I’d like to bring up an observation made by Treppenwitz again:
But when most people today say “the ’67 borders” in relation to territorial compromise, they are talking about the borders that existed on June 5th, 1967… which were, in fact, the 1949 Armistice lines…. Israel’s de facto borders at the end of the War of Independence.
But since a return to the 1949 borders – even a modified version – would be tantamount to admitting that every war fought since (and every Israeli killed in 60 years of Arab aggression) was for naught, you will almost never hear that phrase used in the news.
Read this article about the forthcoming proximity talks and there’s this:
Yasser Abed Rabbo, a Palestine Liberation Organization official and adviser to Mr. Abbas, said Saturday that the Palestinians had received assurances that all the core issues would be broached in the indirect talks, including the future of Jerusalem, the fate of the Palestinian refugees of 1948 and their descendants, borders, and security.
The talks were supposed to have started two months ago, but they were canceled after the Israeli government announced plans for 1,600 new housing units for Jews in contested East Jerusalem, causing a rift in Israeli-American relations.
Israel has since agreed to allow preliminary discussion of core issues in the indirect talks.
If land for peace means exchanging territories captured by Israel in 1967 for peace why does it involve Israel’s discussing the “refugees of 1948?” That’s because this is still about 1948. For Israel to make peace on these terms, it will have to acknowledge in some fashion that its very founding was problematic if not illegitmate.
Besides what should Israel say about the refugees? That it was largely a self-inflicted problem for which Israel bears little blame?
The effort to destroy Israel as soon as it was founded, the expulsion of Jews from their homes in the Arab world, the wars and the terror are all ignored.
Treppenwitz is right, what we’re seeing is a campaign for a massive do-over on the part of the Arab world. Rather it is one designed to either destroy Israel or extract a massive price as the cost of Israel’s legitimacy.
UPDATE: Thoughts on the proximity talks from Daniel Pipes and Jonathan Tobin.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
Oh, I think we should discuss the plight of the refugees…including the Jewish refugees from Arab lands after 1948 and, for that matter, the Jews forced to flee their homes in Hebron, the Etzion bloc, and the Old City, among other places. Curiously, that never seems to come up.
But first things first. A million Ionian Greeks were forced out of Turkey after World War I; let’s first deal with their dispossession. Czechoslovakia ejected what, several million Germans from the Sudetenland after the Second World War. Let’s deal with them, too.
I guess my memory is eroding as I get older, because I seem to recall reading that from the signing of the armistice in 1949 the Arabs were adamant that the lines were not international borders, would never be recognized as such, and merely marked the place where they had for the moment agreed to stop fighting until they were ready to wipe out the Zionist entity.
At some point these temporary, interim, never to be recognized armistice lines assumed holy status. When did that happen? Of course, I spend a lot of time at baseball games and perhaps while I was at the park this changed.
“…the Palestinians had received assurances that all the core issues would be broached in the indirect talks, including the future of Jerusalem, the fate of the Palestinian refugees of 1948 and their descendants, borders, and security. ”
OK, here goes. Jerusalem is and will remain the capital of Israel. Get used to it.
The Palestinian refugees and their descendents will be resettled in the Arab countries of their “Arab Brothers.” Their “Arab Brothers,” out of the goodness of heart they hold for those sad refugees, illustrated by their welcoming and devoted solicitude for them over the last 60 years, will willingly pay to resettle them (/sarc). Just like the Jews did for the Jewish refugees thrown out of the Arab countries in the 1950s who migrated to Israel in such large numbers.
The border will follow the present security fence or, in areas where there is no fence, the present Israel-held lines.
As for security, if the Arabs make any moves to meanace Israel’s security Israel will beat the s**t out of them. Americans will cheer.
The Arabs might have got a better deal if they had ever negotiated in good faith or kept the terms of the Oslo Agreements, but ten years of the Oslo Terror War and 17 years of treachery have snapped any patience with their bad faith. They can stew in their own juice and depend on the goodwill of their “Arab Brothers” to help them. Since their “Arab Brothers” treat them worse than the Israelis do, that’s not such a good bargain. They should not have been so treacherous and murderous.
Any questions Yasser Rabbo?
Their Arab brothers should be helping them, Mike, but I assume you’re not holding your breath until they do. By the way, as to the so-called blockade of Gaza, Israel has no control over what comes across Gaza’s border with Egypt, the Egyptians are building a barrier along that line, and no one seems to be exercised by that. After the first Gulf war Kuwait kicked out 300,000 Palestinians and I don’t recall a fuss about that. And Lebanon has restricted Palestinians from certain areas and from seventy-some occupations, yet Israel is the apartheid state.
I wonder what the reason is. OK, I don’t really wonder.