territory proclaimed as the State of Israel longer than the State of Israel has existed. Have they bought peace? Nope.

        “Who are you calling insane?”

        An idiot for Israel. RU keen to join the list?

    • pabelmont
      pabelmont
      January 29, 2014, 1:12 pm

      Water sharing? OK: and removal of all trash, sewage, toxic dumps, settlement buildings, prisons, that Israel and/or Israelis has/have placed, dumped, built, etc., in whatever land is allocated to Palestine in the deal?

      And what about oil/gas in Mediterranean and elsewhere?

      And as to Jerusalem, the Palestinians are e3ntitled to part of the OLD Jerusalem, with a roll-back of Israel’s unilateral re-designation of a huge areas under the umbrella name “Jerusalem”.

      GiladG makes hs list, and I begin to make mine.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 29, 2014, 1:40 pm

        “GiladG makes hs list, and I begin to make mine.”

        Yes, I would counter giladog’s #2

        “2) Palestinians recognize Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people and recognize the 3,500 year connection Jews have to Jerusalem.”

        with:

        2) israel recognizes that all of Palestine, from the Med to the Jordan, is the historical and rightful and exclusive homeland of the Palestinans poeple and that all Palestinians have the right to live anywhere in Palestine to be implimented when the zionist entity is destroyed.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka
      January 29, 2014, 1:35 pm

      “They will not control the Temple Mount. Special access yes. Control, never and this is THE KEY to peace.”

      This is why you can never trust a zionist. Ever. About anything. Just a few weeks or months ago, it was all about how all the Jews wanted was to “share” al-Haram ash-Sharif, and now you see the true story of what this band of theives want: they want to steal it all and kick out the Muslims from their holy place, no doubt doing a Bamiyan Buddha job on al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock. They would destroy priceless treasures of humanity for their evil ideology. Bunch of lying, theiving barbarians.

      • giladg
        giladg
        January 29, 2014, 3:31 pm

        Jews are already sharing the Temple Mount, the place you call al-Haram ash-Sharif, you dumb squat. In 1967 Israel had the opportunity to move all Muslims off the site and knock the mosques down, but did not. Muslims continue to control the daily religious ritual on the site. I am not proposing that this changes, however much it displeases me, and it displeases me a lot. But I am prepared to wait until God shows his hands and then what you say and what I say will mean very little.
        What I am saying is that the Palestinians, as a people invented during the past 60 years, have no rights to anything in Jerusalem. The Palestinians are the newest entity on the block. Never in all of history has a Palestinian Arab entity controlled anything in Jerusalem. Not even for one day. And with a peace treaty with Israel, the Jewish people may just share some aspects of the city with them. If you are a Palestinian be grateful and say thank you. I am willing to share. Are you? If you are, start with recognizing Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.

      • adele
        adele
        January 29, 2014, 3:59 pm

        “What I am saying is that the Palestinians, as a people invented during the past 60 years, have no rights to anything in Jerusalem.”

        Invented people, LOL. Is that like a scientific cloning experiment? Or perhaps an outer space alien invasion? This thread is a riot. Keep them coming Giladg, they say laughter is the best medicine.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 29, 2014, 5:15 pm

        “Jews are already sharing the Temple Mount, the place you call al-Haram ash-Sharif”

        It’s not that I’m calling it that; that’s what it is, and that’s what it’s been for 1,500 years. There was a Temple Mount, but that disappeared long ago. You zios have the Western Wall. Go pray there.

        “In 1967 Israel had the opportunity to move all Muslims off the site and knock the mosques down, but did not.”

        Yes, because there are one or two people among the zionist leadership who weren’t soul-less barbarians.

        “Muslims continue to control the daily religious ritual on the site. ”

        Of course they do. It’s their property. It’s not the Jews and hasn’t been for thousands of years. Go pray at your Wall and be thankful you have that.

        “the Palestinians, as a people invented during the past 60 years, ”

        A lie.

        “have no rights to anything in Jerusalem.”

        The more you let your hair down, the more you sound like a Nazi.

        “The Palestinians are the newest entity on the block”

        Well, they’ve been there longer than almost every Jew who lives in the region. When the Jews were in Russia and Poland and Brooklyn and wherever, the Palestinans were in Palestine as they have been for thousands of years.

        “Never in all of history has a Palestinian Arab entity controlled anything in Jerusalem. Not even for one day.”

        So what? If they had controlled the place for 15 minutes back in the Bronze Age, do you think that would have made a difference??

        “I am willing to share. Are you?”

        No you’re not, liar. You’re willing to play “Jim Crow Era” with the Jews as the Whites and the Palestinians as the Blacks.

        “If you are, start with recognizing Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.”

        First you have to recognize that all of Palestine belongs to the Palestinians by right and that the Jews are only guests and thieves in the land.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 31, 2014, 4:55 am

        “What I am saying is that the Palestinians, as a people invented during the past 60 years, have no rights to anything in Jerusalem. … Never in all of history has a Palestinian Arab entity controlled anything in Jerusalem. ”

        Correction: One of the first acts undertaken by the British Government in fulfillment of Article 13 of the Mandate was the establishment of the Supreme Muslim Council. The Commission appointed by the Council of the League of Nations had determined that the Wailing Wall and pavement in front of it were constituted a Muslim Waqf by Afdal, the son of Saladin, in about the year 1193 A.D. and were under the sole proprietorship of the Supreme Muslim Council of Palestine. See (3) The Ownership of the Wall and of its Surroundings http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/59A92104ED00DC468525625B00527FEA

        Regarding the typical lame-assed Zionist attempts at the negation of Palestine and Palestinians, it’s supremely ironic that the Director of Propaganda for Keren Hayesod and the Founding Father of Revisionist Zionism, Ze’ev Jabotinsky wrote this 90 years ago:

        If it were possible (and I doubt this) to discuss Palestine with the Arabs of Baghdad and Mecca as if it were some kind of small, immaterial borderland, then Palestine would still remain for the Palestinians not a borderland, but their birthplace, the center and basis of their own national existence. Therefore it would be necessary to carry on colonization against the will of the Palestinian Arabs, which is the same condition that exists now. . . . because they are not a rabble but a nation”. See The Iron Wall (We and the Arabs), First published in Russian: “O Zheleznoi Stene,” Rassvyet, November 4, 1923 from Daniel Pipes website.

        http://www.danielpipes.org/3510/the-iron-wall-we-and-the-arabs

        Enough said.

      • James Canning
        James Canning
        January 31, 2014, 2:14 pm

        Great post, H.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 29, 2014, 8:06 pm

        “What I am saying is that the Palestinians, as a people invented during the past 60 years, have no rights to anything in Jerusalem. … Never in all of history has a Palestinian Arab entity controlled anything in Jerusalem. ”

        Are you trying to pretend that there were no people living in Palestine before the Zionists got there? Or are you simply saying that the people who lived there have no rights?

      • James Canning
        James Canning
        January 30, 2014, 7:46 pm

        Mandate for Palestine was created almost a century ago. Decades before Israel was created.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 29, 2014, 11:56 pm

        giladg “But I am prepared to wait until God shows his hands”

        Good luck there buddy. G-d was AWOL during the Holocaust and every evil that ever befell the Jewish/Christian and Islamic people.

        “What I am saying is that the Palestinians, as a people invented during the past 60 years, have no rights to anything in Jerusalem”

        UNSC res 476 says your full of ziopoop. All citizens of Palestine were Palestinians from at least the Roman era, far longer than any Kingdom of David or State of Israel.

        Don’t let facts stand in the way of your vile bigotry tho, it’s fun showing other folk how you’re in complete denial and how empty your pathetic dialogue is

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew
        January 30, 2014, 12:08 am

        Maybe it does not effect your argument with giladg, talknic, but “All citizens of Palestine were Palestinians from at least the Roman era” is a silly sentence, which you can’t prove and is not provable and is not true, unless there are no citizens of Palestine and only then would this be a true sentence.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 30, 2014, 1:03 am

        yonah fredman s “All citizens of Palestine were Palestinians from at least the Roman era” is a silly sentence, which you can’t prove and is not provable and is not true, unless there are no citizens of Palestine and only then would this be a true sentence.”

        It’s no different than .. All citizens of Israel are Israelis.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew
        January 30, 2014, 1:27 am

        It’s no different than “All citizens of Israel are Israelis and have been Israelis since the time of the Romans,” which would be ridiculous as well. Talknic- your expertise regarding law tricked me into thinking you were smart and possibly sane. You’re definitely not smart and I would hesitate to show you a Rorschach blot for fear of the consequences.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 30, 2014, 1:43 am

        @ yonah fredman “It’s no different than “All citizens of Israel are Israelis and have been Israelis since the time of the Romans,” which would be ridiculous as well.”

        Yes. Quite ridiculous. BTW who are you quoting?

        “You’re definitely not smart and I would hesitate to show you a Rorschach blot for fear of the consequences.”

        Sez the guy who quotes a non existent statement.

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 30, 2014, 7:38 am

        I guess all people were invented after they emerged from the caves of Africa?

    • talknic
      talknic
      January 29, 2014, 1:40 pm

      @ giladg “The Palestinians once again get off scot-free”

      The Palestinians are willing to sacrifice more than half their rightful territory for peace and a zionist fool claims they’re getting off scot free. AMAZING!

    • annie
      annie
      January 29, 2014, 2:10 pm

      West Jerusalem and the Old City with some of the neighborhoods around the Old City remain united.

      shorter gilad:
      1. Israel gets exclusive control of the Old City, the most contested real estate on the planet, including Haram al-Sharif, under any arrangement.

      what planet are you on?

      and this: 4) Special access (tunnels, underground trains) are build from Abu-Dis giving access near to the Temple Mount, on certain days and times.

      how bout israeli jews are given access the western wall or their capital only thru an underground tunnels, on certain days and times. we could call it “special access”!!! you could be “special” gilad. very special.

      what’s next? connecting all of palestine (little walled compounds) thru underground tunnels. an underground subway system where everything above ground except their walled compounds belongs to israel?

      • giladg
        giladg
        January 29, 2014, 3:12 pm

        Annie, how many times do we need to repeat it to you that the Temple Mount is the holiest site for Jews and not the Western Wall. The Western Wall is the holiest site for Jews to pray on due to its proximity to the site of the First and Second Jewish Temples, on top of which now stand the Dome of the Rock. Why are you unable to understand this point. I’ll write it slower next time.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 29, 2014, 5:35 pm

        “Annie, how many times do we need to repeat it to you that the Temple Mount is the holiest site for Jews and not the Western Wall.”

        Who cares? The place you call “temple mount”, al-Haram ash-Sharif, is Muslim property and has been for 1,500 years. Any claim the Jews had to it expired long, long ago, never to return. Sorry, not yours. Go live with it.

        “The Western Wall is the holiest site for Jews to pray on due to its proximity to the site of the First and Second Jewish Temples, on top of which now stand the Dome of the Rock.”

        So what? The world is full of places that used to be something else. Your ideas about them don’t give you any rights to the place and certainly no rights that supersede the rights of the Muslims, who property it is, and the world at large, who have a superior interest to anything you can muster, in seeing the architectural treasure of the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa mosque preserved indefinately.

      • wondering jew
        wondering jew
        January 30, 2014, 12:15 am

        giladg- Any peace treaty that will be signed between the Palestinians and the Israelis will have to include unlimited access of Palestinians to the Temple Mount. If you are holding out for the Palestinians to agree to any limitations on such access you are holding out for some pie in the sky goal and instead you will be stuck with no peace and the alternatives that Tom Friedman has delineated.

        As far as “ownership” of the Temple Mount: The only document of relevance is Resolution 242. Those Jews who wish to assert Jewish ownership of the Temple Mount should be aware that this will only occur when world opinion/UN approval becomes irrelevant to Israel’s economy and survival. The world is interdependent and certainly Israel is dependent on trade and as such Resolution 242 is the most relevant document regarding the Temple Mount.

      • Naftush
        Naftush
        January 30, 2014, 4:02 am

        “Muslim property […] for 1,500 years”? You can’t count, either.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 30, 2014, 7:00 am

        “Any peace treaty that will be signed between the Palestinians and the Israelis will have to include unlimited access of Palestinians to the Temple Mount.”

        No, I think it would have to continue the status quo of full Muslim control and ownership of the property. Perhaps, if the israelis stop being oppressive barbarians, then the Muslims might agree to permit limited tours of al-Haram ash-Sharif, but the zios would have to earn that privilege.

        “As far as “ownership” of the Temple Mount: The only document of relevance is Resolution 242. Those Jews who wish to assert Jewish ownership of the Temple Mount should be aware that this will only occur when world opinion/UN approval becomes irrelevant to Israel’s economy and survival. ”

        No, that’s a Nazi-like “might-makes-right” idea, typical of zios, but one that should be rejected by anyone who is not a Nazi. The fact is that this land has belonged to the Muslims for 1,500 years. Theft of it by the zios would be a crime against all of humanity and the greatest act of cultural terrorism in history.

        You have your Western Wall. Go pray there.

      • giladg
        giladg
        January 30, 2014, 8:01 am

        Sorry to break it to you Woody, but Jews care. And Jews are not asking for your permission to decide what is important for Judaism and what is not. The core of Judaism was formed in and around Jerusalem and more specifically, The Temple Mount. The only people who are going to take your comments seriously are those who also believed that Mohammad flew on a winged horse to the place of the rock on his way to heaven and the reference to the rock has been interpreted over the past 400 years to be the the rock in Jerusalem, or as you call it Al-kuds (both not mentioned anywhere in Islamic books older than the state of Israel). Of all the rocks in the Middle East, it had to be the one the Jews had build their Temples over.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 30, 2014, 10:27 pm

        @ giladg “The core of Judaism was formed in and ….”

        Irrelevant to the Internationally recognized legal status of the sovereign extent of the state of Israel and that state’s illegal activities as the Occupying Power over non-Israeli territories.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 31, 2014, 10:02 am

        Naftush,

        It’s called rounding, thief.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 31, 2014, 10:21 am

        “but Jews care. ”

        So what? Look, if the zios pull a Nazi-job and steal this property and/or do a Taliban-job and destroy these cultural and human treasures like the destruction of the Bamiyan Buddhas, all you’d be doing is confirming that your wicked, evil ideology is simply that.

        “The core of Judaism was formed in and around Jerusalem and more specifically, The Temple Mount.”

        So what? Humans evolved in East Africa. It doesn’t give you any rights to Ethiopia. It’s trivia. Ancient history and meaningless to the fact that the property, al-Haram ash-Sharif, belongs to the Muslim people, absolutely and exclusively. You have your Wall. Go pray there.

        “The only people who are going to take your comments seriously are those who also believed that Mohammad flew on a winged horse to the place of the rock on his way to heaven…”

        No, they will also be taken seriously by everyone who knows that the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa Mosque are cultural treasures of all mankind and only a soul-less, satanic barbarian would do anything to affect that, in any way.

        “and the reference to the rock has been interpreted over the past 400 years to be the the rock in Jerusalem, or as you call it Al-kuds (both not mentioned anywhere in Islamic books older than the state of Israel).”

        Wow, you’re ignorant and an Islamophobic bigot, too. Is it your zionist education that has made you this ignorant?

        “Of all the rocks in the Middle East, it had to be the one the Jews had build their Temples over.”

        Again, so what? Ancient history and trivia, but meaningless to today’s world. Any claim that Judaism had on the place expired long ago. And this is simply one of the near-infinite number of places that used to be something. It is now al-Haram ash-Sharif. What it used to be is meaningless.

    • January 29, 2014, 2:27 pm

      unbelievable! no, i do belive it, little arrogant psychotic dictator.
      gilad, it’s all crumbling down on top of you, just like the world trade center towers collapse you israelis love to celebrate.
      “it’s very good for us!” your boy’s netanyahoo’s infamous first word’s after 9/11.
      “for us” whatever is good for israel, the rest of the goyem world be damned, right gilad?
      your world is crumbling down! formerly brainwashed people are finally waking up to your horror machine israel. enjoy your last days in your delusional arrogance.

      • puppies
        puppies
        January 31, 2014, 7:59 am

        @Tanaka – “You have your Western Wall. Go pray there.”
        In the sense of access to individual worshippers. Not as “right of conquest”!

    • Mike_Konrad
      Mike_Konrad
      January 29, 2014, 3:32 pm

      1) West Jerusalem and the Old City with some of the neighborhoods around the Old City remain united. Other East Jerusalem neighborhoods fall under Palestinian control.

      6) The major settlement blocks in Judea and Samaria are annexed by Israel.

      9) Israeli army in strategic positions in the Jordan Valley and areas on the hills overlooking the valley.

      What the h*ll is left?!

      What do they get? Two high schools and a half a soccer field?!

      Look, I am Zionist, but I am reasonable. It is clear to me that Israel will not give Palestine anything. Okay. I do not ask Israel to divide her patrimony.

      So pay the Palestinians to leave.

      Israel obviously does not want them there, Israel does not want to give them a viable state, Israel does not want to give them open borders, Israel does not want to give them open sea access to the Mediterranean from Gaza.

      I am not going to argue. If that is what Israel wants okay. I might even agree with Israel.

      Just then admit it, and say Israel has no intention of giving the Palestinians a viable state.

      But don’t say the ball is in the Arab’s court. Israel has set ridiculous requirments.

      Admit it!

      No army
      No open borders
      No control of resources
      No contiguity
      No control over who leaves and exits (a requirement you did not list)

      By what definition would that constitute a free nation?

      I am not saying Israel should give them a nation. I am saying Israel should stop the double-talk. If you want all the land … admit it.

      Then start to deal with paying them to leave.

      PAY THEM TO LEAVE.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 29, 2014, 5:23 pm

        “I do not ask Israel to divide her patrimony.”

        Is that what you call stolen loot these days?

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 30, 2014, 7:42 am

        I guess you mean the USA is to pay the Palestinians to leave, like it paid for Jews to leave USSR and move to Israel?

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 30, 2014, 7:48 am

        @Mike_Konrad “I am Zionist, but I am reasonable. It is clear to me that Israel will not give Palestine anything. Okay. I do not ask Israel to divide her patrimony.”

        Uh? How is that “reasonable”?

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 30, 2014, 8:25 am

        “Uh? How is that “reasonable”?”

        To the zionist, “reasonable” means that they get everything and the Palestinians get nothing and no one complains about it because to do so would be “antisemitic.”

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 30, 2014, 8:08 am

        >> Look, I am Zionist, but I am reasonable.

        There’s nothing reasonable about being a supremacist.

      • puppies
        puppies
        January 31, 2014, 8:03 am

        @Konrad – You guys don’t pay, even when using other people’s money as in this case.
        So you are bullshitting. The Zionists are only waiting for an opportunity to clear the land by cheaper means.

    • Waterbuoy
      Waterbuoy
      January 29, 2014, 11:47 pm

      Couple of comments, giladg.
      1) Palestinians are hardly getting off “scot-free”, let alone “once again”.
      They’ve already ‘contributed’ (ie lost) 80% of their land and many are refugees on their own land or on someone else’s. They live under either a brutal occupation with ongoing FURTHER loss of land or under seige.
      2) (in addition to other valid comments on your points) ”
      Your item 4) (Special access tunnels from Abu Dis to the temple mount ON CERTAIN DAYS) How would you feel if Jews were allowed access to their religious site via tunnels and “on certain days”.

      I’m sure that your list is only a starting point and not your serious expectation for an outcome.

      Your use of “Judea and Samaria” to try to ‘normalize’ the occupation and illegal settlments is revealing.

  4. amigo
    amigo
    January 29, 2014, 12:10 pm

    If the report about East Jerusalem is correct , which I very much doubt, then Nietanhayu had better get some heavy security and stop meeting with illegal settlers or their friends.

    Rabin 2 anyone.

    There is also the possibility that this is just a re hash of the Abu Dis scam of some 15 years ago where Israel was claiming they were going to give sovereignty to Palestinians over East Jerusalem.

    It turned out they were referring to Abu Dis,(or was that Al Quds) as the new Capital of Palestine.

    • adele
      adele
      January 29, 2014, 3:53 pm

      “It turned out they were referring to Abu Dis,(or was that Al Quds) as the new Capital of Palestine.”

      It was Abu Dis. Al Quds is the Arabic name of Jerusalem.

  5. hophmi
    hophmi
    January 29, 2014, 12:38 pm

    ” And we’re doing fine in the U.S.; at the last State of the Union speech, most of the Supreme Court Justices in attendance were Jewish. ”

    I truly cannot understand why you keep repeating this as if Jews never attained positions of power in previous Western societies. I agree; America is great, but Jews have “made it” before.

    • philweiss
      philweiss
      January 29, 2014, 1:25 pm

      Hophmi I think that’s absurd; first Jewish S.C. justice was 1916 or so. We have seen a sea change in US society.

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 29, 2014, 2:40 pm

        “Hophmi I think that’s absurd; first Jewish S.C. justice was 1916 or so. We have seen a sea change in US society.”

        It’s not absurd. It’s simple history. There were plenty of successful professional German (and French and Polish and Hungarian and Austrian) Jews for a very long time before the Nazis took power. It didn’t take much to reverse all of that. Just a bad economy, a lot of latent hatred, and the right leader.

        No one is saying that America and Germany are in any way the same. But to expect Jews to feel collectively safe as Americans because of a couple of generations of acceptance is naive. There’s a reason for all the vigilance. It’s not just paranoia. The fact that Louis Brandeis became a justice in 1916 only proves that significant societal antisemitism can exist in a society where Jews attain positions of power and influence.

      • Light
        Light
        January 29, 2014, 9:26 pm

        But to expect Jews to feel collectively safe as Americans because of a couple of generations of acceptance is naive.

        But you still live in the US, Hophmi? How many generations until you feel safe there?

      • philweiss
        philweiss
        January 29, 2014, 10:17 pm

        Fair enough Hophmi. I am saying history won’t repeat itself; history would be too bored to do that, it never does that. That’s my bet. You disagree. You’re in what Goldberg called a defensive crouch, when he lied about WWalt and Mearsheimer, saying they were anti-semitic for talking about something everyone now acknowledges as fact.
        The thing about Jewish exceptionalism is that other people are allowed to experience it too.. The fact that the last three Fed chairs have been Jewish is a reflection of a rise that entire American society encouraged, celebrated. They know it and it’s ok, our gifts helped make this moment. Which is over by the way. We’ve shared our gifts. As this democracy has urged us to do. And privilege has transformed the Jewish experience.

      • bilal a
        bilal a
        January 30, 2014, 2:56 am

        I think its fair to say that the rise of Jewish exceptionalism in America
        represented a displacement of the indigeneous Christian-lite culture with a new culture , a fusion of jewish-christian secularism , perhaps eastern european by nature, bringing many benefits, but not entirely costless at least as indicated by the usual statistical measures of human happiness. And Unz and others have shown this was not a meritocratic rise but something different, the creation perhaps of an American deep state.

        So Crowing “[This] is a reflection of a rise that entire American society encouraged, celebrated. They know it and it’s ok, our gifts helped make this moment.” doesn’t quite get it. The entire American society did not encourage its displacement or celebrate it, even if that is the story one gleams from NPR or MSNBC. Indeed the major losers in the transformation were the African American white working poor and middle classes, at least as measured by real wage and familial health statistics.
        Like giving a cultural award to a serial pedaphile, it displays a bubble mentality, the entire society does not celebrate this. Its not ok. Or as Mia Farrow put self conflictingly put it:

        mia farrow ✔ @MiaFarrow
        Time to grab some icecream & switch over to #GIRLS
        http://www.cnn.com/2014/01/13/showbiz/ronan-farrow-woody-allen-tweet/

        ‘Our gifts helped make this moment.”

      • Citizen
        Citizen
        January 30, 2014, 7:46 am

        I think the last 5 Fed chairs have been Jewish with one very brief exception. The second head of US Homeland Security was Jewish.

    • annie
      annie
      January 29, 2014, 2:06 pm

      I truly cannot understand why you keep repeating this as if Jews never attained positions of power in previous Western societies

      i didn’t hear phil referencing all past “Western societies”, he was referencing the US. why use the “as if” argument anyway?

      why not just say ‘Jews have repeatedly attained positions of power in Western societies so it’s normal for them to do so in the US’?

      if that’s what you believe.

      • hophmi
        hophmi
        January 29, 2014, 2:44 pm

        “i didn’t hear phil referencing all past “Western societies”, he was referencing the US. why use the “as if” argument anyway?”

        Phil’s point is that Jews are doing fine because they’ve achieved positions of power and influence in the US, as evidenced by Jewish Supreme Court justices. I think that’s naive in historical context.

        “why not just say ‘Jews have repeatedly attained positions of power in Western societies so it’s normal for them to do so in the US’?”

        Because my point is that the attainment of positions of power by a minority group is not synonymous with safety, and never has been, for Jews or anyone else.

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 29, 2014, 5:30 pm

        Yup. Gotta support oppressing those Palestinians for a few more generations rather than telling a couple paranoid Jews in the US to chill the hell out. Makes perfect sense.

      • RoHa
        RoHa
        January 29, 2014, 8:10 pm

        “Because my point is that the attainment of positions of power by a minority group is not synonymous with safety, and never has been, for Jews or anyone else.”

        Exactly. None of us are totally safe from crazy governments or social upheavals. We all have to try to keep an eye on the government and work hard at getting on with the neighbours.

      • philweiss
        philweiss
        January 29, 2014, 10:18 pm

        I agree with you. This is a challenge to all societies in our ever smaller world

      • annie
        annie
        January 29, 2014, 11:34 pm

        my point is that the attainment of positions of power by a minority group is not synonymous with safety

        i agree, in fact there’s good reason to believe the more power a minority has, the more opportunity they may have to abuse it and the more people might resent them for that abuse if in fact they do abuse it, when they use that power, as phil mentions wrt transformation:

        it’s apartheid, the corruption of the US government by the Israel lobby, and an albatross on the U.S. national interest.

        if some(or a lot) of jews don’t feel collectively safe, perhaps you might take it upon yourself not to support abusing whatever collective influence you might have. as the most privileged (or one of the most privileged) ethnic minority in the US, i’m not sure how much weight an appeal for your collective fears is going to have in the environment we live in today, frankly.

        i mean, while you fret, millions are suffering with no rights under the oppressive control of a state that purports to represent you. it kind of makes you seem…whiny. it seems counterproductive, if your priority is collective fear, to be the dominating and oppressing power over another people for years and years and years.

        and the continued appeals for your collective fear, only work in your favor so far as they are believed. a dictator king can fear his starving subjects will rise up against him too. there’s another example of the attainment of power by a minority not being synonymous with safety. a minority of one. do you think if he cried from the tower while torturing his subjects how afraid he was people would come to his rescue? don’t you think after a while they might not believe him?

        positions of power, when abused, frequently do not engender sympathy from the masses (shocking i know, but true none the less). i get it you have a dog in this fight, and metaphorically it looks more and more like a deadly bulldog barking about his own safety.

      • JennieS
        JennieS
        January 30, 2014, 2:55 pm

        Brilliant comment Annie, thank you.

      • annie
        annie
        January 30, 2014, 5:10 pm

        thanks jennieS

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 30, 2014, 7:51 am

        >> Because my point is that the attainment of positions of power by a minority group is not synonymous with safety, and never has been, for Jews or anyone else.

        What better way for a minority to be safe than to brutally and murderously carve out an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist state in a region of the world where its annihilation is perpetually imminent.

  6. Sibiriak
    Sibiriak
    January 29, 2014, 1:25 pm

    [Friedman:] And has the Palestinian rhetoric on the right of return become so deeply embedded in Palestinian politics

    Friedman uses that point to create an impression of equivalent Israeli and Palestinian intransigence. In fact, the Palestinian leadership has already largely capitulated on the RoR issue, whatever the rhetoric.

    • Naftush
      Naftush
      January 30, 2014, 4:14 am

      I see no Palestinian capitulation on RoR; at best, there is a grudging tactical retreat. Forgotten is the fact that by standard definitions, few “Palestinian refugees” would qualify for that title. Instead, the PLO, the Arab states, and the Muslim bloc conspired to create a mass of millions of pawns, all intended to destroy the repatriated Jewish population. Try that on for size as a crime against humanity.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 30, 2014, 7:43 pm

        Forgotten is the fact that by standard definitions, few “Palestinian refugees” would qualify for that title. Instead, the PLO, the Arab states, and the Muslim bloc conspired to create a mass of millions of pawns, all intended to destroy the repatriated Jewish population.

        If the Palestinians and their family members displaced as a result of wars in 1948 and 1967 aren’t eligible for repatriation, then Jewish aliens from the Russian Empire and other parts of Europe obviously were ineligible to be “repatriated” after the mythical Roman exile. What an idiot.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 30, 2014, 8:06 pm

        @Naftush “I see no Palestinian capitulation on RoR”

        There are no Jewish refugees. When a person takes permanent citizenship in a country other than the the country of return, they are no longer a refugee.

        Go whine to the Zionist Federation et al for encouraging them to take up citizenship in Israel.

        “Forgotten is the fact that by standard definitions, few “Palestinian refugees” would qualify for that title”

        Your idea of ”fact’ and ‘standard definitions’ being what exactly? In fact, the actual definition can be read here http://unispal.un.org/UNISPAL.NSF/0/418E7BC6931616B485256CAF00647CC7

        ” the PLO, the Arab states, and the Muslim bloc conspired to create a mass of millions of pawns, all intended to destroy the repatriated Jewish population”

        They did? How? By generously hosting Palestine refugees for 65 years?

        “Try that on for size as a crime against humanity”

        Hosting refugees has never been a crime against humanity. There are no UNSC resolutions or charges being laid in the International courts against their hosting refugees.

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 30, 2014, 8:32 pm

        ” the PLO, the Arab states, and the Muslim bloc conspired to create a mass of millions of pawns, all intended to destroy the repatriated Jewish population”

        It’s actually a matter of public record here in the United States that Israel was responsible. It refused to allow the 750,000 refugees to return and reserved the right to replace them all with Zionist Jews from Arab countries who had expressed a desire to move to Palestine. http://digicoll.library.wisc.edu/cgi-bin/FRUS/FRUS-idx?type=goto&id=FRUS.FRUS1948v05p2&isize=M&submit=Go+to+page&page=1295

        FYI, it also revived the Emergency Regulations after the British Government had repealed them and put the Palestinian Arabs under martial law for nearly 20 years. During that time it committed many atrocities against Palestinians who tried to return to their homes. The Arab Higher Committee and the Arab states quite logically pointed out that any return of the refugees under those conditions of persecution would be illegal (refoulment), i.e. anyone, who owing to well-founded fear (of Israel) or being persecuted for reasons of race, religion, nationality, membership of a particular social group or political opinion, is outside the country of his or her nationality or country of origin and is unable or, owing to such fear, is unwilling to avail himself or herself of the protection of that country is by definition a REFUGEE.

  7. American
    American
    January 29, 2014, 1:29 pm

    Water sharing.

    Ask Hostage but if memory serves UN 181 called for sharing/or some accomadations for water sharing. As in Israel ‘should –and should, not must’ be able to BUY water if needed from Palestine.
    BUT it forbade Israel taking or assuming control or ownership of any RESOURCES in the Palestine land.
    I wouldnt let Isr keep control of a f’ing drop of water—they would pay thru the nose for every ounce they needed—and would get only what was left over after Palestine needs and healthy reserves in case of droughts.

    • Hostage
      Hostage
      January 30, 2014, 6:25 am

      Water sharing. Ask Hostage but if memory serves UN 181 called for sharing/or some accomadations for water sharing.

      That was one of the objectives of the Economic Union of Palestine. It was tasked to act as a central governing body with “all powers of organization and administration necessary to fulfil its functions”, including planning, control of key revenues, resources, and the joint supply of currency:

      D. ECONOMIC UNION AND TRANSIT

      The objectives of the Economic Union of Palestine shall be:

      A customs union;

      A joint currency system providing for a single foreign exchange rate;

      Operation in the common interest on a non-discriminatory basis of railways inter-State highways; postal, telephone and telegraphic services and ports and airports involved in international trade and commerce;

      Joint economic development, especially in respect of irrigation, land reclamation and soil conservation;

      Access for both States and for the City of Jerusalem on a non-discriminatory basis to water and power facilities.

      There shall be established a Joint Economic Board, which shall consist of three representatives of each of the two States and three foreign members appointed by the Economic and Social Council of the United Nations. The foreign members shall be appointed in the first instance for a term of three years; they shall serve as individuals and not as representatives of States.

      The functions of the Joint Economic Board shall be to implement either directly or by delegation the measures necessary to realize the objectives of the Economic Union. It shall have all powers of organization and administration necessary to fulfil its functions.

      The States shall bind themselves to put into effect the decisions of the Joint Economic Board. The Board’s decisions shall be taken by a majority vote.

      In the event of failure of a State to take the necessary action the Board may, by a vote of six members, decide to withhold an appropriate portion of the part of the customs revenue to which the State in question is entitled under the Economic Union. Should the State persist in its failure to cooperate, the Board may decide by a simple majority vote upon such further sanctions, including disposition of funds which it has withheld, as it may deem appropriate.

      In relation to economic development, the functions of the Board shall be planning, investigation and encouragement of joint development projects, but it shall not undertake such projects except with the assent of both States and the City of Jerusalem, in the event that Jerusalem is directly involved in the development project.

      In regard to the joint currency system, the currencies circulating in the two States and the City of Jerusalem shall be issued under the authority of the Joint Economic Board, which shall be the sole issuing authority and which shall determine the reserves to be held against such currencies.

      Freedom of Transit and Visit

      The undertaking shall contain provisions preserving freedom of transit and visit for all residents or citizens of both States and of the City of Jerusalem, subject to security considerations; provided that each State and the City shall control residence within its borders.

      http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/un/res181.htm

  8. German Lefty
    German Lefty
    January 29, 2014, 1:33 pm

    These Zionists are really funny. They always talk about the one-state solution as if it were the worst-case scenario: “If we don’t implement the two-state solution now, then there will be a one-state solution. Oh the horror!” My response would be: “So what?”

    • hophmi
      hophmi
      January 29, 2014, 2:47 pm

      “They always talk about the one-state solution as if it were the worst-case scenario”

      “My response would be: ‘So what?'”

      Yeah, and that’s why you don’t matter. Because you have no dog in this fight, and thus, you have no regard for the risks to the people who actually have to bear the burden of your utopian ideas.

      The only people I know of who think one-state solutions involving multiple ethnic groups are great ideas are colonial powers, who created one-state solutions through the Arab Middle East and in Africa. It has not worked out very well.

      Oh yes; Russia thinks it’s a great idea too, especially where the Chechens and Dagestanis are concerned.

      • libra
        libra
        January 29, 2014, 4:18 pm

        hophmi: Because you have no dog in this fight,…

        hophmi, isn’t your poodle sitting safely in New York?

      • Woody Tanaka
        Woody Tanaka
        January 29, 2014, 5:25 pm

        “Because you have no dog in this fight, and thus, you have no regard for the risks to the people who actually have to bear the burden of your utopian ideas. ”

        And it’s it just peachy that your zio ideology is one in which you have no dog in the fight, living in the US, and can simply ignore the massive injury that the Palestinians have to bear, as a result of your racism.

      • German Lefty
        German Lefty
        January 30, 2014, 6:47 am

        @ hophmi

        that’s why you don’t matter. Because you have no dog in this fight
        Well, I am against dog fights. Any way, Germans ARE affected by the Zionist regime in various ways. Zionists drive a wedge between Jews and non-Jews around the world. Zionists try to make Jewish Germans believe that their true homeland is the “Jewish state”, not the German state. Zionists try to set Jewish Germans against non-Jewish Germans. Zionists exploit German history. Zionists emotionally blackmail the German government. Zionists give all Jews – including German Jews – a bad reputation by committing crimes in their name.

        you have no regard for the risks to the people who actually have to bear the burden of your utopian ideas.
        I have regards for the suffering of the people who actually have to bear the burden of your Zionist ideas.

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 30, 2014, 7:40 am

        @hophmi “The only people I know of who think one-state solutions involving multiple ethnic groups are great ideas are colonial powers, who created one-state solutions through the Arab Middle East and in Africa. It has not worked out very well. “

        The Greater Israel utopia is gonna be ethnically cleansed? WOW!!

        One-state solutions involving multiple ethnic groups. The USA. Japan. UK. Australia. Norway. Germany. Greenland. Canada. Singapore. China. New Zealand. Sth American states etc etc etc etc

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        January 30, 2014, 7:50 am

        @talknic:

        USA. Japan. UK. Australia. Norway. Germany. Greenland. Canada. Singapore. China. New Zealand. Sth American states etc etc etc etc

        None of them in the ME. Do you have example from the ME?

      • talknic
        talknic
        January 30, 2014, 8:32 pm

        @ MahaneYehude1 “None of them in the ME”

        So what? hophmi described people who thought ” one-state solutions involving multiple ethnic groups are great ideas”

        He then described what colonial powers imposed on systems that were already in place for maybe thousands of years, in order to exploit them for their resources.

        It’s the exploitation of resources that were the cause of conflict then and are still the cause of today’s conflicts.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 30, 2014, 10:03 pm

        >> None of them in the ME.

        Day after day, Zio-supremacists claim with pride that Israel is not like other states in the Middle East – that it is more like Western states (democratic, free press, gay-friendly, etc.).

        But when it comes to multi-ethnic states – of which there are many successful Western examples – suddenly Zio-supremacists look to other states in the Middle East for inspiration.

        When it comes to defending the supremacist “Jewish State”, no excuse is too lame for a Zio-supremacist.

      • eljay
        eljay
        January 30, 2014, 7:53 am

        >> Because you have no dog in this fight, and thus, you have no regard for the risks to the people who actually have to bear the burden of your utopian ideas.

        Funny stuff, coming from a hateful and immoral American Zio-supremacist.

      • MahaneYehude1
        MahaneYehude1
        January 31, 2014, 4:50 am

        @eljay:

        It takes two to Tango.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      January 29, 2014, 3:49 pm

      @
      GL
      A 1 state solution would turn US politicians’ sales of US-Israel as having the same values into more of a reality. Oh, the horror, the horror…. be nice, eh?

  9. James Canning
    James Canning
    January 29, 2014, 2:24 pm

    Perhaps Tom Friedman whould consider the merits of simply allowing the illegal Jews in the West Bank to remain in indpendent Palestine. Provided appropriate compensation is paid, etc etc.

  10. mcohen
    mcohen
    January 29, 2014, 2:32 pm

    German Lefty says:
    January 29, 2014 at 1:33 pm

    “so what”

    the arabs will not accept a 2 state solution because they believe they can eventually disarm the idf by political means which what all this nonsence is really about.they lost the war,they lost the suicide bombing campaign,now they are trying the “sodastream effect”
    on and on it goes…..for the arabs the 2 state solution is disaster if it cannot weaken the defensive positions of the idf.
    water solutions,access to jerusalem,all these points are just,land issues,are all window dressage
    how do disarm or weaken the idf
    thats the arab goal

    • a blah chick
      a blah chick
      January 30, 2014, 8:36 am

      “…how do disarm or weaken the idf thats the arab goal,”

      You make that sound like a bad thing.

      • James Canning
        James Canning
        January 30, 2014, 7:21 pm

        Arab “goal” is to get Israeli army out of the WestBank.

  11. JennieS
    JennieS
    January 29, 2014, 4:42 pm

    “Netanyahu lacks the political ability to forge a new, centrist governing coalition to back up Kerry’s ideas”

    Irrelevant. No possible government of Israel, right, centre or far to the left, has the slightest intention of giving up territory already grabbed in the West Bank or the control of Palestinians that would be necessary for a just and legal two state solution unless forced by more powerful political entities. At the moment there is no will on the part of the world powers to force Israel to comply but the mood is, slowly, changing.

    • Citizen
      Citizen
      January 29, 2014, 8:59 pm

      @ JennnieS
      Yep. Will be interesting to see how this might change apropos the two bills in Congress to (1) install the non-reciprocal visa allowance between US & Israel, and ((2), install Israel as the trigger for US war power and heaps more Irani sanctions towards ending Obama’ diplomatic trajectory.

  12. RoHa
    RoHa
    January 29, 2014, 8:16 pm

    “design a new framework of one-state-for-two-people”

    Part of that framework should be to eliminate the idea of “two peoples”.

    (Ahem! “The Times columnist”

    That should be “The NYT columnist”. You’ve been very good about this for a long time, Phil. Don’t slip back into old habits.)

  13. wondering jew
    wondering jew
    January 29, 2014, 10:47 pm

    Phil while paraphrasing Friedman inserts his own view: Among Israel’s options Friedman lists: 1. stay put, which means global isolation or 2. withdraw unilaterally or
    3. reconceive Israel as one state of two peoples. Friedman lists withdraw unilaterally without comment but Phil inserts: (which would also mean global isolation). This is okay as a comment, but it is confusing for at first I thought that this comment was Friedman’s and not Phil’s, which it was not.

    • giladg
      giladg
      January 30, 2014, 8:12 am

      Phil is on a mission from God. It’s heads down all the way.

  14. mcohen
    mcohen
    January 30, 2014, 2:42 am

    One state solution with palestinians becoming citizens of jordan would be the ideal solution with the borders of jordan expanded into southern syria to accomadate the palestinians of the west bank and diaspora.settlements along the jordan river to secure israels eastern borders.sodastream factory to be closed down and building used as a technical college.scarlett to be named honourary principal
    thats it mondies,problem solved

    • talknic
      talknic
      January 31, 2014, 10:51 am

      mcohen “.. with palestinians becoming citizens of jordan would be the ideal solution”

      Why? They’re not from Jordan. People who didn’t live in the territory that became Transjordan when it became a state didn’t have the right to automatic permanent citizenship in Transjordan. Only the Palestinians who lived in the region at the time Transjordan became a state had the right to automatic permanent citizenship in Transjordan. They’re all Jordanian BTW. Quite simple really. Normal.

      Jordan only had temporary sovereignty http://pages.citebite.com/m9e8h8y9ovia over the West Bank (see UN Charter Chapt XI).

      Jordan relinquished sovereignty to the PA (now the State of Palestine) at the same time it signed the Peace Treaty with Israel.

      The GC’s apply because the West Bank was under the sovereignty of Jordan in 1967 and Jordan was a UN Member State & a High Contracting Power. (see UNSC res 252 and its eight reminders giving Israel the OPPORTUNITY to adhere to the binding laws reaffirmed and emphasized in those resolutions. Israel failed to take those opportunities, preferring to illegally acquire even more territory)

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 31, 2014, 8:33 pm

        Jordan only had temporary sovereignty link to pages.citebite.com over the West Bank (see UN Charter Chapt XI).

        Close, but there never was a “sovereign” entity called “Jordan” that did not include the West Bank of Arab Palestine. So, the West Bank wasn’t a non-self-governing territory in the sense of Chapter XI. In fact, it was the Palestinian resolution of the Jericho Congress and the Declaration of the Unity of the Two Banks which explicitly preserved the option of “a future life of independence” for Arab Palestine, not the decision of the Arab League. The union was not consummated by the Palestinian people acting as a whole, and Jordan never governed by the consent of Palestinians living in Gaza or in exile. The Palestinians concerned stipulated that the union was without prejudice to their rights in Palestine, the defense of those rights by every legal means, and the final settlement of the Question of Palestine.

        In the Wall case, the ICJ cited the South West Africa/Namibia cases and explained that there was a “sacred trust of civilization” that applied to the exercise of the right of self-determination concerning the people and territory as a whole – and that it was merely reflected in Article 22 of the Covenant of the League of Nations, the mandates, and the UN Charter.

        In the Namibia case, the Court also noted that all of the other mandates had been converted to UN trusteeships, with the exception of those in which the inhabitants had been emancipated. In the cases of Namibia and Palestine the respective mandates were terminated before the object of the sacred trust, independence and the exercise of self-determination had been obtained.

        When the Charter entered into force, Chapter XI certainly did apply to British obligations under the Palestine mandate. But resolution 181(II) terminated the mandate and emancipated both Arab Palestine and Transjordan. Chapter XI didn’t apply to Jordan thereafter because it’s 1) application for UN membership was declined until 1955; and 2) by 1952 Jordan adopted a formal constitutional system of self-government that extended the right to vote and citizenship to the people of the West Bank and reserved an equal number of seats for lawmakers from both the East and West Banks. UN member states are not considered non-self-governing territories. Membership in either the LoN or the United Nations always resulted in the termination of any form of international tutelage, since “membership is based upon the principle of sovereign equality” (see article 78 of the UN Charter).

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        January 31, 2014, 8:42 pm

        P.S. One of the key findings in the ICJ Advisory Opinion concerned the erga omnes responsibility for Israel and the United States to remove any impediment to the exercise of the right of the Palestinian people to self-determination. The reported terms of Kerry’s Framework agreement would do exactly the opposite and create new impediments.

      • talknic
        talknic
        February 1, 2014, 12:58 am

        @ Hostage “the West Bank wasn’t a non-self-governing territory in the sense of Chapter XI”

        Understood. Will adapt accordingly … thx

      • Hostage
        Hostage
        February 1, 2014, 1:37 am

        Understood. Will adapt accordingly … thx

        You are correct that the consent to share sovereignty with Transjordan in a new joint entity, Jordan, was always provisional in nature and that it ended up being temporary.

        FYI, the recent treaty between Palestine and Jordan seemingly reaffirmed an on-going confederation of sorts between the two states and the qualified nature of the 1988 Jordanian disengagement from the West Bank.

        On it’s face, the agreement recognizes Jordanian territorial jurisdiction over 144 dunums of mosques, buildings, walls, courtyards, attached areas over and beneath the ground and the Waqf properties tied-up to “Al Haram Al Sharif” – based upon continuity of custodianship that dates back to a declaration made by the people of Jerusalem and Palestine in 1924. It notes that the custodianship also encompasses the “Rum” (Greek) Orthodox Patriarchate of Jerusalem that is governed by the Jordanian Law No. 27 of the year 1958.

        Article 9 of the Treaty with Israel cited the Washington Declaration, and contained an affirmation that Israel respects the present special role of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in Muslim Holy shrines in Jerusalem.

        The ICJ outlined a similar line of continuity in its analysis of the international protections for freedom of movement and access to the holy places in paragraph 129 of the Wall AO. It started with recognition ab antiquo and cited Article 62 of the Treaty of Berlin (1878) as the most recent example of international recognition. It stepped forward from there through the safeguarding clauses for “existing rights” in Article 13 of the Mandate (which applied to both Palestinians and Transjordanians) and the Chapter on religious groups and minorities in the UN partition plan, then on to the guarantee contained in the armistice agreement – and winding up with Article 9 of the treaty of peace between Jordan and Israel (which the Court considered to still be legally enforceable).

        The latest agreement between Palestine and Jordan says that it reflects the parties intention to establish “legal obligations” and affirm the parties recognition of their “legal status”. Article 2.1 makes Jordan responsible for legally representing the Waqf territory in international forums and organizations – and for managing the institution of Waqf in Jerusalem and its properties in accordance with the laws of the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan.

        I assume that was done intentionally to facilitate an ICC State referral should the need arise. I noted elsewhere that Article 3(2) of the treaty with Israel said the boundary was without prejudice to the status of any territories that came under Israeli military government control in 1967.

      • talknic
        talknic
        February 1, 2014, 1:26 am

        @ Hostage re your explanation http://mondoweiss.net/2014/01/people-friedmans-crystal.html/comment-page-1#comment-636823

        Whichever way, the ziocake is cut it’s A grade poop

        Were one to agree for argument’s sake with the Hasbara argument that Palestine had never been a state, never self governed etc Chapt XI would automatically apply.

    • Woody Tanaka
      Woody Tanaka
      January 31, 2014, 12:24 pm

      “One state solution with palestinians becoming citizens of jordan would be the ideal solution ”

      Ideal for who? Since the US and israel say they are joined at the hip, the ideal solution would be to force all the Jews in Palestine to move to the US (there is plentiful open space in the Rocky Mountain/Southwest and Alaska regions), and let those to make “one state” and leave the Palestinians to have Palestine.

      THAT is the ideal solution.

    • James Canning
      James Canning
      January 31, 2014, 6:02 pm

      Your “solution” would destroy Jordan.

  15. a blah chick
    a blah chick
    January 30, 2014, 8:35 am

    I think the advice of the Israeli government and the hasbarists who post here to the Palestinians can be summed up very simply: shut up, go away and let me drink my soda stream in peace.

Leave a Reply