White House Is Weeks Away From Imposing Middle East Peace Framework – What You Need To Know
Share this article
http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/February03/032.html
In a matter of weeks, and possibly sooner than that, the US Secretary of State John Kerry will present Israel and Palestine with a peace plan. An American-crafted peace plan that he refers to as a “framework agreement.”
True, this plan is the result of endless weeks and months of conversation with both sides (and also with the Jordanians), but understand this: This is the plan that President Obama wants to impose on both parties. This is the plan that is supposed to create the context for the final treaty, which the White House wants negotiated and signed by the end of this year (2014).
A recent story in the Israeli Times included some excerpts from the framework agreement, and it contains a number of elements that are hugely unpopular with both sides.
Just to point out a couple of examples, the plan keeps Israeli troops helping patrol and secure the Jordan Valley for a period of years, something the Abbas team adamantly rejects. It also reportedly calls for dividing Jerusalem and turning into East Jerusalem into the Palestinian capital, something the Netanyahu team adamantly rejects.
Nonetheless, the expectation in Washington is that the two sides will say “yes” to this interim deal and use it as the basis to craft a final, and supposedly “better” one, but of course, this is where the problems lie. There are many problems with this approach, but let’s take a closer look at just two:
One – Team Obama could inadvertently make matters worse:
Forcing this agreement could set events in motion that lead to renewed acts of aggression. Palestine could launch a “Third Intifada,” which would force the Israeli Defense Forces into action against them. Casualties would then escalate and things could easily spin out of control. We have seen this once before, in 2000.
Back then, President Clinton tried to put pressure on the two sides to make a final deal at Camp David. Then-Israeli PM Barak grudgingly agreed to make sweeping concessions to PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat, offering all of Gaza, 93% of the West Bank, and half of Jerusalem for their capital, in return for a final peace treaty and the end to all claims.
It wasn’t enough, and Arafat quit the talks, left Camp David, then supported the Second Intifada, which unleashed a wave of suicide bombers who kept killing Israeli civilians, and caused the IDF to invade cities and towns in the West Bank to find and crush these terror cells.
Second, acceptance of this deal could cause various factions to revolt inside one government or the other (or both!):
If the Israeli government says “yes” to this American “framework agreement,” his coalition may splinter or even revolt. Already the right-wing parties fear that Netanyahu will make dangerous concessions in the final negotiations. He has done it before, in giving the ancient city of Hebron to the Palestinians, to cite one specific example.
And if Netanyahu looks like he’s agreeing to even more painful concessions in the name of peace, it might prove impossible to hold the coalition together. Political tensions in Jerusalem have been spiking all week for these very reasons.
Saying “yes” might mean the Netanyahu government has to scramble to forge a new coalition to even continue functioning, but if it cannot do so, then it could collapse entirely, and if that happens we’re looking at new elections, which would derail the entire process until such time as that was settled.
On the other hand, if Netanyahu’s government says “no” to the Obama plan, there could also be repercussions. For example, European countries could impose a boycott on Israeli goods to punish Israel for saying “no” to the American plan, a move that would cost Israel billions in lost exports and directly impact every Israeli citizen. Even if Israel could weather the storm, it would still be a storm and still cause unnecessary damage.
There is a great deal of pressure on the Netanyahu team not to create economic chaos for its own people. Yet there is also great pressure on Netanyahu not to make concessions that threaten the long-term security of the Jewish state.
What are some of these concerns? Well, in particular, consider:
• What if Hamas Islamists seize control of the West Bank government from the more secular Fatah faction, like it did in Gaza? Then what?
• If the IDF stops operating in the West Bank — arresting terrorists and shutting down rocket factories — then the security situation in the West Bank could devolve into the nightmare that we see in Gaza, with rockets being fired at Israeli towns and cities, and even at Israel’s airport. Then what?
• If the IDF stops overseeing security in the West Bank, what if al Qaeda and Hamas and other jihadist groups (such as the 30,000 jihadists that are operating in Syria right now) turn the territory into yet another base camp for suicide bombers and other forms of terrorism?
• What if Christian holy sites in Jerusalem are turned over the Palestinian Authority, but Hamas eventually comes to power? Will Christian tourists feel safe visiting those sites under Hamas supervision? Would the Hamas government even allow Christian tourists to visit?
As to the particulars of the “Framework Agreement,” itself, we don’t have all the answers yet, but here’s what we do know (this, based on a recent story from the Times of Israel):
• Under the framework agreement about 75-80 percent of settlers would remain in what would become Israeli sovereign territory through land swaps
• The framework is to be presented to both sides within a matter of weeks, and that there will be “no surprises” for the Israeli and Palestinian leaders, according to four people who were on the off the record call.
• Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Abbas would be expected to accept the agreement, with reservations, as the basis of continued negotiations
• Making it a US-drafted framework permitted the leaders to distance themselves from politically sensitive issues contained in the agreement
• Broadly, the agreement will address: mutual recognition; security, land swaps and borders; Jerusalem; refugees; and the end of conflict and all claims.
• On some sensitive issues — particularly the status of Jerusalem — the framework would be intentionally vague
• The deal would include a new security arrangement for the border between Jordan and the West Bank. This new security zone would be created with new fences, sensors and unmanned aerial vehicles.
• The framework would address compensation for Jews from Arab lands as well as compensation for Palestinian refugees — another longstanding demand by some pro-Israel groups but one that has yet to be included in any formal document.
• The framework would describe “Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people and Palestine as the nation state of the Palestinian people,” a nod to a key demand by the Netanyahu government that Israel be recognized as a Jewish state.
• The deal would also address the issue of incitement and Palestinian education for peace.
(H/T: Flash Traffic)
Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/February03/032.html#uJFbYSgHAQx6uRcL.99
Share this article
http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/February03/032.html
In a matter of weeks, and possibly sooner than that, the US Secretary of State John Kerry will present Israel and Palestine with a peace plan. An American-crafted peace plan that he refers to as a “framework agreement.”
True, this plan is the result of endless weeks and months of conversation with both sides (and also with the Jordanians), but understand this: This is the plan that President Obama wants to impose on both parties. This is the plan that is supposed to create the context for the final treaty, which the White House wants negotiated and signed by the end of this year (2014).
A recent story in the Israeli Times included some excerpts from the framework agreement, and it contains a number of elements that are hugely unpopular with both sides.
Just to point out a couple of examples, the plan keeps Israeli troops helping patrol and secure the Jordan Valley for a period of years, something the Abbas team adamantly rejects. It also reportedly calls for dividing Jerusalem and turning into East Jerusalem into the Palestinian capital, something the Netanyahu team adamantly rejects.
Nonetheless, the expectation in Washington is that the two sides will say “yes” to this interim deal and use it as the basis to craft a final, and supposedly “better” one, but of course, this is where the problems lie. There are many problems with this approach, but let’s take a closer look at just two:
One – Team Obama could inadvertently make matters worse:
Forcing this agreement could set events in motion that lead to renewed acts of aggression. Palestine could launch a “Third Intifada,” which would force the Israeli Defense Forces into action against them. Casualties would then escalate and things could easily spin out of control. We have seen this once before, in 2000.
Back then, President Clinton tried to put pressure on the two sides to make a final deal at Camp David. Then-Israeli PM Barak grudgingly agreed to make sweeping concessions to PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat, offering all of Gaza, 93% of the West Bank, and half of Jerusalem for their capital, in return for a final peace treaty and the end to all claims.
It wasn’t enough, and Arafat quit the talks, left Camp David, then supported the Second Intifada, which unleashed a wave of suicide bombers who kept killing Israeli civilians, and caused the IDF to invade cities and towns in the West Bank to find and crush these terror cells.
Second, acceptance of this deal could cause various factions to revolt inside one government or the other (or both!):
If the Israeli government says “yes” to this American “framework agreement,” his coalition may splinter or even revolt. Already the right-wing parties fear that Netanyahu will make dangerous concessions in the final negotiations. He has done it before, in giving the ancient city of Hebron to the Palestinians, to cite one specific example.
And if Netanyahu looks like he’s agreeing to even more painful concessions in the name of peace, it might prove impossible to hold the coalition together. Political tensions in Jerusalem have been spiking all week for these very reasons.
Saying “yes” might mean the Netanyahu government has to scramble to forge a new coalition to even continue functioning, but if it cannot do so, then it could collapse entirely, and if that happens we’re looking at new elections, which would derail the entire process until such time as that was settled.
On the other hand, if Netanyahu’s government says “no” to the Obama plan, there could also be repercussions. For example, European countries could impose a boycott on Israeli goods to punish Israel for saying “no” to the American plan, a move that would cost Israel billions in lost exports and directly impact every Israeli citizen. Even if Israel could weather the storm, it would still be a storm and still cause unnecessary damage.
There is a great deal of pressure on the Netanyahu team not to create economic chaos for its own people. Yet there is also great pressure on Netanyahu not to make concessions that threaten the long-term security of the Jewish state.
What are some of these concerns? Well, in particular, consider:
• What if Hamas Islamists seize control of the West Bank government from the more secular Fatah faction, like it did in Gaza? Then what?
• If the IDF stops operating in the West Bank — arresting terrorists and shutting down rocket factories — then the security situation in the West Bank could devolve into the nightmare that we see in Gaza, with rockets being fired at Israeli towns and cities, and even at Israel’s airport. Then what?
• If the IDF stops overseeing security in the West Bank, what if al Qaeda and Hamas and other jihadist groups (such as the 30,000 jihadists that are operating in Syria right now) turn the territory into yet another base camp for suicide bombers and other forms of terrorism?
• What if Christian holy sites in Jerusalem are turned over the Palestinian Authority, but Hamas eventually comes to power? Will Christian tourists feel safe visiting those sites under Hamas supervision? Would the Hamas government even allow Christian tourists to visit?
As to the particulars of the “Framework Agreement,” itself, we don’t have all the answers yet, but here’s what we do know (this, based on a recent story from the Times of Israel):
• Under the framework agreement about 75-80 percent of settlers would remain in what would become Israeli sovereign territory through land swaps
• The framework is to be presented to both sides within a matter of weeks, and that there will be “no surprises” for the Israeli and Palestinian leaders, according to four people who were on the off the record call.
• Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Abbas would be expected to accept the agreement, with reservations, as the basis of continued negotiations
• Making it a US-drafted framework permitted the leaders to distance themselves from politically sensitive issues contained in the agreement
• Broadly, the agreement will address: mutual recognition; security, land swaps and borders; Jerusalem; refugees; and the end of conflict and all claims.
• On some sensitive issues — particularly the status of Jerusalem — the framework would be intentionally vague
• The deal would include a new security arrangement for the border between Jordan and the West Bank. This new security zone would be created with new fences, sensors and unmanned aerial vehicles.
• The framework would address compensation for Jews from Arab lands as well as compensation for Palestinian refugees — another longstanding demand by some pro-Israel groups but one that has yet to be included in any formal document.
• The framework would describe “Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people and Palestine as the nation state of the Palestinian people,” a nod to a key demand by the Netanyahu government that Israel be recognized as a Jewish state.
• The deal would also address the issue of incitement and Palestinian education for peace.
(H/T: Flash Traffic)
Read more at http://www.prophecynewswatch.com/2014/February03/032.html#uJFbYSgHAQx6uRcL.99
No comments:
Post a Comment