PA official: We'll freeze talks if settlement building continues

[subsuelo]

Palestinian negotiator Yasser Abed Rabbo said Thursday that the Palestinians were considering freezing their peace talks with Israel over Israeli construction plans for East Jerusalem.

The Palestinians hope to establish the eastern sector of the city as capital of their future state, and see continued Israeli construction there as undermining that goal.

Since renewing negotiations with the Palestinians in November, Israel has disclosed plans to build more than 3,000 apartments in East Jerusalem and the adjoining West Bank. Israel captured both areas in the 1967 Mideast war.

Haaretz - read more

[azurnoir]

1. Talk about "playing into hands"

IMHO Israel would like almost nothing better than to have the PA call off talks, takes all pressure off Israel who can then point the finger and claim "well WE were willing, but THEY did not want peace" as Israel continues construction.

[subsuelo]

2. Just suppose it was Palestinians stealing land from Israel.

Daily building settlements inside Israeli territory.

Suppose Palestinian militants gunned down any Israeli that moved near a 'security' fence.

Suppose it were Palestinians bravely sitting in tanks firing at crowds of Israeli civilians.

How long do you suppose the U.S. would allow that to continue?

[azurnoir]

4. about 5 seconds? n/t

[Shaktimaan]

5. Well, in the past, when this basically did happen, what was America's reaction?

Nothing.

I realize that things are different now. But you should also realize that nothing you mentioned is actually occurring. Not the way you have portrayed it here, at least.

The main thing that I can't understand is how you seem to have determined all on your own exactly what land belongs to whom. You are so self-assured when you comment on Israel stealing land from Palestine, or when referring to Palestinian territory. I have no idea what you're basing your conclusions on though.

I mean, it hasn't been decided what land is Palestinian or Israeli yet. How do you know what land is Palestinian territory and what land isn't? What are you basing it on?

You think Israel's stealing East Jerusalem from the Palestinians, right? That it is Palestinian land, right? Why? (I'm being serious.)

[Violet_Crumble]

6. I think most people are clear on where Israeli sovereignty begins and ends...

None of the West Bank is part of Israel, and there's no ambiguity about it. I'm pretty sure that it was decided a long while back that Tel Aviv, for example, is Israeli land, and that Hebron, as another example, isn't...

[Shaktimaan]

7. Correct.

But then, the West Bank and Hebron aren't under any nation's sovereignty including Palestine's. Some of the land is owned by individual Palestinians or villages, some is owned by Jewish individuals or settlements and some is not owned by anyone at all. Exactly where the border between Israel and Palestine will eventually be is still open to negotiation. After it is all said and done, it seems extremely likely that some small parts of the WB will be Israeli land while most of it will be Palestinian. But right now it belongs to neither nation.

My point was not that Israel owns part of the WB. It was that the land is not sovereign Palestinian territory and Israel is not stealing it by allowing Israelis to build settlements there. Particularly land that happens to be owned by Israelis.

[azurnoir]

13. A question about your statement

My point was not that Israel owns part of the WB. It was that the land is not sovereign Palestinian territory and Israel is not stealing it by allowing Israelis to build settlements there. Particularly land that happens to be owned by Israelis.

Are you stating that because an Israeli citizen owns a piece of land that it is then part of Israel?
On the same token the people that bought the house next door to me are citizens of Cambodia but not US citizens does that mean the house is no longer part of the US but part of Cambodia?

My guess is that your claim will be that once again because the land is not officially part of any country it is once owned by an Israeli part of Israel.

[Shaktimaan]

14. No.

I am not stating that because an Israeli citizen owns a piece of land that it is then part of Israel. I am stating that if an Israeli owns a piece of land they are not stealing it if they choose to live on it.

On the same token the people that bought the house next door to me are citizens of Cambodia but not US citizens does that mean the house is no longer part of the US but part of Cambodia?

Of course not. Where are you getting this idea from that I ever said that any part of the West Bank belongs to Israel? I deliberately stated that this is NOT the case... that the WB is not owned by Israel. An important difference between the West Bank and your Cambodian example is that your neighbors bought a house in America, which has sovereignty over the land they purchased, whereas we are discussing land in the West Bank, which is not part of any state.

My guess is that your claim will be that once again because the land is not officially part of any country it is once owned by an Israeli part of Israel.

Once again? When did I ever suggest that just because an Israeli owns land in the west bank that it becomes a part of Israel?

The West Bank is not part of Israel. But just because the land in question does not belong to Israel it does not mean that it belongs to Palestine either. The land is disputed. It can only be resolved through negotiations between Israel and Palestine. Aside from privately owned land, the WB really does not belong to anyone yet.

[subsuelo]

9. You're right on one point

Sitting in a tank pressing a button to fire on a crowd of civilians is hardly 'brave'. So my portrayal is inaccurate.

[Shaktimaan]

8. You also seem to contradict yourself alot.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but wasn't it you who was arguing that the two state solution is dead and buried, and that a single, bi-national state already exists as the final result. (Remember, you had us count the states in existence there and there was only one?) If you still abide by that interpretation then how can Israel be stealing land from Palestine? Or building settlements in Palestinian territory? Didn't you argue that neither thing exists (or ever will exist)?

[subsuelo]

10. You seem to want it both ways

Everyone recognizes it's their land. Everyone, that is, except Israel and her faithful supporters who seem to want all the land in the region, but then cry and fuss about the fact that it is steadily becoming the dreaded single state.

Take your pick - do you want Israel to steal all the land from the native population? Or do you want One State?

[Shaktimaan]

11. This has nothing to do with what I want.

I just noticed that you seem to alter your argument of what the "reality" of the situation (as you see it) is.

One day you insist that a single state result has already occurred and is irrevocable. Now you argue that Palestinian territory exists and that it is being stolen.

And you think that I'm the one who wants it both ways? No, I have a single understanding of what is occurring. It does not change depending on who I'm talking to, where I am or the subject of the thread I'm posting in.

By the way, your description of the "native" population doesn't really conform to reality. The messy truth is that many native families are Israeli citizens, both Jewish and Arabs. And not all of the Palestinians are native to the area. I realize that acknowledging these truths makes it difficult to describe the situation in terms of simplistic labels but the fact of the matter is that it isn't a simple conflict. Identities overlap, any truly just solutions are mutually exclusive to each side and most attempts at describing the situation in terms of clear sets of ethically distinct choices requires either deliberate distortion or a faulty understanding of the facts at hand.

Those facts are complex, there's no doubt about that, but they are not fluid. They stay the same no matter what thread you are discussing. Understanding this is the first step towards gaining any real understanding of the conflict. It is the difference between opinion and fact... a critical difference that's all too often lost during the heat of debate.

[subsuelo]

12. I am sorry you are incapable of understanding

that a single state exists in the region, while Palestinian territory also exists but is not established as a formal state.

I guess I can see where there may be difficulty in comprehending that.

That being said, I've never not acknowledged that some native families are Jewish while many Palestinians are not native to the area, but thanks for stating the completely obvious. What I don't understand is all the fierce resistance to accepting the truth of Israel stealing land from the native population. You seem to be trying to argue that because not all natives were Arab-Palestinian that Israel therefore didn't steal the land from the indigenous people. Or is it, that Oh, the facts are just so complex, it's just not that simple. Israel really hasn't ever stolen anything, it's just the way history developed in the region. Somehow the natives just happened to get pushed into large reservation camps where Israel now dumps it's sewage on. Woops! Sorry about that little natives, but it's just how history worked out, too bad for you. Is that it? To the victor goes the spoils, eh?

But before I assume too much, why don't you share more of your "single understanding of what is occurring". Explain how is it that the indigenous Palestinian population got pushed into two large reservation camps while Israel somehow 'acquired' the land (and continues to 'aquire' it from those native people? Do take the time to enlighten the rest of us over the 'complexities' of how this all came about, will you please.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

3. Would that Abbas had even half the necessary balls to freeze the talks.