What was actually proposed by Israel at Camp David

[NewsGuy]

Well, as a good starting point, I figured I'd bring in what Israel proposed at Camp David, which was described by then-Prime-Minister Barak (and later by Sharon) as a more generous peace plan than the Palestinians would ever be offered again. If those two Israeli Prime Ministers are actually correct, then the following plan might be at the extreme left of peace proposals.

What do you think?

Here are the nitty-gritty proposal details:

1. Palestinian Statehood and Conditions

A Palestinian state would be established in most of the West Bank and all of the Gaza strip, with these conditions:


The state would not have an army with heavy weapons,

The state would not make alliances with other countries without Israeli approval and would not allow introduction of foreign forces west of the River Jordan.

Israel would be allowed deploy troops in the Jordan Valley if Israel were to be threatened by invasion from the east.

Israeli aircraft could overfly Palestinian airspace.

Israeli would install early warning stations in the mountains overlooking the Jordan valley and other areas.

Palestinians would control border crossings with Jordan and Egypt along with Israeli security observation.

The Israelis would retain management over water sources in the West Bank while approving a limited quota to the Palestinians.

Israel would lease areas in the Jordan Valley or maintain temporary sovereignty over them for up to 25 years.


2. Refugees

The Palestine refugee problem would be solved in the following way:


Israel would allow the return of around 100,000 refugees under “humanitarian” grounds in the form of family reunions and considers such a step as compliance with UN Resolution 194.

According to one source, the Palestinian State would be limited in the number of refugees it could absorb to half a million refugees according to a fixed timetable. This is not confirmed by other sources and is problematic, since a much larger number of refugees, well over a million, already live in camps in Gaza and the West Bank.

An international fund would compensate refugees. Israel, the U.S. and Europe are to contribute. According to one source, this fund would also provide compensation to Jews who were forced to leave their possessions in Arab countries when they fled to Israel.


3. Jerusalem

Palestine would obtain sovereignty over suburbs in the north and the south of Jerusalem that would be annexed to the West Bank, including Abu Dees, Alezariye and eastern Sawahre.

Within East Jerusalem, in (Beit Hanina-Shuafat), there would be a civilian administration affiliated with the Palestinian Authority with the possibility of linking it to West Jerusalem through a municipality covering both sectors. The Palestinians would run a branch municipality within the framework of the Israeli higher municipal council while depriving them from planning and construction jurisdictions.

Palestinian, Arab, Islamic and Christian administration of holy shrines in the old city of Jerusalem. The Palestinians would be allowed to hoist the Palestinian flag over the Islamic and Christian shrines along with a safe passage linking northern Jerusalem, which would be annexed to the West Bank, to those areas so that Palestinians and Muslims would not pass through lands under Israeli sovereignty.

4. Land Area of Palestine

The initial area of the Palestinian state would comprise about 73% of the land area of the West Bank and all of Gaza. The West Bank would be divided by the road from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea and a corridor on either side of it. This would form two relatively large Palestinian areas and one small enclave surrounding Jericho. The three areas would be joined by a free passage without checkpoints, but the safe passage could be closed by Israel in case of emergency. According to Palestinian sources, there would be another division beween the area north of the Ariel and Shilo settlements along the trans-Shomron highway built by Israel.

In later stages (10-25 years) Israel would cede additional areas, particularly in the mountains overlooking the Jordan valley, to bring the total area to slightly under 90% of the area of the West Bank (94% excluding greater Jerusalem).

The major settlement blocks adjacent to Jerusalem and in the Jerusalem corridor would be annexed to Israel: Efrat, Gush Etzion, Ma'ale Edumim. The town of Ariel and the corridor along the trans-Samaria highway would be annexed to Israel. The Jewish settlement town of Qiriat Arba would remain under Israeli administration in the heart of Palestinian territory, with a single road through Palestinian territory reaching it from the south. Isolated Jewish settlements including the settlement in Hebron, would come under Palestinian jurisdiction and would probably be abandoned.

[Solon]

This looks like it's written to show all the limitations and not-so-generous points.

Keep perspective that a Palestinian state would be established on 90% of the area of the West Bank and all of the Gaza strip, Israel would allow the return of around 100,000 refugees to Israel-proper, Palestine would obtain sovereignty over major parts of Jerusalem, and that Jewish settlements including the settlement in Hebron, would come under Palestinian jurisdiction.

That's pretty darn generous.

[Negev]

Originally posted by Solon
That's pretty darn generous.

The bigger question is whether no matter how generous a plan might be, will the Palestinians finally recognize Israel's right to exist?

A recent pole published in the Israeli press shows that nearly 1/3 of all Palestinians poled view the intifada as a fight for all of Israel, not just the Palestinian territories.

[takeo]

well, 1/3 is still a minority. 1/3 of the Israeli vote for parties who want to eliminate Palestinians as a people. (Shas for example)

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by takeo
well, 1/3 is still a minority. 1/3 of the Israeli vote for parties who want to eliminate Palestinians as a people. (Shas for example)

More Arabist disinformation.

There is no Israeli party currently in the Knesset that has ever advocated the elimination of the Palestinian people.

That's simply an Arabist lie.

You can fool some of the people some of the time...

[aid]

Many people have already forgotten that Camp David was followed by Taba, in a mad and desperate rush by Barak, Beilin, Ben-Ami to appease Arafat. According to those proposals, Israel relinquished her requests for the temporary control of the Jordan valley area. Eastern Jerusalem was to be given to Arafat, as well as, astonishingly, the full control over the Temple Mount. For the first time Jerusalem was put on the butcher block, without any indication as to how security of Israel would be maintained in the absense of non-existent borders through the city.

I also never heard of this:

"The West Bank would be divided by the road from Jerusalem to the Dead Sea and a corridor on either side of it. This would form two relatively large Palestinian areas and one small enclave surrounding Jericho."

I am not disputing this, I just never saw this part. Can you supply references?

In any event, Arafat's response to Camp David was as resounding as it was illiterate: "NO ACCEPTABLE" - this was Arafat's resoultion scribbled with his own hand across the document presented to him by Clinton. I can imagine an Israel response like that to an American proposal - what would happen?
However, everything was permitted to Arafat - with no penalty.
The US financial assistance to his regime continued (still does), there was little price to pay - Clinton did blame Arafat for the failure of peace.

There was not even an attempt of a counteroffer, NO proposals AT ALL from the Arab side. I watched Arafat at Camp David when I could - his body language indicated he was not there. His body wa, but his mind was not. His mind was calculating the future pogrom ("intifada").

The IDF had previously retreated from Lebanon, and it was played as a glorious victory of the Arab weapon. The Lebanese Liberation Army had achieved total Victory without engaging in humiliating negotiations with the Zionist enemy. The Palestinian Revolution could not have done worse. If Hizbullah had been able to achieve liberation, why not the PLO and Hamas? By his Lebanese retreat Barak had precipitated and sealed the war that is going on today.

At Taba the real stumbling block was the "refugees" and the Temple Mount, not territorial problem. It looks like Arafat is not very much preoccupied with a few percentage points of territory. This is secondary to him. He looks into the future and sees two three Palestinian States: Jordan, Arafat's Palestine and Israel. What matters to him is the ethnic composition of Israel. If he manages to stuff Israel with a few hundreds of thousands of Arabs, in addition to those who will be settled in his domain, in just a few years Israel would be another Arab State, at which point Jews would have no choice but leave or be eventually slaughtered in pogroms. And when they leave, they'll leave behind all the reaches of the country. At this point, the three Palestinian states become one, and Palestine becomes the dominant force in the Arab world.

This scenario is the exact one that Israel is trying to prevent. I don't know how a compromise can be found between the two opposite national project and goals. I see no solution. There is no cure to this chronic desease. The only hope is it can be sustained at a non-life threatening level.

[takeo]

to newsguy:
If i remember well, the leader of Shas called for the elimination of Palestinians as a people, right? the other leaders of right-wing parties advocate the elimination of the palestinian people from israel and areas occupied by israel. And some people on thos board too.
to aid:
Please read the UN-resolutions and compare it to the "offer" of Barak. Israel must leave the occupied territories entirely, and it must take back the etnically cleansed people from Israel. This is not something for negociation, this is an obligation and a precondition for peace. Nobody would accept if Iraq retreated only half from Kouweit.
Jordan is not a Palestinian state, many of its inhabitants who are refugees will return to Palestine if they are offered the opportunity. The influx of Palestinian refugees in Israel will not destroy Israel as they will still be less than 1/3 of the population and will have to adapt to Israeli laws as the small minority of Palestinians who was allowed to remain in Israel did. Palestinians no longer living in miserable conditions are no terrorists but civilians who want a job and a house for their family, the same as any average israeli family.
and about Libanon: the truth is that Barak made an end to the war in Bibanon and at the northern borders of Israel. It shows that Arabs are only terrorists when they are occupied.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by takeo
to newsguy:
If i remember well, the leader of Shas called for the elimination of Palestinians as a people, right? the other leaders of right-wing parties advocate the elimination of the palestinian people from israel and areas occupied by israel. And some people on thos board too.

and about Libanon: the truth is that Barak made an end to the war in Bibanon and at the northern borders of Israel. It shows that Arabs are only terrorists when they are occupied.

Sorry, it seems that all you don't "remember well" at all.

Shas spiritual leader Ovadia Yosef is considered by nearly all Israelis to be mentally unstable at this point in his life. Most of his verbal attacks have been against Israeli members of Knesset and against his fellow rabbis.

More importantly, the fgacts that you conveniently "forgot" to mention is that at no time did his unfortunate remark ever become the official policy of Shas nor that of the Israeli government.

And, after Ovadia Yosef made his unfortunate remark, the Israeli attorney general Elyakim Rubinstein began a criminal prosecution against Ovadia Yosef for that remark, which is of an illegal nature in Israel.

At no time did any Israeli party and certainly no Israeli government ever advocate the physical elimination of Palestinians -- that is a blood-libel of the Arabs whic only plays well to an audience which is biased in the first place. It has no basis in reality.

What is true, however, is that some Israeli parties, as well as many Palestinians, advocate a border separation between Israelis and Palestinians to stop the ongoing violence.

...

As for your mistaken comment about Lebanon, you agains conveniently "forgot" to mention that even after Barak's retreat from Lebanon and after the UN marked the international border, there have been ongoing attacks from Hizbullah, including the Har Dov kidnapping of the 3 Israeli soldiers now presumed dead.

There has also been ongoing fortification of terrorist infrastructure, supplied by Iran and supervised by Syria and ongoing threats of a border blowup. In the past month alone, the US needed to intervene and threaten Syria with direct military action if the Hizbullah threat to Mideast stability was allowed to continue.

The terror from Lebanon and Hizbullah never stopped due to Israel's withdrwal, buyt rather only when Syria and Iran the puppet masters of Lebanon were threatened with military action by the US.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by aid


The IDF had previously retreated from Lebanon, and it was played as a glorious victory of the Arab weapon. The Lebanese Liberation Army had achieved total Victory without engaging in humiliating negotiations with the Zionist enemy. The Palestinian Revolution could not have done worse. If Hizbullah had been able to achieve liberation, why not the PLO and Hamas? By his Lebanese retreat Barak had precipitated and sealed the war that is going on today.


Yes, this Arab view that terrorism and the avoidance of peaceful negotiations were successful are seen by many as costing the lives of scores of innocent Israelis due to Palestinian terrorism.

[takeo]

It may be true that he is unstable and that his remark was condamned by the other Israeli politicians (this is only normal) but isn't he still the leader of Shas (i might be wrong)? has he received a penalty for his remark?
And if some extremist palestinian of Hamas says the same and is immidiately condamned by the PA for it, than you treat it as well as if that remark of an unstable extremist is the opinion of the entire Palestinian community, so you are guilty yourself of the mistake you said i made.
Remains the fact that many Israeli politicians not only advocate "separation" but outright etnic cleansing from all the territories occupied by Israel, especially from the religious parties.

About Libanon, yes, still some violence occured, but one can not deny that the violence has sharply declined since the Israeli withdrawel. before 1999 it was almost every day war, many Israeli soldiers died and almost monthly rockets were fired at Kiriat Shmona. after 1999 it was calm except some isolated incidents. And about US-pressure, Hezbollah nor Syria are listening the US, they don't care what the US says or does (on the contrary to Arafat). How long has it been since there was no violence recently?
yes Libanon was an example for Israel. Withdraw your forces, comply to international demands, and you will receive peace.

[aid]

The situation with Lebanon is that thousands of Katyusha rockets are targeted at Israel.

The declared goal of the Hizbullah is the destruction of Israel. There is only reason this has not happened yet - and it is not Iran, Syria and Hizbullah honoring the borders of Israel. The reason, quite simply, is the IDF.

Lately the PA, Hizbullah and Iran have become good friends. The intercepted ship laden with weapons is the result of this friendship.

When the 9/11 furor dies down a little, the next battle will include a simultaneous Katyusha attack by the PA and Hizbullah.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by takeo
... isn't he still the leader of Shas (i might be wrong)? has he received a penalty for his remark?
And if some extremist palestinian of Hamas says the same and is immidiately condamned by the PA for it, than you treat it as well as if that remark of an unstable extremist is the opinion of the entire Palestinian community, so you are guilty yourself of the mistake you said i made.

Remains the fact that many Israeli politicians not only advocate "separation" but outright etnic cleansing from all the territories occupied by Israel, especially from the religious parties.

yes Libanon was an example for Israel. Withdraw your forces, comply to international demands, and you will receive peace.

As I wrote before, but you chose to ignore, the fact that under Israeli law, incitement is illegal. Ovadia Yosef is currently under criminal investigation to determine whether his remarks constitute this crime. If found guilty, he will suffer the consequences under the law.

On the other hand, Sheik Yassin the leader of Hamas and many other Arab leaders regularly call for the systematic genocide of all Jews, but they are viewed as examplary citizens to be praised as inspiration for their constituencies.

That's one of the differences between Israel and the Arab countries: In Israel incitement is a crime. In Arab countries, it is a way of life to divert public attention away from the true cause of their miserable lives, i.e., the brutal third-world dictatorships that rule the Arabs.

As for your second point, Lebanon is exactly an example of why Israel should never have fled in such a chaotic manner from lebanon. It never get peace there, as terrorist attacks persisted on the Lebanese border, because the Arabs never respected the UN resolution which set international borders and they still have never accepted Israel's right to exist under international law.

[takeo]

Egypt has done so, Jordan has done so, the PA has done so, and the only reason why Libanon didn't is because they claim that Israel is till occupiing a small part of their country (and probably as well because Syria ordered them to do so as long as the Golan heights haven't been returned to Syria) . So yes the most Arabs respect the territorial integrity of Israel (again: within its existing borders recognised by the international community, a fact some people seem to ignore on this board). The only reason why Syria didn't do so is because Israel didn't want to return the Golan-heights.
Sheik Yassin is such an unstable extremistic leader, ad as Shas in israel he has his followers (more since the latest intifadeh) but as well many Palestinians don't agree with him and his organisation has been persecuted by the PA many times in the past. But he isn't as extreme as the leader of Hamas, who called for the fysical elimination of palestinians, he called for the etnic cleansing of all jews from palestine /Israel, so comparable to what some on this board want to do with the Palestinians.
i am glad to hear that he is still persecuted for his nazist words, but that won't stop the incitement of the other israeli right-wingers who call for the elimination(not killing but expulsion) of all Palestinians from Israel/occupied territories. So incitement is not something typically Arab.

About Libanon, you say that those rockets are ready to be fired on Israel, but why weren't they fired yet? Not even when Sharon ordered the shooting of protesting stone throwing children in the hottest period of intifadeh? and not even before september the 11th?
The truth is, and all the rest is imagination and speculation, that since the Israeli withdrawel, the violence at the northern borders of israel has sharply declined and far less people died than before on both sides.

[takeo]

"But he isn't as extreme as the leader of Hamas, who called for the fysical elimination of palestinians, he called for the etnic cleansing of all jews from palestine /Israel, so comparable to what some on this board want to do with the Palestinians. "

sorry i mean Shas

[aid]

Shas is politically quite moderate, like most of the "ultra-orthodox."

What Rav Ovadia (Abdullah) Yosef said was just a measure of frustration of an elderly man, who is still a good deal lives within Arab culture where he comes from. It has nothing to do with the political platform of Shas.

In contrast, the Hamas Charter, its official program, directly calls for the destruction of Israel and literally for killing all Jews. You may check it on the Hamas website.

With this Charter, Hamas is an organization that exists totally legally and operates quite openly. Before 9/11 no one even dared call it officially terrorist.

Even after 9/11, it is still not outlawed, and all the arrests made are as always a sham.

The war of extrmination against the Jewish State keeps on.

[takeo]

I checked the website of hamas, and didn't see any call for the fysical elimination of all jews from Palestine. I only saw that they call for "the liberation of all Palestine" (so indeed not only the occupied territories) from Jewish rule (so it is not indicated that Jews have te be physically eliminated or even can't continue the live there anymore, but i agree most Jews would flee and not allowed back when Hamas would take controll over Israel, so in fact that means etnically cleansing).
Hamas is sometimes operating legal, sometimes not. Also Israel didn't persecute its extreme right-wing, not even when those were responsible for the killing of Rabin) Arafat is not a dictator however and as Palestine isn't a real state he doesn't have full controll over everything that happens in the Palestinian community. the PA is weak, has a small army, and hamas has a strong base. when Arafat is strong (during the begiing of the oslo-days) he tried to extermintate hamas, but as oslo under netanyahu didn't bring the Palestinians anything, the popularity of hamas did grow and he couldn't do anything). when he tried to arrest Sheik yassin the Palestinian police was just not strong enough to face the angry mob facing them and they are not prepared to have a civil war as long as Israel is occupiing.

[NewsGuy]

Originally posted by takeo
when Arafat is strong (during the begiing of the oslo-days) he tried to extermintate hamas, but as oslo under netanyahu didn't bring the Palestinians anything, the popularity of hamas did grow and he couldn't do anything). when he tried to arrest Sheik yassin the Palestinian police was just not strong enough to face the angry mob facing them and they are not prepared to have a civil war as long as Israel is occupiing.

1. Oslo actually brought a tremendous benefit to the Palestinians because they got full control over all their major cities and near-total sovereignty there. They got to place their own leaders and manage their day-to-day affairs and build their municipal services infrastructure as they please. Before Oslo they were treated correctly as terrorist subjects under military guard to control their murderous tendancies.

On the other hand, what did Israel get from Oslo? Nothing at all but thousands of dead Israeli civilians. This is true of all the "peace" agreements with the Arabs. All worthless and only benefitting the Arabs.

2. Arafat has 60,000 professionally trained and armed troops. Hamas has about 2,000. Of course Arafat has the power to arrest Sheik Yassin, the terrorist leader of the Hamas. But why would Arafat arrest his terror partner? No way.

The only reason Arafat does not arrest terrorists is that he does not want to. He is their partner.

[aid]

Israel's right does not have its own armies, Takeo.

Israel has only one army.

Arafat plays a role of a conductor of a terrorist orchestra.

Al-Fateh is his violin group. Hamas is chellos.

Jihad is trumpets. etc.

aLL Arafat needs to do is point his wand in the direction of a group, or simply wink or touch his nose, and the group starts its "music".

This is how it works.

I quoted to you Hamas program of complete physical extermination of Jews, but you prefer to ignore it.

There is no way to discuss anything with you. You are simply playing your recording.

[takeo]

"1. Oslo actually brought a tremendous benefit to the Palestinians because they got full control over all their major cities and near-total sovereignty there. They got to place their own leaders and manage their day-to-day affairs and build their municipal services infrastructure as they please. Before Oslo they were treated correctly as terrorist subjects under military guard to control their murderous tendancies. "

Those cities were like huge prisons of which the Israeli could close the gate at any moment. And so according to you all palestinians are terrorist subjects (again you show your hate against Palestinians as a people) that need to be put under "military guard". You can't put an entire population under "military guard" without harvesting more violence and more hate. The real reason why they are put under military guard is because Israel wants to keep their land and is a colonial oppressor, the same way France behaved in Algeria. in that time Algerian liberation fighters were also considered terrorists in france but all they did was fighting to have their own land back. every people under "military guard" will become violent and terrorist towards their aggressor. in fact putting an entire population under military guard is an act of terrorism on itself.

"On the other hand, what did Israel get from Oslo? Nothing at all but thousands of dead Israeli civilians. This is true of all the "peace" agreements with the Arabs. All worthless and only benefitting the Arabs. "

Bullshit, the peace-agreement with Egypt, Jordan and Libanon brought israel peace or less violence at those borders. And in 1993 as well Oslo made an end to the first intifadeh, and with some exceptions the violence stopped untill 2000 when it was clear that oslo wouldn't bring the palestinians their independance.

"2. Arafat has 60,000 professionally trained and armed troops. Hamas has about 2,000. Of course Arafat has the power to arrest Sheik Yassin, the terrorist leader of the Hamas. But why would Arafat arrest his terror partner? No way. "

arafat doesn't have 60000 armed troops, where did you read this? he only has around 5000 armed police, of which most are not functioning anymore since Israel destroyed the complete police-infrastructure, including prisons. How do you want them to combat terrorists? the Palestinian police have been criticised in the 90's for harming the human rights of Hamas memebers and putting them in jail without trial. in those times Arafat did fight the terrorists, but in the current conditions it can't fight against Israeli aggression AND against hamas.

Aid, you are the one with a recorder. Always the same BS, never listening to any argumenti i fakti that don't fit in your story that the whole world is one giant anti-semitic mudhole and that everything israel does is purely an act of self-defense.
hamas and jihad don't listen to Arafat at all, never did and never will. The PA are harmed by those suicide attacks on civilians, in destroys their image in the west and undermines their autority.