It looks like you're using an Ad Blocker.

Please white-list or disable AboveTopSecret.com in your ad-blocking tool.

Thank you.

 

Some features of ATS will be disabled while you continue to use an ad-blocker.

 

Israel warns Palestinians over seeking recognition

page: 1
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join
share:

posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   

Israel warns Palestinians over seeking recognition


news.yahoo.com

JERUSALEM (AFP) – Israel on Monday warned Palestinians against seeking recognition of an independent state, while dismissing the move as a political manoeuvre amid frustration over the stalled peace process.
(visit the link for the full news article)




posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:01 AM
link   


"Any unilateral action will undo the framework of past accords and lead to unilateral actions from Israel," Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said late on Sunday.

"There is no substitute for negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority," he added.

His comments came after the Palestinians said they intended to ask the UN Security Council to recognise an independent Palestinian state as US efforts to relaunch peace talks flounder.

Israeli ministers on Monday said the Palestinian move was a political manoeuvre amid a widening rift between the two main Palestinian factions and mounting frustration over the impasse in the Middle East peace process.

Environment Minister Gilad Erdan, of the premier's rightwing Likud party, told public radio that the move was "a storm in a teacup, an internal manoeuvre aimed at boosting the image of Mahmud Abbas."

And he repeated a threat by another minister on Sunday that if the Palestinians proceed with their move, Israel should annex the parts of the occupied West Bank that house major Jewish settlement blocs.

While dismissing the "empty" rhetoric on both sides, Industry Minister Benjamin Ben Eliezer of the centre-left Labour said the Palestinian move "betrays the frustration of the Palestinian population which sees no end to an occupation that has lasted for 43 years."

"All those who are speaking about annexation are speaking empty words and all those who are speaking of independence are also speaking empty words," he told army radio. "It's a game of ping pong."

Israeli analyst Yossi Alpher echoed the sentiment.

"The Palestinians might be seeking new concessions ahead of the renewal of peace negotiations, but there is no doubt that they are expressing their frustration," he said.

Chief negotiator Saeb Erakat insisted that the Palestinian side was serious, saying that he had met with European Union diplomats to ask them to back the move to the UN Security Council.

"We asked their countries to back our initiative," he said. "The initial response of the EU is positive. I didn't hear any opposition or concern from the EU members."

US Senator Joe Lieberman, an independent from Connecticut, said that Washington was likely to veto any attempt to bring the issue before the Security Council, which he branded as "a waste of time."

"I hope and presume that the United States would veto such an attempt when and if it ever came to the Security Council," he said in a press conference in Jerusalem.

Meanwhile, Abbas's spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeina said that Netanyahu's comments showed that "Israel is looking for pretexts and excuses to oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state."

The move for UN recognition is the latest in a series of options the Palestinians have warned they could take if the Middle East peace process remained stalled.

Others include unilaterally declaring independence, asking the UN to determine final borders of their promised state, dissolving the Palestinian Authority (PA) and seeking equal rights within Israel. France warns against Palestinian declaration

The administration of US President Barack Obama has so far been unable to convince Israelis and Palestinians to resume their peace talks amid deep disagreements on the issue of Israeli settlements on Palestinian land.

The Palestinians insist on a freeze of all settlement activity before talks restart, while Israel is offering a temporary and limited ease on construction, saying the issue will be resolved during the negotiations.


Dam! I donno what to say about it except Israel is at it again, warning Palestine to seek recognition...

Wonder why is it not covered in mainstream news.

news.yahoo.com
(visit the link for the full news article)



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:11 AM
link   
So basically, everyone screams Israel has the right to exist.... as a state
but palestine is not?

Netanyahu is saying this is nothing more than a political move, so palestine wanting to end an embargo is just a political move?
People want good access to food and supplies is just politics?

Freedom is an empty word?

Netanyahu is a psychopath and more dangerous than Hamas himself.
Both Netanyahu and Hamas should be dethroned!!

This speech that Netanyahu gave is repulsive to say the least.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:26 AM
link   
Well this is a shrewd maneuver by the Palestinians, if ever there was one. If they can manage to hold it together without internal strife and/or having members of their citizenry resort to terrorism (rockets, be it from west bank or gaza), it will really put the burden on Israel to come through.

If the Palestinians do this right and still Israel does something to crush it then it will certainly not look good for Israel. They will then be scene as the primarily road block to peace.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:33 AM
link   
Remember how Israel was created?
Remember how they fought for independence?

But their neighbours are not allowed the same it seems...
More of the usual "one rule for Israel,one rule for everyone else" crap.

I think the Israeli government wants perpetual war against the Palestinians until there are none left.Otherwise they would have given their neighbour a free hand to develop their own Independent state of Palestine.

I believe Netenyahu knows full well that an independent Palestine would obliterate any support for Hamas,and would stop rocket attacks against Israel.
He knows this,and yet still wants war.

He said this the other day:


The official explained to Bibi Netanyahu that if there was a peace settlement, extra investment would push Israel's long-term growth rate from 5% a year to 7%. The Israeli prime minister responded that if the country had 5% growth, it did not need peace.


www.guardian.co.uk...

Discussed here:

www.abovetopsecret.com...

The Israeli Government want war-it keeps their population in fear(and so easier to manipulate)and it kills off their Arab neighbours-The Israelis gov want both IMO.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:49 AM
link   
Allow me to interject my own interpretation of the state of the peace process (although no doubt I'll get flamed for not agreeing with the mainstream).

This is what Netanyahu has been saying to the PA for the last 5 months, in about 6 different speeches:

We want you to have your own State.
We want to support your State with trade, commerce and shared security.
We cannot, at this time, accept your preconditions* as they are politically impossible.
Let's sit down and see if we can work out a compromise to get things moving.

This has been Abbas's consistent response:

We won't sit down with you until you agree to all our preconditions.

But, of course, the MSM portrays Israel as the intransigent party. Why not, makes better headlines and keeps the more violent pressure groups quiet.

*Palestinian Authority's preconditions are:

- Unlimited right of return for (~6 million) Palestinians living abroad to live in Israel (not Palestinian territories)
- Jerusalem to be split down the middle between Israel and Palestinian governments
- And of course the end to Jewish settlements in the West Bank / Judea & Samaria.

The first two are, frankly, not going to happen in our lifetimes. Under any Israeli government. The Israeli populace would not accept it, and the government coalition would disintegrate. Abbas knows this.

The third is politically difficult. It involves sending the IDF in to turf Israelis out of their homes. Difficult, but not impossible. Israel has shown willingness to do this (hence Hillary's comments about Israeli concessions), but only if it progresses peace - not if they will get nothing in return.

Now Abbas is throwing his toys out of the pram and threatening to go it alone. This would indeed by bad for Israel, but worse for the Palestinian people. If the Palestinian Authority acts unilaterally, so will Israel. No more freebies. No more assistance with security (yes, there is a great deal of cooperation and intelligence sharing between the IDF and PA security forces). No more protection from Hamas.

Incidentally the EU and US have also said that they won't support a unilateral Palestinian State.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 08:59 AM
link   
reply to post by mattpryor
 


WOWWWWWW
you didn't include Netanyahu saying that a two state solution has a pre-condition where palestinians are not allowed to have ANY weapons whatsover?

you didn't include that?
WOWOW


A state can still be considered a state if they aren't allowed to protect themselves? I think not

You can call it a two state solution with one side having complete sovereignty and the other almost none at all.
That's not a two-state solution that's a slap in the face, it's a farce.

And what was the other joke from Netanyahu???
A temporary and partial settlement freeze?


temporary and partial????


Netanyahu must think that the stupidest people on earth read or listen to his speeches and won't see through these sharades. that's no offense to you mattpryor



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 09:04 AM
link   
reply to post by mattpryor
 


"We want you to have your own state,no weapons allowed,and we're still going to carry on building settlements across your state,and controlling your water supplies"

would have been more accurate.

Sounds fair enough doesn't it?
Who could possibly disagree with such a plan?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 10:14 AM
link   
I think there's more than meets the eye.

If Palestine is recognised it would mean Israel wont be able to forcefully take anymore land From Palestine and build illegal settlements.

Secondly if Palestine is recognised, Israel would no longer able to keep hold of Gaza coast and control the water supply as per their wish.

Third, it would no longer be able to enter Gaza & West Bank to arrest anyone they like too without proper evidence etc.

Fourth, Israel will have to remove all blockades from within Gaza and West Bank and iit would mean Palestinians would be able to walk freely in their areas.

Fifth, however controversial Israel plans(if any) to build "Greater Israel/Promised Land" from the River of Egypt to the Euphrates river as mentioned in the Hebrew Bible will come to end.

Only these come to my mind atm.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 10:29 AM
link   
reply to post by December_Rain
 


good addition!


Are you familiar with the Land of Canaan?


Canaan (Phoenician: , Kana'n, Hebrew: כנען kna-an, Arabic: كنعان Kanaʿān) is an ancient term for a region encompassing modern-day Israel, Lebanon, the Palestinian Territories, plus adjoining coastal lands and parts of Jordan, Syria and northeastern Egypt. In the Hebrew Bible, the "Land of Canaan" extends from Lebanon southward across Gaza to the "Brook of Egypt" and eastward to the Jordan River Valley, thus including modern Israel and the Palestinian Territories. In far ancient times, the southern area included various ethnic groups. The Amarna Letters found in Ancient Egypt mention Canaan (Akkadian: Kinaḫḫu) in connection with Gaza and other cities along the Phoenician coast and into Upper Galilee. Many earlier Egyptian sources also make mention of numerous military campaigns conducted in Ka-na-na, just inside Asia.

en.wikipedia.org...



Part of this is all about religion.

It's so amazign how much trouble and pain religion causes.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:10 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Actually, I am not into religion at all. It is so frigging confusing and irrational it smogs a person mind so I try to stay away from religion aspect. I am against Shariah & Torah both though after I researched a lil' about them.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:14 AM
link   
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Weapons, water distribution and management, etc, are negotiable details aren't they? Stuff that can be worked out by peaceful negotiations?

Surely the first priority should be to get a working Palestinian government with defined borders, then details like that can be sorted out afterwards? Seems a funny thing to get stuck on when both parties have a shared goal of a Palestinian state.

If I were the Israeli government I wouldn't want to see a Palestinian state with its own airforce and army either, at least not yet, given their propensity to attack Israel whenever some religious extremist declares another intifada! Do you really think that's unreasonable?



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:19 AM
link   
reply to post by mattpryor
 


lunacy!!!
Palestine with it's own airforce?

They wouldn't even be able to afford the gas for one fighter jet let alone an entire airforce.


and as far as religious extremism, I think that's a major problem on the israeli side not the palestine side.

The settlements are buing built because people think god told them to live there.

lunatics!



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:26 AM
link   
reply to post by Silcone Synapse
 


I imagine the Israeli government would come down very hard on any religious settlers that tried to build in the West Bank after borders had been drawn. And any existing settlements that are within the Palestinian state's future borders would have to be removed. Again, that's all part of the negotiations. First they have to agree borders, then who gets to live where.

As for water, that has to be something both parties cooperate on as Israel provides (and pays for) the technology and infrastructure, and they both share the same sources.

Do you not agree that negotiations have to come first?

Incidentally you may be interested to learn that there is a big debate in Israel at the moment about IDF troops who protest or refuse to evict Jewish settlers, who are being prosecuted: JPost.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:29 AM
link   

Originally posted by mattpryor
reply to post by ModernAcademia
 


Weapons, water distribution and management, etc, are negotiable details aren't they? Stuff that can be worked out by peaceful negotiations?

Surely the first priority should be to get a working Palestinian government with defined borders, then details like that can be sorted out afterwards? Seems a funny thing to get stuck on when both parties have a shared goal of a Palestinian state.

If I were the Israeli government I wouldn't want to see a Palestinian state with its own airforce and army either, at least not yet, given their propensity to attack Israel whenever some religious extremist declares another intifada! Do you really think that's unreasonable?


You are 100% right, but the borders is the real issue. It seems like Israel has not made up its mind on how much land it wants to give the Palestinians, so they keep encroaching in with settlements and building walls and making ridiculous zigzag boundaries to take the best farm land.

As the other poster mentioned I wouldn't worry about Palestine having a military of any worth at all in the near future.

Show me a single document/map detailing the boundaries that Israel finds fair for both itself and Palestine, and I will show you hopefully the single most important document in developing peace among them.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:35 AM
link   
No ones saying the Palestinians should have an air force/nukes except for loony boys like Gaddafi.
But thats not what this is about-its about why is it fair and proper for another country/state(Israel)to demand such terms as no weapons in general to another country/state(Palestine)in order for them to have the right to exist as a state/country.

At best,the Israeli goovernment wants to be allowed to dictate what their neighbour must or must not do to be able to achieve statehood...sorry its not up to the Israelis really is it?
And maybe that attitude is exactlly what is perpetuating this state of tension between the two...Israel always has to tell them what is acceptable or "allowed".

Who the hell made them the boss of all Palestinians?
Wouldn't you be a tad pissed off if some bully country kept telling you how to behave,and even if you have the right to exist as a state?

I would.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:36 AM
link   
reply to post by Desolate Cancer
 


Agreed.

Interestingly, Israel used settlements in the Sinai quite effectively to force peace from Egypt. Eventually the Egyptian government woke up to the fact that if they didn't make peace soon they'd never get the Sinai back, ever.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by Desolate Cancer
 



Originally posted by Desolate Cancer


You are 100% right, but the borders is the real issue. It seems like Israel has not made up its mind on how much land it wants to give the Palestinians


You mean "how much land Israel wants to GIVE BACK to the Palestinians,"surely
Because after all-they stole it...
There go the Israeli gov again,dictating terms,no real meaningful compromise.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:41 AM
link   
reply to post by mattpryor
 


LOL

like israel will EVER give sinai back.ever.


lose control of the water? your having a laugh.



posted on Nov, 17 2009 @ 11:47 AM
link   
reply to post by Silcone Synapse
 


Well yeah, I probably would, but if my goal was Statehood and leading my people to independence and self determination I don't think I'd argue too much about it.

My first priority would be my own country. Then I could deal with Israel on equal terms, as two nations, and haggle over details like that within the context of the UN.

To be honest I can't understand why the PA aren't jumping at the chance. My only conclusion is that Abbas doesn't have the guts to deal with the Israelis due to the backlash from the extremists in his party who still cling on to the idea of destruction of Israel.




top topics



 
2
<<   2 >>

log in

join