Poll: Settlers would consider leaving West Bank for 'genuine peace'

[King_David]

Many Israelis, including the writer of these lines, feel that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s demand that the Palestinian leadership recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people is only a ruse designed to thwart a peace settlement by transferring responsibility for its failure to the Palestinians next door.

While one can understand the demand for security arrangements in the territories and on the Jordan border, why is it necessary that one nation recognizes the religious identity of the other? We can find an answer to this important question in a new report by the International Crisis Group (ICG), “The Leap of Faith: Israel's National Religious and the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict.” This report, which summarizes research that maps the balance of power within the Religious-Zionist camp, and between it and the rest of Israeli society, gives details on a secret poll ordered by the prime minister’s office in 2010.

The survey revealed that the settlers living east of the separation fence are more likely to acquiesce to an evacuation without violence if the withdrawal is for a “genuine peace.” One of Netanyahu’s close associates noted to the composer of the report that the poll-takers discovered the most convincing step that would show that the arrangement constitutes a “genuine peace” in the eyes of this public is Palestinian recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people.



Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2013/12/settlers-national-religious-movement-rav-kook-palestine.html##ixzz2ocdV7lGi

[msongs]

1. very generous considering they are a main cause of their being no "genuine peace" nt

[King_David]

2. Israelites ?

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=54799


3000 years etc etc ?

[Jefferson23]

3. Under international law the settlers need to get out, period.

There is no recognition of that fact in the OP.

[R. Daneel Olivaw]

8. Come on, Jeffereson. Details...details.

Why bring up details at a moment like this?

[Jefferson23]

4. Top Ten Reasons East Jerusalem does not belong to Jewish-Israelis

March 23, 2010


Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told the American Israel Public Affairs Council on Monday that “Jerusalem is not a settlement.” He continued that the historical connection between the Jewish people and the land of Israel cannot be denied. He added that neither could the historical connection between the Jewish people and Jerusalem. He insisted, “The Jewish people were building Jerusalem 3,000 years ago and the Jewish people are building Jerusalem today.” He said, “Jerusalem is not a settlement. It is our capital.” He told his applauding audience of 7500 that he was simply following the policies of all Israeli governments since the 1967 conquest of Jerusalem in the Six Day War.

Netanyahu mixed together Romantic-nationalist cliches with a series of historically false assertions. But even more important was everything he left out of the history, and his citation of his warped and inaccurate history instead of considering laws, rights or common human decency toward others not of his ethnic group.

So here are the reasons that Netanyahu is profoundly wrong, and East Jerusalem does not belong to him.

1. In international law, East Jerusalem is occupied territory, as are the parts of the West Bank that Israel unilaterally annexed to its district of Jerusalem. The Fourth Geneva Convention of 1949 and the Hague Regulations of 1907 forbid occupying powers to alter the lifeways of civilians who are occupied, and forbid the settling of people from the occupiers’ country in the occupied territory. Israel’s expulsion of Palestinians from their homes in East Jerusalem, its usurpation of Palestinian property there, and its settling of Israelis on Palestinian land are all gross violations of international law. Israeli claims that they are not occupying Palestinians because the Palestinians have no state are cruel and tautological. Israeli claims that they are building on empty territory are laughable. My back yard is empty, but that does not give Netanyahu the right to put up an apartment complex on it.

2. Israeli governments have not in fact been united or consistent about what to do with East Jerusalem and the West Bank, contrary to what Netanyahu says. The Galili Plan for settlements in the West Bank was adopted only in 1973. Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin gave undertakings as part of the Oslo Peace Process to withdraw from Palestinian territory and grant Palestinians a state, promises for which he was assassinated by the Israeli far right (elements of which are now supporting Netanyahu’s government). As late as 2000, then Prime Minister Ehud Barak claims that he gave oral assurances that Palestinians could have almost all of the West Bank and could have some arrangement by which East Jerusalem could be its capital. Netanyahu tried to give the impression that far rightwing Likud policy on East Jerusalem and the West Bank has been shared by all previous Israeli governments, but this is simply not true.

3. Romantic nationalism imagines a “people” as eternal and as having an eternal connection with a specific piece of land. This way of thinking is fantastic and mythological. Peoples are formed and change and sometimes cease to be, though they might have descendants who abandoned that religion or ethnicity or language. Human beings have moved all around and are not directly tied to any territory in an exclusive way, since many groups have lived on most pieces of land. Jerusalem was not founded by Jews, i.e. adherents of the Jewish religion. It was founded between 3000 BCE and 2600 BCE by a West Semitic people or possibly the Canaanites, the common ancestors of Palestinians, Lebanese, many Syrians and Jordanians, and many Jews. But when it was founded Jews did not exist.

remainder: http://www.juancole.com/2010/03/top-ten-reasons-east-jerusalem-does-not.html

[King_David]

5. He could just as well be talking about the Palestinians in most of those reasons , as well as the

Last edited Fri Dec 27, 2013, 08:00 AM - Edit history (1)

Jews...

"l. Peoples are formed and change and sometimes cease to be, though they might have descendants who abandoned that religion or ethnicity or language. Human beings have moved all around and are not directly tied to any territory in an exclusive way, since many groups have lived on most pieces of land. "

[Jefferson23]

9. No, actually, he is not as is explained, but I appreciate your

perspective...as wrong as it is.

[King_David]

10. Actually I'm right,

The logic as written could apply to Jews or Palestinians or even Kurds or Macedonians or any group.

Let's face it Juan Coles top 10 reasons are bogus as applied to Jerusalem .

Back to the drawing board... Gotta do better than this nonsense that could be applied to Jews just as much as it could be applied to Palestinians...

Probably the Geneva accord will have to suffice---- maximum.

[Jefferson23]

12. Bogus? You have anything to back that up? NO, you don't.

Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall
in the Occupied Palestinian Territory

Advisory Opinion
The Court finds that the construction by Israel of a wall in the Occupied Palestinian
Territory and its associated régime are contrary to international law; it states
the legal consequences arising from that illegality

THE HAGUE, 9 July 2004. The International Court of Justice (ICJ), principal judicial organ of the United Nations, has today rendered its Advisory Opinion in the case concerning the Legal Consequences of the Construction of a Wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (request for advisory opinion).

In its Opinion, the Court finds unanimously that it has jurisdiction to give the advisory opinion requested by the United Nations General Assembly and decides by fourteen votes to one to comply with that request.

The Court responds to the question as follows:

- “A. By fourteen votes to one,

The construction of the wall being built by Israel, the occupying Power, in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, and its associated régime, are contrary to international law”;

- “B. By fourteen votes to one,

Israel is under an obligation to terminate its breaches of international law; it is under an obligation to cease forthwith the works of construction of the wall being built in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, to dismantle forthwith the structure therein situated, and to repeal or render ineffective forthwith all legislative and regulatory acts relating thereto, in accordance with paragraph 151 of this Opinion”;

- “C. By fourteen votes to one,

Israel is under an obligation to make reparation for all damage caused by the construction of the wall in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem”;


http://www.icj-cij.org/docket/?pr=71&code=mwp&p1=3&p2=4&p3=6&case=131&k=5a

[King_David]

19. Not sure why you posted that, but Juan Coles top 10 list is bogus- I read it that's how I know...

2 medium potatoes, peeled and cut into 1 1/2-inch chunks
1 medium onion, peeled and cut into 1 1/2-inch chunks
1/2 to 1 pound boneless beef short ribs, cut in 1 1/2-inch chunks
Pepper, to taste
3/4 cup pearl barley
1/3 cup dried kidney beans,
1/3 cup dried navy beans
1/3 cup dried cranberry beans
3 cups chicken or beef broth
2 tablespoons honey or molasses
2 tablespoons smoked paprika
Salt to taste.
1. Line the bottom of a slow cooker with the potatoes, the onion and then the short ribs, sprinkling the meat with pepper to taste.

2. Scatter the barley and the beans on top, then pour on the broth and the honey or molasses. Sprinkle with the paprika and salt to taste. Add enough water to cover all the ingredients. Cook on low for 12 to 15 hours, stirring occasionally (except during Shabbat, for those who observe it), adding more water if necessary.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/11/24/dining/24hanukkahrex4.html?_r=0

[Jefferson23]

25. Your opinion which is free of educated thought, or Juan Cole's...hmm.

Enjoy your recipe.

[King_David]

26. My opinion and many others

Typical Juan Cole nonsense.

[Jefferson23]

27. Pro-settlers generally do not agree with him, true. n/t

[King_David]

28. Who's a pro-settler ???

What should I call you ?

Anti- (something )?

WTF you think you are with your labels. ?

[Jefferson23]

29. You go ahead, and call me whatever you want. Would you care for me

to post all your sources? I am more than happy to do that for you.

[King_David]

31. Your calling me pro-settler,is hateful

Is that hate because I'm Jewish or because I'm gay ?
Because proHamas types hate both the Jews and the Homosexuals.

[Jefferson23]

33. I look at your sources, all the time...explains your point of view..perfectly. n/t

[King_David]

35. Oh I don't think it's my sources , my posts more likely accurate nt

[Jefferson23]

36. Haha..you wish. n/t

[King_David]

20. What you talking about? As I said;

He could just as well be talking about the Palestinians in most of those reasons , as well as the
Jews...

"l. Peoples are formed and change and sometimes cease to be, though they might have descendants who abandoned that religion or ethnicity or language. Human beings have moved all around and are not directly tied to any territory in an exclusive way, since many groups have lived on most pieces of land. "


David Lederman umm I mean Juan Coles top 10 list is bogus .

[sabbat hunter]

6. as long as the old city

stays in Israeli hands, I think that pulling out of the rest of the west bank entirely, should lead to peace.

Why not let Palestine control the old city? It never was supposed to control the old city. And I don't trust the UN to protect the right of Jews to get to the western wall. After all they failed to do so in the years between 1949-1967.




As for RoR for refugees, to me that is a non starter. Perhaps some can be allowed to return, but the rest should be compensated monetarily for any homes they had in what is now Israel. In addition the various Arab countries should allow them to become full fledged citizens of those countries (or they can migrate to either the west bank or Gaza)

[King_David]

21. What's a crime against humanity is host countries of the refugees

Don't allow the children and grand children to become citizens of their country of birth.
Unlike any other refugee group.

[Jefferson23]

11. A just and peaceful resolution for an end to the occupation

is defined in UN res 242. Israel and the US have consistently
rejected it, every year...as in forever. The Palestinians do have the RoR, as the UN validates
every year. In order for there to be fair compensation, the US should not be involved in any
political negotiations on this subject, imo. Abbas has acknowledged RoR in large numbers would
never be accepted.

[Jefferson23]

16. It's not that I don't agree with your assessment, because I do for the most part.

Yet, the RoR will be a political negotiation for the Palestinians. I hope for their sake they
will be protected and compensated as much as possible but their leadership is lacking, to
say the least.

I specifically stated I do not believe the US should be involved and I will add that much more
would need to be agreed upon before the Palestinian leadership even approached the issue.

Meaning, all this talk of land swaps...which are another form of leaving the Palestinians a
Bantustan state..should be dealt with first. Abbas would be crazy to accept Israel as a
Jewish state, and one reason Bibi added this caveat is so he can screw them over on RoR.

[sabbat hunter]

22. Just remember

that 242 does not say "all the territories" and that those that drafted the resolution have said that the omission of the word all was deliberate. It also calls for a just settlement of the refugee problem.

[Jefferson23]

24. The reason I posted it is because it calls for a just settlement of the refugee problem.

I think it is important to recognize they do have the right of return and it should not be
dismissed out of hand and important to go into the negotiations from that stand point.
Compensation and a agreeable number to return etc.

The ICJ advisory 2004 ruling makes clear about the territories.

[sabbat hunter]

30. if Palestinian refugees

were to return to Israel proper, it would be the end of Israel.

Compensation should be fine and acceptable IMHO.

And I see no reason why the old city should belong to a Palestine state. It was supposed to be an international city under UN auspices, but the UN long ago abrogated that right by failing to defend it with troops when Jordan invaded, or sending troops in to free it from Jordanian rule.

Just because it was on the other side of the pre-1967 truce lines, does not mean it belongs to Palestine.

Palestine can have East Jerusalem, except for the old city.

The 2004 ruling by the ICJ is an advisory opinion only, it is non-binding and mainly is about the wall that Israel was building, not the old city.

[Jefferson23]

32. UN res is not asking for all refugees to return...I thought I was clear as to why I posted it.

I also made clear that Abbas has openly recognized that Israel would not accept
an excess of refugees.

You are correct the ruling is non binding but no one who is serious
about ending this conflict would ignore what was decided as it relates to international
law. East Jerusalem is dealt with specifically in the ruling, which is what the Palestinians desire.

Israel is under an obligation to terminate its breaches of international law; it is under an obligation to cease forthwith the works of construction of the wall being built in the Occupied Palestinian Territory, including in and around East Jerusalem, to dismantle forthwith the structure therein situated, and to repeal or render ineffective forthwith all legislative and regulatory acts relating thereto, in accordance with paragraph 151 of this Opinion”;

[sabbat hunter]

37. I agree

that the wall should be along the approximate green line (but it is Israel's right to build a fence/wall if they so wish on their side of the border).

That does however change the facts about the old city not belonging to Palestine.

[oberliner]

40. Juan Cole sure does like top ten lists!

He's got one for almost every occasion - gets a lot of hits that way.

Makes for easy reading!

[oberliner]

41. Did you know there used to be settlers in Gaza?

They are all gone now.

Did you know there used to be settlers in Sinai?

There are all gone now, too.

[jessie04]

23. Sorry...there will never be peace.

Arafat, the PA and Hamas has seen to that.

They have endlessly taught their children that peace means the destruction of Israel.

And that will go on for generations.