No Negotiation - Sharon reveals his plans for the West Bank

[not systems]

http://www.inthesetimes.com/site/main/article/2173/

June 23, 2005

No Negotiation - Sharon reveals his plans for the West Bank

By Neve Gordon

Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon is a man of deeds rather than words. So on those rare occasions when he does disclose his political goals it is important to pay close attention and carefully consider every word.

During his recent visit to the United States, Sharon revealed to a group of Jewish donors how he foresees the developments between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. He divulged a plan he has not yet talked about in Israel, at least not in a public forum.

"There won't be negotiations with the Palestinians about Jerusalem or the settlement blocks of Ariel, Ma'aleh, Edumim, and Gush Etzion," Sharon said, adding, "They will remain eternally under Israeli sovereignty within a contiguous territory." This straightforward sentence reveals both the method that Israel's prime minister intends to embrace and a crucial element informing the substance of his plans.

...

Allow me to explain. Ariel is a large settlement located in the heart of the West Bank's northern part. The settlement Ma'aleh Edumim is located about 30 km southeast of Ariel, while Gush Etzion is located another 20 km southwest of Ma'aleh Edumim, and is situated in the West Bank's southern part. Connecting these three settlement blocs means that the territory Sharon intends to offer the Palestinians will not be contiguous (except maybe by building tunnels!), and that Israel plans to annex a large portion of the Palestinian state-to-be, which is already a very small entity--22 percent of the British Mandate of Palestine.

...

[SteppingRazor]

1. So, basically, Ariel wants no Palestinian state.

Great. Looks like we're on the "Roadmap," as usual.

[aden_nak]

2. Can Palestine claim "eminent domain"? Apparently it works over here.

[SteppingRazor]

3. Good call.

Pity the Palestinians aren't the dominater, but the dominatee, so to speak.

(NOTE TO HUMORLESS PRO-ISRAEL DUERS: No, I am not pro-Palestine, and no, I do not support suicide bombers or terrorism of any sort. In fact, I'm not a big fan of either side in the unending carnage we call the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.)

Pity that the Jewish homeland had to be right in the heart of an area of the world populated by people who hate Jews, no? I mean, why couldn't the Jewish homeland have been, say, Boca Raton?

[eyl]

4. Evidently, the author hasn't bothered to look at a map

Even if those areas are annexed (plus a link to the Green Line, rather than creating an enclave), it still won't cut the West Bank into two or more pieces.

[pelsar]

5. actually its not really relevant....

sharon as a long term strategist is not very good....hes a great tactician but not really more than that:

more than that, the events in gaza will have an effect, one way or another on the west bank, its inhabitants as well as elseswhere...all beyond sharons control......so this is one step at a time and lets see how things play out...for plans/strategies/dreams are all up for grabs now

way too many unkowns about to happen....

[Violet_Crumble]

6. I just did, and I think he's right...

Sharon's statement: "There won't be negotiations with the Palestinians about Jerusalem or the settlement blocks of Ariel, Ma'aleh, Edumim, and Gush Etzion," Sharon said, adding, "They will remain eternally under Israeli sovereignty within a contiguous territory." means that he's not talking of links from individual settlements to the Green Line, I wouldn't think. As it is, the Jerusalem municipal boundaries would go a fair way towards cutting the West Bank just about in two, and I'd be pretty safe in assuming that when people talk about Israel holding onto Jerusalem they're referring to everything within the municipal boundaries?

http://www.btselem.org/Download/Settlements_Map_Eng.pdf

Mind you, I've never been the best at reading maps, especially ones that I have to blow up to 150% to be able to read the names on, so I'm not positive I've read the map correctly....

Violet...

[eyl]

7. I doubt anyone intends

in the context of a withdrawal, to maintain a link between those three blocks, in addition to between them to the Green Line. In particular, linking Ariel to Jerusalem would be very difficult. I assume "contiguous" means contiguous with Israeli territory, not each other (as opposed to an enclave, such as Mount Scopus after 1948).

As for municipal boundaries, those extent somewhat beyond the city proper, so part of them can be removed. Note that the map you linked to wither exaggerates the boundaries or merges the boundaries of several different entities; in particular, the Jerusalem boundaries don't extend anywhere near that far east.