DOCSLIB.ORG

Peace to Prosperity” Vision?

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
Peace to Prosperity” Vision? REPORT 05.11.20 Is There a Practical Roadmap for Trump’s “Peace to Prosperity” Vision? Gilead Sher, Isaac and Mildred Brochstein Fellow in Middle East Peace and Security in Honor of Yitzhak Rabin Daniel Cohen, Intern, Center for the Middle East concessions for Palestinian sovereignty over 1. INTRODUCTION any part of the Old City or the Temple Mount, As a potential “Deal of the Century,” eliciting further Palestinian scorn for the plan. President Donald Trump’s “Peace to Both stipulations disregard carefully crafted Prosperity” plan does not live up to its compromises from former negotiations—the name. It falls well short of an ultimate Oslo process, Camp David, and Annapolis— deal that will break the Israeli-Palestinian which offered detailed sovereignty-sharing gridlock and equitably resolve the conflict. proposals and special security arrangements. It is more accurately a continuation of Even worse, while the Trump plan licenses previous interim agreements—essentially, Israel to initiate annexation without any an Oslo C—but with a significant departure preconditions, Palestinian statehood from past negotiation understandings.1 is conditioned upon a compilation of While the Trump plan The truly innovative components of the unreasonable and impractical thresholds— licenses Israel to initiate deal bend unabashedly toward Israeli all but assuring Palestinian failure. desires, without compensatory elements It is worth noting that while the plan annexation without for Palestinian aspirations. The distortion of has not received strong Arab support, any preconditions, internal balances previously established in neither has it been rejected as strongly Palestinian statehood other U.S. frameworks seems detrimental to as the Palestinians might wish. The Arab is conditioned upon League has dismissed the peace plan as promoting peace or regional security. a compilation of Previous negotiations have recognized insufficient for Palestinian independence;3 a distinction between the main Jewish nevertheless, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Qatar, unreasonable and settlement blocs near the pre-1967 Green and the United Arab Emirates have all issued impractical thresholds— Line and more isolated Jewish settlements statements tepidly welcoming Trump’s all but assuring proposal and calling for negotiations.4 In the in the heart of the West Bank, but Trump’s Palestinian failure. plan allows for Israeli annexation of all past, a plan like this would have received Jewish settlements.2 Though the Clinton resounding criticism from all Arab parties. Parameters recognized the significance Today, with shifting Middle East alliances and of the Jordan Valley to Israeli security and threats—i.e., Iran—moderate Sunni states are would have created a six-year plan for concerned with displeasing Trump and are Israeli withdrawal from it, Trump’s plan increasingly open to establishing relations offers Israel political sovereignty over the with Israel.5 Jordan Valley. At the very least, Trump’s plan serves The plan envisions Israeli control of as a harsh reminder to the Palestinians that the Palestinian state’s airspace, sea, and time is not in their favor. Yet, this should electromagnetic spectrum, as well as all not deceive Israelis into thinking time is on borders and crossing points. There are also no their side. The Trump plan could harden the Israeli center-right to tolerate fewer BAKER INSTITUTE REPORT // 05.11.20 compromises in future negotiations, enter year timeline for its implementation, yet the a new potential spoiler into the Israeli- potential sequencing of the plan—first Israeli Palestinian peace process, and lead Israel annexation, then the rest, if at all—negates down a perilous path to international the possibility of a functional process. demonization and social upheaval. The introduction of the grand deal Though it is unfortunate for both sides, has been marred from the start by a lack the Trump plan will shape the negotiation of cohesion on the part of the Trump process for years to come—regardless of administration regarding the timeframe for the results of the U.S. 2020 presidential Israeli annexation of West Bank territory. The Trump plan will elections. It will serve as a point of reference Immediately after the press conference in in future negotiations for those strongly in Washington announcing the deal, Benjamin serve as a point of favor of it and those staunchly opposed, Netanyahu indicated that the Knesset reference in future just as many other plans in the wastebasket would draft an annexation proposal within negotiations for those of history have continued to influence the the week, with full support from the White strongly in favor of it peace process. Since all parties involved House.6 Two days later, Jared Kushner, and those staunchly will undoubtedly bear the consequences Trump’s son-in-law and one of the creators of the Peace to Prosperity plan, it is worth of the Peace to Prosperity vision, said the opposed, just as examining the implementation issues and Trump administration would prefer Israel many other plans in the the proposed framework, as well as how wait until after the March elections to annex wastebasket of history Israelis, Palestinians, and Arab states can territory, citing a months-long process of 7 have continued to navigate the negotiation process. required technical work on the vision’s map. Of course, the Covid-19 pandemic has Now, the target date for annexation agreed influence the placed many foreign policy issues on hold by the Netanyahu-Gantz 2020 coalition peace process. as the world copes with the health crisis. matches the political campaigning of Trump This will not erase the Israeli-Palestinian and Netanyahu. The way is open to proceed. conflict, nor the problems of the Trump plan. According to a recent INSS Insight, Rather, once the pandemic has subsided, however, Israel must prepare for the the geopolitical challenges facing the Middle repercussions of annexation under a Biden East will resurface, amplified. Then, perhaps administration: “The former Vice President all parties involved can utilize the post- stated in August 2019 that ‘we have to Covid-19 years to attempt resolving—or put pressure constantly on the Israelis to at least subduing—issues critical to the move to a two-state solution.’ Yet the resolution of the conflict. coalition agreement between Likud and Blue and White, which is the foundation for the new Israeli government, permits 2. ANNEXATION, IMPLEMENTATION, Netanyahu to raise the issue of annexing AND NEGOTIATION NON-STARTERS or extending Israeli law to sections of the West Bank as of July 1, 2020. Because 2.1. Sequencing and Deriving Annexation such steps are viewed by Washington’s Given the total absence of Palestinian foreign policy establishment as disrupting involvement in planning and implementing or even preventing progress toward a two- the deal, the current deal has no way of state solution, any unilateral annexation serving as is as a driver to resolving the initiatives in the West Bank by Israel under conflict. Instead, it will further blur the the auspices of Trump’s ‘deal of the century’ borders between two states, as the Israeli (before or during Biden’s tenure) would right-wing looks to ensure a continued aggravate tensions with a future Biden presence in Judea and Samaria. administration.”8 Furthermore, the deal may give Israel a Netanyahu and others have continued green light to initiate unilateral annexation— to trumpet the security strength of the plan, or accomplish its equivalent by “extending particularly due to the strategic necessity of Israeli law”—over Jewish settlements in the the Jordan Valley.9,10 However, in previous West Bank and the Jordan Valley, starting negotiations Israel has not asked for a July 1, 2020. Trump’s plan envisions a four- sovereign border in the Jordan Valley, but 2 IS THERE A PRACTICAL ROADMAP FOR TRUMP’S “PEACE TO PROSPERITY” VISION? merely an adequate security presence and allocated Palestinian sovereignty over Arab complementary arrangements with Israeli neighborhoods and Israeli sovereignty over intelligence capabilities.11 Security experts Jewish neighborhoods. These partitioned agree that a gradual withdrawal from the Palestinian neighborhoods were to be Valley, perhaps with American or UN forces declared the Palestinian capital. The Old stationed as well, can provide Israel with City would have an international status and the necessary intelligence and security to would be governed by five countries: Israel, the east.12 Palestine, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and the Rather than advancing a reckless and United States. irreversible annexation project detrimental Palestinian Authority President to a two-state-for two-people solution, Mahmoud Abbas was outraged by the Trump Israel and the U.S. should clarify and administration’s treatment of Jerusalem, re-sequence the negotiations under the declaring “I will not have it recorded in my plan. They must commit to the deal as a history that I have sold Jerusalem.”16 The starting point, not an endpoint. From the status of Jerusalem is a grave concern for outset, Trump and Netanyahu must eschew Muslims around the world, and Palestinian unilateral action in favor of multilateral leaders are beholden to their Palestinian good-faith negotiations. This is necessary constituency and their Arab allies. Abbas but not sufficient for advancing negotiations, cannot surrender a capital in holy Jerusalem as the deal contains significant non-starters (Al-Quds), and any sensible plan must regarding Jerusalem,
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Hezbollah-Israeli
    The Hizbullah-Israeli War: an American Perspective Aaron David Miller It was unusual for an Israeli Prime Minster to break open a bottle of champagne in front of American negotiators at a formal meeting. But that’s exactly what Shimon Peres did. It was late April 1996, and Peres was marking the end of a bloody three week border confrontation with Hizbullah diffused only by an intense ten day shuttle orchestrated by Secretary of State Warren Christopher. Those understandings negotiated between the governments of Israel and Syria (the latter standing in for Hizbullah) would create an Israeli-Lebanese monitoring group, co-chaired by the United States and France. These arrangements were far from perfect, but contributed, along with on-again-off-again Israeli-Syrian negotiations, to an extended period of relative calm along the Israeli- Lebanese border. The April understandings would last until Israel’s withdrawal. The recent summer war between Hizbullah and Israel, triggered by the Shia militia’s attack on an Israeli patrol on July 12, masked a number of other factors which would set the stage for the confrontation as well as the Bush administration’s response. Six years of relative quiet had witnessed Israel’s unilateral withdrawal from Lebanon in June of 2000, a steady supply of Katushya rockets—both short and long range—from Iran to Hizbullah, the collapse of Israel’s negotiations with Syria and the Palestinians, and the onset of the worst Israeli-Palestinian war in half a century. A perfect storm was brewing, spawned by the empowerment of both Hizbullah and Hamas, Iranian reach into the Arab-Israeli zone, Syria’s forced withdrawal from Lebanon, a determination by Israel to restore its strategic deterrence in the wake of unilateral withdrawals from Lebanon and Gaza, and an inexperienced Israeli prime minister and defense minister uncertain of how that should be done.
    [Show full text]
  • Negotiating in Times of Conflict
    cover Negotiating in Times of Conflict Gilead Sher and Anat Kurz, Editors Institute for National Security Studies The Institute for National Security Studies (INSS), incorporating the Jaffee Center for Strategic Studies, was founded in 2006. The purpose of the Institute for National Security Studies is first, to conduct basic research that meets the highest academic standards on matters related to Israel’s national security as well as Middle East regional and international security affairs. Second, the Institute aims to contribute to the public debate and governmental deliberation of issues that are – or should be – at the top of Israel’s national security agenda. INSS seeks to address Israeli decision makers and policymakers, the defense establishment, public opinion makers, the academic community in Israel and abroad, and the general public. INSS publishes research that it deems worthy of public attention, while it maintains a strict policy of non-partisanship. The opinions expressed in this publication are the authors’ alone, and do not necessarily reflect the views of the Institute, its trustees, boards, research staff, or the organizations and individuals that support its research. Negotiating in Times of Conflict Gilead Sher and Anat Kurz, Editors משא ומתן בעת סכסוך גלעד שר וענת קורץ, עורכים Graphic design: Michal Semo-Kovetz and Yael Bieber Cover design: Tali Niv-Dolinsky Printing: Elinir Institute for National Security Studies (a public benefit company) 40 Haim Levanon Street POB 39950 Ramat Aviv Tel Aviv 6997556 Israel Tel. +972-3-640-0400 Fax. +972-3-744-7590 E-mail: [email protected] http:// www.inss.org.il © 2015 All rights reserved.
    [Show full text]
  • Miriam Elman CV
    MIRIAM F. ELMAN, Ph.D. Associate Professor of Political Science Inaugural Robert D. McClure Professor of Teaching Excellence Maxwell School of Citizenship & Public Affairs Syracuse University SYRACUSE UNIVERSITY POSITIONS: ■ Research Director: Program for the Advancement of Research on Conflict and Collaboration (PARCC) ■ Member of the Advisory Board and Steering Committee: Jewish Studies Program (JSP) | Middle Eastern Studies Program (MESP) ■ Faculty Affiliate: Institute for National Security and Counterterrorism (INSCT) PREVIOUS POSITIONS: Associate & Assistant Professor Department of Political Science, Arizona State University (1996-2008) Faculty Affiliate Jewish Studies Program, Arizona State University (1996-2008) Instructor Department of Political Science, Arizona State University (1995-1996) Research Fellow Belfer Center for Science and International Affairs, John F. Kennedy School of Government, Harvard University (1995-1996 and 1998-2000) Sergeant, Air Force, Israel Defense Forces (1983-1985) CONTACT INFORMATION: 400G Eggers Hall Syracuse, New York, 13244-1020 Tel: 315-443-7404 Fax: 315-443-9082 Email: [email protected] SOCIAL MEDIA: Webpage Twitter Facebook Columns at Legal Insurrection 2 EDUCATION 1996 Ph.D. Columbia University Political Science 1993 M.Phil. Columbia University Political Science 1990 M.A. Degree Studies Hebrew University International Relations of Jerusalem, Israel 1989 Secondary School Hebrew University Teaching Certificate of Jerusalem, Israel 1988 B.A. (cum laude) Hebrew University International Relations
    [Show full text]
  • Strategic Assessment, Vol 16, No 1
    Volume 16 | No. 1 | April 2013 Leading from Behind: The “Obama Doctrine” and US Policy in the Middle East | Sanford Lakoff Eleven Years to the Arab Peace Initiative: Time for an Israeli Regional Strategy | Ilai Alon and Gilead Sher The Emergence of the Sunni Axis in the Middle East | Yoel Guzansky and Gallia Lindenstrauss Islam and Democracy: Can the Two Walk Together? | Yoav Rosenberg The US and Israel on Iran: Whither the (Dis)Agreement? | Ephraim Kam Walking a Fine Line: Israel, India, and Iran | Yiftah S. Shapir Response Essays Civilian Casualties of a Military Strike in Iran | Ephraim Asculai If it Comes to Force: A Credible Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Military Option against Iran | Amos Yadlin, Emily B. Landau, and Avner Golov המכון למחקרי ביטחון לאומי THE INSTITUTE FOR NATIONAL SECURcITY STUDIES INCORPORATING THE JAFFEE bd CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES Strategic ASSESSMENT Volume 16 | No. 1 | April 2013 CONTENTS Abstracts | 3 Leading from Behind: The “Obama Doctrine” and US Policy in the Middle East | 7 Sanford Lakoff Eleven Years to the Arab Peace Initiative: Time for an Israeli Regional Strategy | 21 Ilai Alon and Gilead Sher The Emergence of the Sunni Axis in the Middle East | 37 Yoel Guzansky and Gallia Lindenstrauss Islam and Democracy: Can the Two Walk Together? | 49 Yoav Rosenberg The US and Israel on Iran: Whither the (Dis)Agreement? | 61 Ephraim Kam Walking a Fine Line: Israel, India, and Iran | 75 Yiftah S. Shapir Response Essays Civilian Casualties of a Military Strike in Iran | 87 Ephraim Asculai If it Comes to Force: A Credible Cost-Benefit Analysis of the Military Option against Iran | 95 Amos Yadlin, Emily B.
    [Show full text]
  • August 2011 Postcard
    postcard_marchapril_2020.qxp_MARCH APRIL 2020 Postcard 1/29/20 10:06 AM Page 2 ¡ DEAR PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP: PLACE You have repeatedly boasted of your skills as a negotiator. If you were the You may wish leader of Palestine, would you view the recently released Israel-Palestine 35¢ “peace plan” as a serious overture? Of course not! Any negotiator would STAMP hastily dismiss a proposal that only reflects one side’s interests. How does HERE to send these this deal advance peace? It’s clear this proposal will not lead to a peace set- tlement and could only result in a worsening divide and more violence and injustice. What does the U.S. get out of this deal? Nothing but the promise of greater global distrust. This proposal cards to forgoes any sense of partiality and signals an almost complete acquiescence to Israeli desires. So much for putting “America First.” President TO: Donald Trump PRESIDENT DONALD TRUMP THE WHITE HOUSE 1600 PENNSYLVANIA AVE, NW and the WASHINGTON, DC 20500 Senator and ¡ Representative DEAR SENATOR: PLACE It’s painfully clear to objective observers that President Trump’s Israel- Palestine “peace plan” is simply a green light for Israel to do as it wishes. 35¢ in whose The plan embarrassingly forgoes any premise of U.S. impartiality and puts a STAMP blind rubber stamp on Israel’s desire to annex the West Bank and exert its HERE control over Palestinians. How does this deal advance peace? It’s clear this constituency proposal will not lead to a peace settlement and could only result in a worsening divide and more violence and injustice.
    [Show full text]
  • Armed Conflicts Report - Israel
    Armed Conflicts Report - Israel Armed Conflicts Report Israel-Palestine (1948 - first combat deaths) Update: February 2009 Summary Type of Conflict Parties to the Conflict Status of the Fighting Number of Deaths Political Developments Background Arms Sources Economic Factors Summary: 2008 The situation in the Gaza strip escalated throughout 2008 to reflect an increasing humanitarian crisis. The death toll reached approximately 1800 deaths by the end of January 2009, with increased conflict taking place after December 19th. The first six months of 2008 saw increased fighting between Israeli forces and Hamas rebels. A six month ceasefire was agreed upon in June of 2008, and the summer months saw increased factional violence between opposing Palestinian groups Hamas and Fatah. Israel shut down the border crossings between the Gaza strip and Israel and shut off fuel to the power plant mid-January 2008. The fuel was eventually turned on although blackouts occurred sporadically throughout the year. The blockade was opened periodically throughout the year to allow a minimum amount of humanitarian aid to pass through. However, for the majority of the year, the 1.5 million Gaza Strip inhabitants, including those needing medical aid, were trapped with few resources. At the end of January 2009, Israel agreed to the principles of a ceasefire proposal, but it is unknown whether or not both sides can come to agreeable terms and create long lasting peace in 2009. 2007 A November 2006 ceasefire was broken when opposing Palestinian groups Hamas and Fatah renewed fighting in April and May of 2007. In June, Hamas led a coup on the Gaza headquarters of Fatah giving them control of the Gaza Strip.
    [Show full text]
  • Company Overview
    Gilead Sciences Advancing Therapeutics. Improving Lives. Company Overview Gilead Sciences, Inc. is a research-based biopharmaceutical Key Moments in Our History company that discovers, develops and commercializes innovative medicines in areas of unmet medical need. With each new 1987 Gilead founded discovery and investigational drug candidate, we seek to improve AmBisome® approved (Europe) the care of patients living with life-threatening diseases around the 1990 world. Gilead’s therapeutic areas of focus include HIV/AIDS, liver 1991 Nucleotides in-licensed from diseases, cancer and inflammation, and serious respiratory and IOCB Rega cardiovascular conditions. 1996 Vistide® approved Our portfolio of 18 marketed 1999 NeXstar acquired; products contains a number Tamiflu® approved of category firsts, including complete treatment regimens 2001 Viread® approved for HIV and chronic hepatitis Hepsera® approved C infection available in once- 2002 daily single pills. Gilead’s 2003 Triangle Pharmaceuticals acquired; portfolio includes Harvoni® Emtriva® approved (ledipasvir 90 mg/sofosbuvir ® ® 400 mg) for chronic hepatitis C, 2004 Macugen , Truvada approved which is a complete antiviral 2006 Atripla®, Ranexa® approved; treatment regimen in a single Corus, Raylo, Myogen acquired tablet that provides high cure ® rates and a shortened course 2007 Letairis approved; Cork, Ireland, Harvoni, Gilead’s once-daily single of therapy for many patients. manufacturing facility acquired tablet HCV regimen. from Nycomed ® 2008 Lexiscan , Viread® for hepatitis B Nearly 30 Years of Growth approved Gilead was founded in 1987 in Foster City, California. Since CV Therapeutics acquired then, Gilead has become a leading biopharmaceutical company 2009 ® with a rapidly expanding product portfolio, a growing pipeline of 2010 Cayston approved; investigational drugs and more than 7,000 employees in offices CGI Pharmaceuticals acquired across six continents.
    [Show full text]
  • Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking January 2019 Middle East and North the Role of the Arab States Africa Programme
    Briefing Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking January 2019 Middle East and North The Role of the Arab States Africa Programme Yossi Mekelberg Summary and Greg Shapland • The positions of several Arab states towards Israel have evolved greatly in the past 50 years. Four of these states in particular – Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and (to a lesser extent) Jordan – could be influential in shaping the course of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict. • In addition to Egypt and Jordan (which have signed peace treaties with Israel), Saudi Arabia and the UAE, among other Gulf states, now have extensive – albeit discreet – dealings with Israel. • This evolution has created a new situation in the region, with these Arab states now having considerable potential influence over the Israelis and Palestinians. It also has implications for US positions and policy. So far, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the UAE and Jordan have chosen not to test what this influence could achieve. • One reason for the inactivity to date may be disenchantment with the Palestinians and their cause, including the inability of Palestinian leaders to unite to promote it. However, ignoring Palestinian concerns will not bring about a resolution of the Israeli–Palestinian conflict, which will continue to add to instability in the region. If Arab leaders see regional stability as being in their countries’ interests, they should be trying to shape any eventual peace plan advanced by the administration of US President Donald Trump in such a way that it forms a framework for negotiations that both Israeli and Palestinian leaderships can accept. Israeli–Palestinian Peacemaking: The Role of the Arab States Introduction This briefing forms part of the Chatham House project, ‘Israel–Palestine: Beyond the Stalemate’.
    [Show full text]
  • Moving-Nowhere.Pdf
    MA’AN Development Center MOVINGMOVING NOWHERE: FIRING ZONES AND FORCIBLE TRANSFER IN THE JORDAN VALLEY NOWHERE FIRING ZONES AND FORCIBLE TRANSFER IN THE JORDAN VALLEY 1 2 MOVINGMOVING NOWHERE: FIRING ZONES AND FORCIBLE TRANSFER IN THE JORDAN VALLEY NOWHERE FIRING ZONES AND FORCIBLE TRANSFER IN THE JORDAN VALLEY 2015 3 Table of Contents Introduction 3 Physical Security 6 Eviction Orders And Demolition Orders 10 Psychological Security 18 Livelihood Reductions 22 Environmental Concerns 24 Water 26 Settler Violence 28 Isuues Faced By Other Communities In Area C 32 International Humanitarian Law 36 Conclusion 40 Photo by Hamza Zbiedat Hamza by Photo 4 Moving Nowhere Introduction Indirect and direct forcible transfer is currently at the forefront of Israel’s ideological agenda in area C. Firing zones, initially established as a means of land control, are now being used to create an environment so hostile that Palestinians are forced to leave the area or live in conditions of deteriorating security. re-dating the creation of the state of Israel, there was an ideological agenda within Pcertain political spheres predicated on the notion that Israel should exist from the sea to the Jordan River. Upon creation of the State the subsequent governments sought to establish this notion. This has resulted in an uncompromising programme of colonisation, ethnic cleansing and de-development in Palestine. The conclusion of the six day war in 1967 marked the beginning of the ongoing occupation, under which the full force of the ideological agenda has been extended into the West Bank. Israel has continuously led projects and policies designed to appropriate vast amounts of Palestinian land in the West Bank, despite such actions being illegal under international law.
    [Show full text]
  • The Changing Geopolitical Dynamics of the Middle East and Their Impact on Israeli-Palestinian Peace Efforts
    Western Michigan University ScholarWorks at WMU Honors Theses Lee Honors College 4-25-2018 The Changing Geopolitical Dynamics of the Middle East and their Impact on Israeli-Palestinian Peace Efforts Daniel Bucksbaum Western Michigan University, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/honors_theses Part of the Comparative Politics Commons, International Relations Commons, and the Other Political Science Commons Recommended Citation Bucksbaum, Daniel, "The Changing Geopolitical Dynamics of the Middle East and their Impact on Israeli- Palestinian Peace Efforts" (2018). Honors Theses. 3009. https://scholarworks.wmich.edu/honors_theses/3009 This Honors Thesis-Open Access is brought to you for free and open access by the Lee Honors College at ScholarWorks at WMU. It has been accepted for inclusion in Honors Theses by an authorized administrator of ScholarWorks at WMU. For more information, please contact [email protected]. The Changing Geopolitical Dynamics of the Middle East and their Impact on Israeli- Palestinian Peace Efforts By Daniel Bucksbaum A thesis submitted to the Lee Honors College Western Michigan University April 2018 Thesis Committee: Jim Butterfield, Ph.D., Chair Yuan-Kang Wang, Ph.D. Mustafa Mughazy, Ph.D. Bucksbaum 1 Table of Contents I. Abstract……………………………………………………………………………………………………………………3 II. Source Material……………………………………………………………………………………………………….4 III. Introduction…………………………………………………………………………………………………………….4 IV. Historical Context for the Two-State Solution………………………………………………………...6 a. Deeply Rooted and Ideological Claims to the Land……………………………………………….…..7 b. Legacy of the Oslo Accords……………………………………………………………………………………….9 c. Israeli Narrative: Why the Two-State Solution is Unfeasible……………………………………19 d. Palestinian Narrative: Why the Two-State Solution has become unattainable………..22 e. Drop in Support for the Two-State Solution; Negotiations entirely…………………………27 f.
    [Show full text]
  • The Fatah-Hamas Reconciliation: Threatening Peace Prospects
    The Fatah-Hamas Reconciliation: Threatening Peace Prospects Testimony by David Makovsky Director, Project on the Middle East Peace Process The Washington Institute for Near East Policy February 5, 2013 Hearing of the U.S. House of Representatives Committee on Foreign Relations Subcommittee on the Middle East and North Africa Thank you, Madam Chairwoman, Ranking Member Deutch, and distinguished members of the subcommittee for this wonderful opportunity to testify at your very first session of the new Congress. The issue of unity between Fatah and Hamas is something that the two parties have discussed at different levels since 2007 -- and certainly since the two groups announced an agreement in principle in May 2011. Indeed, a meeting between the groups is scheduled in Cairo in the coming days. One should not rule out that such unity will occur; but the past failures of the groups to unite begs various questions and suggests why unity may not occur in the future. While the idea of unity is popular among divided publics everywhere, there have been genuine obstacles to implementing any unity agreement between Fatah and Hamas. First, it seems that neither Fatah -- the mainstream party of the Palestinian Authority (PA) -- nor Hamas wants to risk what it already possesses, namely Hamas's control of Gaza and the PA's control of its part of the West Bank. Each has its own zone and wants to maintain corresponding control. Second, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas has not been willing to commit to a Hamas demand for the end of PA security cooperation with Israel in the West Bank, which has resulted in the arrests of Hamas operatives by the PA.
    [Show full text]
  • Statement of H.E. President Mahmoud Abbas President of the State of Palestine UN General Assembly General Debate of the 75Th Session 25 September 2020
    Statement of H.E. President Mahmoud Abbas President of the State of Palestine UN General Assembly General Debate of the 75th Session 25 September 2020 In the name of God, the Merciful H.E. Mr. Volkan Bozkir, President of the General Assembly H.E. Mr. António Guterres, Secretary General Ladies and Gentlemen, Heads and Members of delegations, I wondered while preparing this statement what more could I tell you, after all that I have said in previous statements, about the perpetual tragedy and suffering being endured by my people – which the world is witness to daily – and about their legitimate aspirations – which are yet to be fulfilled – to freedom, independence and human dignity, as enjoyed by the peoples of the world. Until when, ladies and gentlemen, will the question of Palestine remain without a just solution as enshrined in United Nations resolutions? Until when will the Palestinian people remain under Israeli occupation and will the question of millions of Palestine refugees remain without a just solution in accordance with what the United Nations has determined over 70 years ago? Ladies and Gentlemen, The Palestinian people have been present in their homeland, Palestine, the land of their ancestors, for over 6000 years, and they will continue living on this land, steadfast in the face of occupation, aggression and the disappointments and betrayals, until the fulfilment of their rights. Despite all they have endured and continue to endure, despite the unjust blockade that targets our national decision, we will not kneel or surrender and we will not deviate from our fundamental positions, and we shall overcome, God willing.
    [Show full text]