Netanyahu says Israel is offering Palestinians ‘conditional’ & ‘limited’ sovereignty, new capital

[PeaceGen]

This is very good news i think, except for one old hawk's remarks, Abbas'.

https://www.rt.com/news/479423-neta...tm_source=rss&utm_medium=rss&utm_campaign=RSS


Netanyahu says Israel is offering Palestinians ‘conditional’ & ‘limited’ sovereignty, new capital will be at Abu Dis
28 Jan, 2020 21:01
Get short URL

© Reuters / Brendan McDermid

• 3

Follow RT on
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has said he is willing to offer the Palestinian people the chance of “conditional, limited sovereignty” under the peace plan proposed by US President Donald Trump.
Trump announced earlier Tuesday that the deal would see a Palestinian capital formed in East Jerusalem, while simultaneously calling the holy city Israel’s “undivided” capital.

Speaking to reporters after Trump’s comments, Netanyahu said the US recognizes Jerusalem as Israel’s capital, “by which I mean, within its fences.”

Netanyahu clarified that the proposed Palestinian capital under the peace plan will be in Abu Dis, a Palestinian neighborhood on the outskirts of the city.

“Israel is offering the Palestinians, at the end of the process, conditional, limited sovereignty,” Netanyahu said.

ALSO ON RT.COM‘Jerusalem is not for sale, your conspiracy deal will not pass’ – Abbas reacts to Trump's Middle East peace deal
Yet, as the peace plan was revealed, Netanyahu did not wait to move forward with previous plans to annex more parts of the West Bank, which he said were areas that would remain under Israeli control under the envisioned solution.

He said he would bring a proposal for applying Israeli jurisdiction to the Jordan Valley, the northern Dead Sea and West Bank settlements to his cabinet for approval, “presumably on Sunday.”

Responding to the much-hyped unveiling on Tuesday, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said the plan was a “conspiracy” and Palestinian rights are “not for sale.”


ALSO ON RT.COMTrump proposes a two-state solution for Israel-Palestine in ‘win-win opportunity’ for both sides
The plan envisages a $50 billion dollar economic revival program for Palestine, but Palestinians have largely regarded it as a way for Israel and the US to bribe them into giving up their rights and accepting permanent occupation.

“I say to Trump and Netanyahu: Jerusalem is not for sale, all our rights are not for sale and are not for bargain. And your deal, the conspiracy, will not pass,” Abbas said in a TV address from the West Bank.

 

[PeaceGen]

Explainer: What's in Trump's Middle East peace plan
More than two years after he first proposed a plan to revive the long moribund Israeli-Palestinian peace process, U.S. President Donald Trump released details on Tuesday of his proposal to solve a conflict that has frustrated peacemakers for decades.

Local : 2020-01-28(Tuesday) 22:23:08
Found via nicer.app/news

 

[Dalit]

First they kept stealing Palestinian land through land grabbing till nothing was left. Now they are making an offer the Palestinians cannot refuse.

The Palestinians are screwed. The Arab nations don't stand with them.

 

[Lincoln]

So under this solution, an outskirt neighbourhood of Jerusalem would be the capital of Palestine, the large swaths of western Palestinian territories captured won't be returned, and other occupied regions as of recent.

This is just straight up humiliation, not a peace deal of century at all. I think Palestine should throw this in the dustbin, death would be better than this.

 

[PakFactor]

So under this solution, an outskirt neighbourhood of Jerusalem would be the capital of Palestine, the large swaths of western Palestinian territories captured won't be returned, and other occupied regions as of recent.

This is just straight up humiliation, not a peace deal of century at all. I think Palestine should throw this in the dustbin, death would be better than this.

Better of Palestinians war with whatever they have, as they are alone in this game. It's better to live 1 day as a lion than a jackal for a 100 years.

 

[PeaceGen]

Trump unveils long-delayed Middle East peace plan
US President Donald Trump has unveiled his long-delayed Middle East peace plan, labeling it a "win-win opportunity" for both Israel and Palestine. The 80 page blueprint outlines a two-state solution for the region with a map showing proposed borders between the two countries. Jerusalem will remain Israel's undivided capital under the plan - but there will also be a Palestinian capital within the city. Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was by Mr Trump’s side when announcing the plan, which has been in development since 2017. Image: AP

Local : 2020-01-28(Tuesday) 22:04:29
Found via nicer.app/news

and (via a google search 'trump proposed borders israel palestine'):
(this got me divided, it shows that the Israelis will take whatever terroritory they want, from the Palestinians. I think that's not the way to do things over there, I think more respect for Palestinian land claims is needed)
https://www.nytimes.com/2020/01/27/...etanyahu-gantz-israel-palestinians-peace.html

Trump’s Mideast Plan Could Give Israel Sovereignty Over Much of Jordan Valley
The president, joined by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel, will announce the plan at the White House on Tuesday.

President Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu, the prime minister of Israel, before unveiling a peace plan for the Middle East.Credit...Doug Mills/The New York Times

By Michael Crowley and Isabel Kershner

• Published Jan. 27, 2020Updated Jan. 28, 2020, 3:51 p.m. ET

Updated Jan. 28, 2020:

WASHINGTON — President Trump will release a long-awaited Middle East peace plan on Tuesday that is expected to include a proposal for new Israeli borders and provide for Israeli sovereignty over much of the Jordan Valley, a strategic area on the eastern frontier of the West Bank abutting Jordan.

Mr. Trump will be joined at the White House for the announcement by Benjamin Netanyahu, Israel’s prime minister.

Palestinian leaders, who no longer speak to Trump officials, are likely to oppose each of those elements, even if they are combined with the economic rewards of $50 billion or more that the Trump administration says it can deliver.

That is why many analysts say the plan, developed under the supervision of Jared Kushner, the president’s son-in-law, is relevant mainly for its potential effect on Israel’s March 2 election, which is likely to decide the fate of the embattled Mr. Netanyahu, and as a distraction from the Senate’s impeachment trial of Mr. Trump.

Create an account or log in

Mr. Netanyahu’s opponent in the election, Mr. Gantz, traveled separately from his rival to Washington to meet with Mr. Trump on Monday, and flew home after the meeting. Mr. Netanyahu remained in Washington and will appear alongside Mr. Trump at the White House on Tuesday for remarks unveiling the plan.

Mr. Gantz’s allies complained that the joint appearance inappropriately elevated Mr. Netanyahu, who has been a close Trump ally, over Mr. Gantz. Perhaps underscoring the point, Mr. Trump did not invite reporters into the meeting he held with Mr. Gantz shortly after Mr. Netanyahu’s visit.

Asked by reporters about hosting the two rivals in highly unusual back-to-back sessions, Mr. Trump professed neutrality but said he was impatient with Israel’s tangled politics, which have produced three national elections in the past year. Ballots in April and September ended inconclusively, with neither Mr. Netanyahu nor Mr. Gantz able to muster a majority government.


The Traveler’s Conundrum: Unpack or Not Unpack?

The Death of Chintz

Mission Impawsible: How Much ‘Cats’ Can a Person Take?

“They’re two good competitors. They’re fighting it out,” Mr. Trump said with Mr. Netanyahu at his side. “I’ve been waiting now — this is my third election. We keep waiting, and waiting, and waiting. So, let’s go. What kind of a system is that?”

Speaking in the Oval Office alongside the president on Monday, Mr. Netanyahu showered his host with flattery.

“You’ve been the greatest man Israel had in the White House,” Mr. Netanyahu said. “I think tomorrow you can continue making history.”

Mr. Gantz, too, praised Mr. Trump in remarks to reporters after he left the White House, calling the president “a true and courageous friend of the State of Israel,” and thanking Mr. Trump for his “profound support of Israel’s citizens and for his commitment to their security.” He called Mr. Trump’s peace proposal “a significant and historic milestone.”

An American plan providing for Israeli sovereignty — also known as annexation — over large portions of the Jordan Valley would present both Mr. Netanyahu and his opponent with a quandary.

It could force Mr. Netanyahu, who is fighting for his political future and his freedom — he is facing charges of bribery, fraud and breach of trust — out of his risk-averse comfort zone and put his credibility with his supporters, and his legacy, on the line. The unveiling of the plan will occur on the same day his bid for parliamentary immunity from prosecution on the corruption charges gets underway in Israel.

Even if the American plan proposes annexation of the Jordan Valley only as part of a larger compromise with the Palestinians, any approval from Washington for the idea of Israeli control of the area is likely to increase pressure on Mr. Netanyahu from his right-wing partners to move ahead immediately and unilaterally.

urged last week on Twitter. “Within two weeks we must impose sovereignty over all the settlements.”

Unilateral annexation, however, is not without risk, and something that Israeli leaders, including Mr. Netanyahu, have avoided for decades. For one thing, it could undermine Israel’s strategic peace treaties with Jordan and Egypt. It could also fuel Palestinian unrest or a violent reaction, costing lives on both sides.

For Mr. Gantz, the leader of the centrist Blue and White party, embracing the plan could alienate his more left-leaning supporters and send them back to their more traditional political home, the left-wing Labor-Meretz alliance, tipping the electoral scale away from him.

If Mr. Gantz rejects the plan or gives it a lukewarm reception, that could send his more right-leaning supporters back to Mr. Netanyahu’s Likud or other parties in the right-wing bloc, likewise snatching away the chance of a slim victory.

At a minimum, the peace plan will complicate Mr. Gantz’s efforts to focus Israeli voters’ attention on the cases against Mr. Netanyahu, which he referred to in comments after the meeting. “No one has the right to lead an entire country, at such an intricate diplomatic and security timing, when all of his interests and thoughts are devoted to his own interests,” he said.

“Netanyahu,” he added, “cannot both run a country and run a trial.”

Mr. Gantz also attempted to carve out his own position on the peace plan, welcoming it while distinguishing himself from Mr. Netanyahu by indicating that he prefers not to move unilaterally, but in coordination with Israel’s peace partners.

“Immediately after the elections, I will work toward implementing it from within a stable, functioning Israeli government, in tandem with the other countries in our region,” he said.


As for the weak and ailing Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, acceptance of the plan is impossible since it does not meet the most minimal of Palestinian demands. But refusal leaves his people divided between the West Bank and Gaza, with no state and no road map for the future.

“It is nothing but a plan to liquidate the Palestinian cause,” Muhammad Shtayyeh, the prime minister of the Palestinian Authority, said at a cabinet meeting in the West Bank city of Ramallah on Monday.

A senior Palestinian official said on Monday that Mr. Abbas had recently received an offer, made through a third party, to speak with Mr. Trump, but declined to do so. The White House did not respond to a request for comment.

Mr. Trump sounded energized on Monday by the scale of the challenge before him.

“I think it’s a fantastic thing if we can pull it off,” he said. “They say it’s probably the most difficult deal anywhere and of any kind to make. In the business world, when I was back in the business world, when a deal was tough, people would jokingly refer to it as, ‘This is tougher than Israel and the Palestinians getting together.’”

Mr. Trump also asserted of the plan: “Many of the Arab nations have agreed to it. They like it. They think it’s great.” No Arab leader has publicly embraced the as-yet-unreleased plan. But Mike Evans, an evangelical leader and Trump ally who has met with several senior Arab officials, said that “even though many won’t say it publicly, quietly they are on board.”

Jeremy Ben-Ami, the president of the liberal advocacy group J Street, said it was unlikely that the plan would win strong Arab support, particularly from Jordan’s King Abdullah II.

“We don’t expect what we’re going to hear tomorrow to be an actual plan for peace,” said Mr. Ben-Ami, who supports greater Palestinian rights. “This is really an effort to shift longstanding U.S. policy into alignment with the hardest-right positions that Israel has ever taken on these issues.”


“It’s not an effort to resolve this conflict,” he added. “It is an effort to redefine what is the baseline of U.S. policy.”

Michael Crowley reported from Washington, and Isabel Kershner from Jerusalem. David M. Halbfinger contributed reporting from Jerusalem, and Mohammed Najib from Ramallah, West Bank.

 

[Gangetic]

So under this solution, an outskirt neighbourhood of Jerusalem would be the capital of Palestine, the large swaths of western Palestinian territories captured won't be returned, and other occupied regions as of recent.

This is just straight up humiliation, not a peace deal of century at all. I think Palestine should throw this in the dustbin, death would be better than this.

Palestine should be a wake up call to all Muslim sovereign nations around the world. If you give the Zionists an inch of land, they will take a mile. The first thing we must do is kick American troops out of Afghanistan and then help kick them out of Iraq. Then move onto Africa until they're in no more countries.

 

[Lincoln]

Palestine should be a wake up call to all Muslim sovereign nations around the world. If you give the Zionists an inch of land, they will take a mile. The first thing we must do is kick American troops out of Afghanistan and then help kick them out of Iraq. Then move onto Africa until they're in no more countries.

Unfortunately, we can't. Biggest hurdle in a strong commonwealth of Muslim-majority nations are the Arabs themselves.

 

[PeaceGen]

Palestine should be a wake up call to all Muslim sovereign nations around the world. If you give the Zionists an inch of land, they will take a mile. The first thing we must do is kick American troops out of Afghanistan and then help kick them out of Iraq. Then move onto Africa until they're in no more countries.

Those American troops are there to prevent such regions from dying into ISIS-infested regions, or terror training camps for terror strikes against western targets.

I for one, am glad and grateful they're there doing their thing. Keeping the world a little safer than it otherwise would've been.

Unfortunately, we can't. Biggest hurdle in a strong commonwealth of Muslim-majority nations are the Arabs themselves.

Who are also grateful for the protection against tyranny that these troops and equipment by the Americans and other western nations, provide.

 

[Lincoln]

Those American troops are there to prevent such regions from dying into ISIS-infested regions, or terror training camps for terror strikes against western targets.

I for one, am glad and grateful they're there doing their thing. Keeping the world a little safer than it otherwise would've been.

ISIS and other such organizations were also the result of their initial invasions.

After a country reaches stability in terms of politics and military capabilities, which Iraq has, then a foreign force, unless invited to stay, needs to leave. In the end, their presence is making Iraq a target for US opponents, and their prolonged stay against the wishes of the people will only give rise to militias again.

Those American troops are there to prevent such regions from dying into ISIS-infested regions, or terror training camps for terror strikes against western targets.

I for one, am glad and grateful they're there doing their thing. Keeping the world a little safer than it otherwise would've been.


Who are also grateful for the protection against tyranny that these troops and equipment by the Americans and other western nations, provide.

Yes, they're grateful because it hasn't effected them and their dictatorships yet. Why don't we ask the people in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen. Man, those children dying and families, homes being destroyed, they must be really thankful for the US and Russian jets carpet bombing entire cities flat - not making this up.

 

[PeaceGen]

ISIS and other such organizations were also the result of their initial invasions.

After a country reaches stability in terms of politics and military capabilities, which Iraq has, then a foreign force, unless invited to stay, needs to leave. In the end, their presence is making Iraq a target for US opponents, and their prolonged stay against the wishes of the people will only give rise to militias again.

American troops, when stationned abroad (like in Iraq), do not go against the wishes of entire governments of the countries they're stationed in. But in Iraq's case, half the population wants the Americans to stay. And the Kurds living there, too. As noted by their absence from the very vote to oust American troops from Iraqi soil recently.

and ISIS is the result of Islamic madness, not the presence of peacekeeping soldiers.

Yes, they're grateful because it hasn't effected them and their dictatorships yet. Why don't we ask the people in Syria, Iraq, Afghanistan, Yemen. Man, those children dying and families, homes being destroyed, they must be really thankful for the US and Russian jets carpet bombing entire cities flat - not making this up.

uprisings will be struck down. and that's not coz i want it, that coz it's been true throughout modern history.

and if you want people to stop protesting your rule entirely, it seems (according to some) to help if you bomb their residential area into a crisp. ***we in the west did not impose this kinda thinking upon you. it is native muslim born thinking, as it is for any culture that treads a foot into these waters of violence***.

 

[Gangetic]

American troops, when stationned abroad (like in Iraq), do not go against the wishes of entire governments of the countries they're stationed in. But in Iraq's case, half the population wants the Americans to stay. And the Kurds living there, too. As noted by their absence from the very vote to oust American troops from Iraqi soil recently.

and ISIS is the result of Islamic madness, not the presence of peacekeeping soldiers.

Half?

to help if you bomb their residential area into a crisp. ***we in the west did not impose this kinda thinking upon you. it is native muslim born thinking, as it is for any culture that treads a foot into these waters of violence***.

wtf? are you high on cow piss?
worst poster on this forum by far, i mean you only have to look at your ratings

 

[Lincoln]

American troops, when stationned abroad (like in Iraq), do not go against the wishes of entire governments of the countries they're stationed in. But in Iraq's case, half the population wants the Americans to stay. And the Kurds living there, too. As noted by their absence from the very vote to oust American troops from Iraqi soil recently.

and ISIS is the result of Islamic madness, not the presence of peacekeeping soldiers.



uprisings will be struck down. and that's not coz i want it, that coz it's been true throughout modern history.

and if you want people to stop protesting your rule entirely, it seems (according to some) to help if you bomb their residential area into a crisp. ***we in the west did not impose this kinda thinking upon you. it is native muslim born thinking, as it is for any culture that treads a foot into these waters of violence***.

Taliban were the result of CIA wanting to deal with Soviet Union via proxies, many offshoots came from this, CIA literally designed the narratives to get recruits for Taliban.

Much of these terrorist groups started off as resistance groups. These terrorist groups didn't rsndomly sprout into being out of nowhere suddenly.

Look at the state of Syria, Libya and Iraq, and Afghanistan. If this is the state, then no doubt, we are doing something seriously wrong.

American troops, when stationned abroad (like in Iraq), do not go against the wishes of entire governments of the countries they're stationed in. But in Iraq's case, half the population wants the Americans to stay. And the Kurds living there, too. As noted by their absence from the very vote to oust American troops from Iraqi soil recently.

and ISIS is the result of Islamic madness, not the presence of peacekeeping soldiers.



uprisings will be struck down. and that's not coz i want it, that coz it's been true throughout modern history.

and if you want people to stop protesting your rule entirely, it seems (according to some) to help if you bomb their residential area into a crisp. ***we in the west did not impose this kinda thinking upon you. it is native muslim born thinking, as it is for any culture that treads a foot into these waters of violence***.

I like how you shift blame and find justification as if two wrongs make a right.

 

[PeaceGen]

Half?

Half, because Islam in those regions is divided into Sunni or Shia sub-culture groups of individuals, who live among eachother no doubt.

wtf? are you high on cow piss?
worst poster on this forum by far, i mean you only have to look at your ratings

i suspect it goes back to the days when officials would still cut off the hand of a thief.
there's a lot of nagging for obedience among Muslim leaders living today.

and it tends to be dealt with amongst Muslims in those regions by means of violence.

that external help for the bigger chores (like bombimg entire residential areas into a pulp) then arrives, is *also* the choice of such local leaders.

and if we didn't provide such help, we here in the west can not create *any* kind of decent governing of oil rich regions.

we need oil on a stable delivery rate and a steady reasonable price, or our economies and societies *die*.

now you know that (A) i'm not high on anything right now and (B) i might have a point after all.

 

[Gangetic]

Half, because Islam in those regions is divided into Sunni or Shia sub-culture groups of individuals, who live among eachother no doubt.



i suspect it goes back to the days when officials would still cut off the hand of a thief.
there's a lot of nagging for obedience among Muslim leaders living today.

and it tends to be dealt with amongst Muslims in those regions by means of violence.

that external help for the bigger chores (like bombimg entire residential areas into a pulp) then arrives, is *also* the choice of such local leaders.

and if we didn't provide such help, we here in the west can not create *any* kind of decent governing of oil rich regions.

we need oil on a stable delivery rate and a steady reasonable price, or our economies and societies *die*.

now you know that (A) i'm not high on anything right now and (B) i might have a point after all.

There's no oil in Afghanistan, and most of the oil-rich regions are very stable and are American allies. Syria also doesn't have much oil.