Please find the relevant central topic of this discussion in an article from Israel Today.
I think we are all looking forward to your reactions, visions and any other expressions!
N.B: Please also pay special attention to the supposed position of the state of Israel.
With archaeology being such a passion in Israel, it would seem highly unlikely that any type of archaeological find would be covered up by the Israeli government. Anything small enough is immediately transported to the Israel Museum. Jerusalem is just filled with historical artifact shops, but many times they are filled with forgeries. One time a pomegranate carved out of a hippo tusk was dated back to the time of King Soloman's Temple. It was placed in the Israel Museum, but under careful analysis, it was discovered to be a forgery, and was removed from exhibit. So the difficultly is proving what is real, and what is a forgery. If the Israeli government is covering this up, it is probably due to the fact that it is a forgery.
Okay, that may very well be, but wouldn't the fact of the mere presence and archeological findings itself then still be the most important issue -whether if some pieces might be fake or not? Furthermore, the suggestion in the article is that the government covers it up not because it could be fake, but to prevent frustration of the peace process.
My questions then are aimed at the peace process, so what influence could this have on the (de)legitimation and claims of land (from both sides) for instance?
Archaeological finds are not going to be the determining factor, it is going to be the Israeli citizens living in the West Bank. Either return them back to the pre-1967 borders, or let them stay and become citizens of Palestine. Another possibility is land swaps, can Israel still keep Area C of the West Bank in exchange for something else. The largest of the settlements, Ariel is a city of 15,000 people with a credited university. So that will definitely be a determining factor, as oppose to any archaeological find.
I don't think so either, and you just open up an even more important discussion about possible solutions to foster at least a state of coexistence. I am (currently) convinced that the only feasible long term solution would be the two state option for two different peoples. However, if time will pass by and Israeli settlements will expand, do you believe that the option of one state for two peoples could ever be realized?
The foundations for a two-state solution has already been laid down. The Palestinians have their own government -- though not united, -- their own constitution -- Israel does not have a written constitution, -- taxation -- the Palestinians do not have their own currency. So taking what the Palestinians lack, that could become the foundations for a one-state solution. The only thing the Oslo Accords state, it that what the Palestinians lack would be finalized within a 5 year interim period. The Oslo Accords were signed in 1993, it is now 2013.