Will the creation of a Palestinian State bring the conflict to an end?

I don't know how many of you are aware of this but the PA in the West Bank is building its armed forces, legislative apparatus and political logistics in the run up to the announcement of a Palestinian State within the next two years.

This move is supported by the Middle East Quartet, European Union, Russia, the United Nations and the United States.

Ban arrived in Ramallah a day after the Quartet called for Israel to halt all settlement construction and for a peace deal with the Palestinians by 2012. "The Quartet has sent a clear and strong message: we are strongly supporting your efforts to establish an independent and viable Palestinian state," he told Fayyad ahead of formal talks

www.france24.com...

This is Prime minister Fayyad of the PA'S plan.

Fayyad's plan is based on the assumption that the US will recognize the Palestinian state and impose on Israel the well-known peace terms:
* two states,
* return to the 1967 borders with small and agreed-upon land swaps,
* East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine,
* evacuation of all settlements which are not included in the land swap,
* the return of a symbolic number of refugees to Israeli territory, and
* the settlement of the others in Palestine and elsewhere.

www.straightgoods.ca...

The U.S. currently has General Keith Dayton in the West Bank training and equipping the Palestinian police so they can take over security once the state of Palestine is announced.

Palestinian security forces on Thursday conducted a series of drills in the northern West Bank city of Jenin, including a special display for school children. The exercises were meant to boost the security forces' image in the eyes of the West Bank's younger population.

The Palestinian security forces have significantly improved their capabilities over the past two years. Some battalions underwent special training in Jordan under the supervision of US General Keith Dayton, and additional battalions are expected to be trained in the Hashemite Kingdom in the future.

www.ynetnews.com...

If this happens and is supported by the rest of the World and in particular by the U.S. will the occupation and conflict be nominally over?

What will come of Hamas and Gaza? Will they join with this state and create a unitary government?

Israel under its current leadership seem to be being left behind over this. If this is actually going to happen it would appear a peace deal is going to be forced upon the competing factions, in particular Israel.

Time to talk peace Netanyahooooo?



[edit on 14-4-2010 by Peruvianmonk]

It wont...because the issue here is the hardliners demand the entire area = palestine...not some sanctioned area. This has been the biggest issue in establishing the state to begin with...they do not recognise Israel's right to be there.

So, the moderates will be happy, but the zealots will not accept the borders no matter where its put. Bombing will happen, and israel will expand once again...its a neverending cycle.

The hardliners also dont want a state specified, because that would admit defeat and accept that the koran is wrong when promised the land to islam.

It wont end the conflict. There will be Israeli's who wont let it slide and there will be Palestinians who want more.

Conflicts like this dont ever end. Not unless everyone involved dies off or they suddenly all become pacifists.

There are people in the US for who the Civil War and even the Revolutionary War are still alive and well.

These conflicts dont end. They just become "manageable."

Actually, when the Palistinians get there state that is when you know that the REAL war has just begun. Don't be fooled, both sides are guilty of there crimes, but the Muslims will not stop till they have all the land. Giving them there own state will just provoke more demands not ease the tensions.

Fayyad seems to be banking on a forced implementation of a peace plan on Israel once the Palestinian State is announced. This is something it is rumoured that the Obama administration has been considering. Or at least a proposal on a peace plan.

Despite recent turbulence in U.S. relations with Israel, President Obama is "seriously considering" proposing an American peace plan to resolve the Palestinian conflict, according to two top administration officials.

www.washingtonpost.com...


Although this appears to have been put on the back burner for now.

"The truth is in some of these conflicts the United States can't impose solutions unless the participants in these conflicts are willing to break out of old patterns of antagonism," Obama told a news conference on Tuesday.

english.aljazeera.net...

If a peace plan is put forward by the Obama administration following the announcement of a Palestinian state, how could Israel evade an American peace plan?

I get the feeling another Israeli attempt to derail the process would lead to an immediate response by the U.S. in regards to aid, diplomatic immunity at the U.N.

[edit on 14-4-2010 by Peruvianmonk]

Any peace "settlement" and establishment of a Palestinian state that does not include Hamas is doomed to fail and quite frankly, would just mean another US puppet government in the world, and we do not need anymore of those...

Besides, Fatah is already more corrupt than the Iraqi and Afghani governments installed by the US...A government composed only of Fatah does not represent all Palestinians and will continue its theft of international monies meant for the betterment of the Palestinian people...

Now then...If Fayyad's proposal includes meaningful dialog with Hamas and an inclusion of Hamas in government, then the proposal gets a big tick and it may just have enough wings...

sarcasm on

Me personally, I'm betting Phar Lap will win this years 150th Melbourne Cup

/sarcasm off

No, i liken it to football teams that hate each other. In the real world footie teams send death threats to each other and use weapons on each other.

So you think that if that happens in footie, what would happen in real world issues of hate like this. If you cannot get two footie teams to stop using weapons on each other, i doubt you will stop the evil of two peoples and countries.

Most of the people just want to live there lifes, but the top often want to get at each other, and its an endless cycle.

reply to post by Retrovertigo


Hamas appear willing to talk with Fatah. They are not as irreconcilable as some people say.

Contrary to the demonic image created by Israeli and American propaganda, Hamas wants a Palestinian state, not an Islamic emirate. Like our own Orthodox, who aim at a Jewish state ruled by religious law and the rabbis, they know how to compromise with reality. Hamas’ aims are not restricted to the small enclave they now control. They want to play a major role in the future State of Palestine.

The official position of Hamas is that they will accept an agreement signed by the Palestinian authority if it is ratified by the Palestinian people in a referendum or by an act of parliament. It should be noted that even now, Hamas treats the Fayyad experiment with relative indulgence.

www.counterpunch.com...

reply to post by Peruvianmonk


Like I said, if it includes Hamas, then its all good as they do represent a fair proportion of the Palestinian population and have been one of the few groups with the guts to stand up to the Israelis, something Fatah has not done...

Despite the crap the average Israeli and American has been fed, and largely bought, Hamas is more than willing to recognise Israels right to exist...

Hamas is necessary as a counter-balance to Fatah as its members are as likely to feather their own nests as they are to represent their people...

It would appear most posters are not taking this process towards the creation of a Palestinian state very seriously. And i understand why.

This has been done before of course in 1988 with over 100 countires recognising the PLO declaration. But this did not include the U.S. Although it did lead to greater dialogue between the PLO and the Regan administration. So for me it was a small step forward.

In a letter from Reagan to Shamir the Israeli PM at the time.

In your letter of 13 December, you expressed your deep concern about the repercussions of a United States decision to begin a dialogue with the PLO. I would like to add my personal assurances to those already made to you by Secretary [George] Shultz, that nothing in this decision should be construed as weakening the United States' commitment to Israel's security, diminishing our fight against terrorism in all its forms, or indicating our acceptance of an independent Palestinian state.

www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org...

If it happens this time, a Palestinian state being declared, and the U.S. recognises it de jure it will be a clear sign for me that the U.S. is genuinely intent on seeing a peace settlement implemented, whether Israel likes it or not.


[edit on 14-4-2010 by Peruvianmonk]

When the United Nations created the state of Israel, it was also supposed to create a second "Palestinian" state. That was not acceptable to the neighboring Arab nations at that time and I suspect that it would still not end the war.

The Muslim hardliners want to get rid of Israel. Anything less is not acceptable.

reply to post by Wildbob77

When the United Nations created the state of Israel, it was also supposed to create a second "Palestinian" state. That was not acceptable to the neighboring Arab nations at that time

Great point that is. As we know Palestinians are seen as little more than half breeds by some of their Moslem 'Brothers'.

Yes the hardliners on BOTH sides will never be happy, i would be upset if any of them ever were! But i can only see diplomatic relations between the likes of Israel, Syria, Egypt and Saudi Arabia improving as a result of a fair peace settlement.

A peace settlement would also give Moderates a much louder voice in the region and take away some of the ammunition for the extremists on BOTH sides.

Things could even improve in the long run betwen Israel and Iran when they both have more level headed leaderships. They are natural allies after all in a region where they are surrounded by Arab states.

[edit on 14-4-2010 by Peruvianmonk]

reply to post by Wildbob77


People are often mistaken when they say the Israeli-Palestinian conflict started when the Israeli's grabbed Arab territories in 1967. The fact is there was a conflict well before 1967. If Israel completely withdrew from the territories it seized in 1967, the underlying problems would still remain.

I personally cannot see the Palestinians forming their own state in the near future. This may lead to a resolution of the conflict, which neighboring states do not want. As long as their is a Palestinian-Israeli conflict, neighboring states will have nothing to blame their problems on.

reply to post by hotpinkurinalmint


Agreed. The violence started in April 1920 in Jerusalem. However i think the majority of the Palestinians and Moslem people's (not neccesarily thier leaders) will take a solution based on the pre 1967 status quo, but with the Palestinians in control, not the Jordanians.

People keep going on about the 'hardliners' on both the Israeli and Palestinian side. I argue that they are in the minority even now, and that this declaration of a Palestinian state will erode their power even further and increase the Moderate power in the Arab 'street'.

i don't think so, Israelis want more land so does Arabs
i think that a one DEMOCRATIC state would be better and it would make it near impossible for Other arab countries to do anything about it

reply to post by Pharoh


I'm not sure about a one state solution. Arab Israelis do not have the same rights as Jewish Israelis. Rights such as these would have to be enshirned in Israeli law before a one-state solution could be workable.

The fear of the demographic pattern could hinder this solution on the Jewish side. Palestinians have a far higher birth rate and over time would become the majority in Israel.

What an ironic twist! 80 years ago you had Arab fears of a Jewish takeover of Palestine through Immigration and now you would have the reverse through the higher Arab birthrate.

Few years ago, President Gaddafi, president of Libya, suggested to create a new state that includes both Palestinians and Israelis. He suggested for the state to be called "Israteen" or something like that. I do find his suggestion the only true solution because IMO, any other solution that includes two states will simply postpone the problem
Anyway, Muslims and Jews are both Semitic so we wont find them calling each other Anti-Semitics

I do not think that it will magically end all the mutual mistrust and hatred at once. Both sides have radicals, there is also a religious tension and Middle East is and always been political conflict spot.
However it is what will (and should) happen anyway, and if both sides will play it correctly somewhere in the future conflict might evolve into something less violent.
Right now no Palestinian leader will be able to drop refugees claim. Even if he will be willing , radical forces will take over almost instantly. And no Palestinian leader will agree to loose East Jerusalem.
And no current Israeli leader will be able to give up on Jerusalem for more or less similar reasons. Not to mention that Israeli leaders and public will never agree to return of refugees.
These are the reason for current cooling of peace talks. However if Palestinian state will seemingly unilaterally declare independence (with secret agreements and mutual + US +EU guarantees) it might just happen that all the points of this plan that cannot be agreed to openly will be there in practice.
Oh, and by the way -

I'm not sure about a one state solution. Arab Israelis do not have the same rights as Jewish Israelis. Rights such as these would have to be enshirned in Israeli law before a one-state solution could be workable.

This is wrong. All Israelis have the same rights. It is not always observed and there is discrimination but it is not due to legislative problems.
Only law that is ethnically discriminating is Law of Return. But it does not involve Israeli citizens, only those who want to become ones.

reply to post by ZeroKnowledge


Exactly, in practise there is no equality between the two.

This is on a group of Arabs and Jews trying to be recognised as 'Israelis'.

Mr Ornan, 86, said that denying a common Israeli nationality was the linchpin of state-sanctioned discrimination against the Arab population. “There are even two laws -- the Law of Return for Jews and the Citizenship Law for Arabs -- that determine how you belong to the state,” he said. “What kind of democracy divides its citizens into two kinds?”

Yoel Harshefi, a lawyer supporting Mr Ornan, said the interior ministry had resorted to creating national groups with no legal recognition outside Israel, such as “Arab” or “unknown”, to avoid recognising an Israeli nationality.

www.counterpunch.org...

On the ghettoisation of the Arabs within Israel and a Jewish family prevented from renting out their house Bedouin friends in Nevatim.

Chances for Jews and Arabs to live together -- outside of a handful of cities -- are all but impossible because Israel’s rural communities are strictly segregated, said Alaa Mahajneh, a lawyer representing the Zakais.

Israel has nationalised 93 per cent of the country’s territory, confining most of its 1.3 million Arab citizens, one-fifth of the population, to 120 or so communities that existed at the time of the state’s creation in 1948. Meanwhile, more than 700 rural communities, including Nevatim, have remained exclusively Jewish by requiring that anyone who wants to buy a home applies to local vetting committees, which have been used to weed out Arab applicants.

www.counterpunch.org...

This is why a one state solution will not work. Becasue it will be dominated by the Jewish majority and Jewish leaders who will not allow the Arabs to rise. The Palestinians need and deserve their own state.