(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force;
Note that it uses "every state in the area" and not Palestine or Palestinian. How do you propose top get to "secure and recognized boundaries" without negotiations. BTW, Israel did comply with this clause when it agreed to a peace treaty with Jordan, one of the three High Contracting Parties on the Arab side as referred to in res 242.
Oslo says no such thing and only talks about autonomy. Oslo is for all intensive purposes a dead letter.
NO, no, no you or I for that matter will be enforcing NOTHING, NADA, ZILCH. Israel and Israelis will be doing the enforcing or nothing at all as the see fit.
The given is that both Israel and Jordan signed the peace treaty in 1994. They could have been a situation, where not everybody liked the language in it. Just like Japan may have not liked the language in the Treaty of Portsmouth in 1905, and Japan was the victor of the Russo-Japanese War. In the Oslo Accords it is stated that one of the issues which will be permanently agreed upon are borders. Signed by the Israeli government and the Palestine LIberation Organization, that they will come to an agreement about borders. So it can be open up to interpretation about what borders are they talking about. It sounds to me, as though they are referring to Israel and territory controlled by the Palestinian Authority, and mentioned along with borders, is territory controlled by the Palestinian Authority, which after a five year interim period, will be expanded and finalized. Currently, the West Bank is divided up into three ares with one degree or another of joint Israeli-Palestinian control. Of course, it can be chosen to keep it that way. If so, then both Israel and the Palestinian Authority would have to agree so. The Oslo Accords can be viewed as a dead letter, but also it can be viewed as frozen too.
Tim We can twist and sound bite anything until the cows come home. I was not referring to what language was used or whether everybody was happy. The intent of Rabin has always been a autonomous state with Jerusalem and the settlements and the Jordan Valley as one way or another part of Israel. The settlements as well as the Jordan Valley have since the Allon Plan of 1968 been part of the secure borders equation. Not Rabin, not Barak, not even Olmert said that they will remove all the settlers or just leave without a secure border being delineated. The borders can only be ascertained after negotiations and nothing else will take their place.No ambiguity there.
In 1993 the Palestinians did not control any territory, period..
But all this is semantic as Abbass is refusing to negotiate without preconditions.
This is where international mediation is so desperately needed, because Netanyahu has been asking Abbas to return to negotiations without pre-conditions. With 30% of the Palestinian economy dependent on international aid, both the United States and Europe are in a condition to apply leverage on the Palestinian Authority to do so. This is where lobbying the U.S. government on both an executive and legislative level comes in. I have being doing so, but how many others are doing so, because they are too busy taking sides. This is the need to eliminate side taking, because it is just holding everything up. One does not have to be a citizen of a country to lobby. Yesterday, I got on-line with the European Union's meeting of foreign ministers in Brussels. It is so ironic that the European Union can enforce the no-fly zone in Libya, with non-stop aerial bombardments, but feels comfortable with a hand-off policy elsewhere. With the United States, Hillary Clinton is back with hosting the meetings between Abbas and Netanyahu, at Abbas's invitation. So hopefully, she can tell Abbas to drop the pre-conditions, so they can move forward.
I am so glad that you have come to realize that not every horse that is brought to the trough is willing to drink, The problem is that you and people like you are lobbying the wrong entity: the one that needs to be lobbied is Abbass, Hamas and Hizbulla. I would venture a guess that you or any organizations like Combatants for peace are too scared to do that, even from the safety of the USA. Reality is not side taking but rather pointing out where the problem lies. Telling Abbass to drop the preconditions would be a good start
Lobbying Hezbollah, does not really help the situation with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. That has become more of an internal Lebanese issue, because the people of Lebanon are fearful of it taking control of the government of Lebanon. Also, their funding was coming from Iran through Syria. So right now, Hezbollah is not a factor. With Hillary Clinton back into the arena again, the Palestinian Authority has to be pressured on if the Israeli settlers can stay and become citizens of Palestine, and not this unrealistic Palestine is to be Jew-free. If Hamas still has control of Gaza, then the must will be they have to recognize the State of Israel. Israel is now in a stronger position with the formation of the Likud-Kadima coalition. So as of now, more pressure will have to be placed on the Palestinian factions. Israel will be safe in this, if they have no major objections. But the mediations have not fully started yet. I might be in the United States, but I sure had my share of air raid sirens, buses being blow up, and hearing both Israelis and Palestinians say to me, tell the outside world what is going on here. I have.