Is Jerusalem the Key to Achieving Mid-East Peace?

[russ_watters]

Anyone paying attention to the recent developments in Israel? Sharon is pledging to dismantle settlements, agreeing to the creation of a Palestinian State, etc. Is he for real?

Opinions?

 

[Zero]

Well...one would hope so. Military incursions is one thing...when you start building homes in a military occupation zone, it makes it hard to say that safety is your overriding concern. We'll see what happens.

 

[Zero]

Oh, and of course...any peace is going to depend on a cease-fire on both sides. Sad but true...

 

[FZ+]

So far, it looks hopeful. But the power of the palestinian PM looks increasingly tenuous and the sticking point that is Jerusalem is yet to be resolved...

 

[drag]

Greetings !

It all depends on the shaky agreement with the
terrorist organizations and the prevention
capabilities of Israeli security. The Palestinian
PM still has too little political power to force
a sieze fire. If a few suicide bombers still manage
to carry out attacks in the near several days then
PM Sharon will loose public support quickly and will
be forced to stop the nagotiations.

FZ, Jerusalem ?
I don't think that'll be a major issue like it was
before. I doubt that considering the conflict of the
past few years it will be seriously discussed at all.

Live long and prosper.

 

[username]

Oh, and of course...any peace is going to depend on a cease-fire on both sides. Sad but true...

Sharon has systematically destroyed any control Arafat or anybody else might of had over rogue military organizations, so I can't imagine any cease-fire happening anytime soon.

Anyone paying attention to the recent developments in Israel? Sharon is pledging to dismantle settlements, agreeing to the creation of a Palestinian State, etc. Is he for real?

Some kind of sick PR stunt me thinks.

 

[schwarzchildradius]

Do you think that the presence of Bush will help or hurt prospects for near-term peace?

 

[kat]

Originally posted by schwarzchildradius
Do you think that the presence of Bush will help or hurt prospects for near-term peace?

It don't think it will hurt, it will help if he is willing to put enough pressure on Sharon for Sharon to step beyond what he has already declared a willingness to do..dismantle outpost, a few of the settlements that are convenient to get rid of. see Ruby Rivlin in Ha'aretz today, according to rivlin (knesset speaker) sharon is planning on taking down Nokdim- the home of Minister Avigdor Lieberman - Tekoah, Ganim, Kadim, Homesh and other
settlements, while leaving Netzrim,Kfar Darom and all the Gush Katif settlements in place.

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/299899.html

On the other side Mazin is talking about a temporary ceasefire with hamas, PNA, Fatah etc. This is not the required disarment, and even if he desired to disarm them I don't think he has the capability. So expect this portion of the deal to blow up in the face of it all.

Unless Bush has sufficiently frightened Syria, they will continue to fund and incite hezbollah and attempt to undermine any longterm peace in Palestine, Syria still sees the Palestinian and Israeli areas as part of the larger Syrian state.

So, with all of this I expect that Sharon will give a good show and wait for the terrorist to undermine the peace iniative and then he will wash his hands of it, come back as fierce as ever all the while saying.."We did our part" and maybe he will be right in a sense, but not morally correct in another. After all of this, if Bush is still in office I expect he will push for a nato mission to enforce peace and sort the thing out..of course this will come with a trillion dollar price tag and many new contracts to arms producers.

end of my rambling thoughts, don't make too much of them or criticize too harshly...they are not presented in supportive debate like form.

 

[Zero]

Originally posted by kat
It don't think it will hurt, it will help if he is willing to put enough pressure on Sharon for Sharon to step beyond what he has already declared a willingness to do..dismantle outpost, a few of the settlements that are convenient to get rid of. see Ruby Rivlin in Ha'aretz today, according to rivlin (knesset speaker) sharon is planning on taking down Nokdim- the home of Minister Avigdor Lieberman - Tekoah, Ganim, Kadim, Homesh and other
settlements, while leaving Netzrim,Kfar Darom and all the Gush Katif settlements in place.

http://www.haaretzdaily.com/hasen/spages/299899.html

On the other side Mazin is talking about a temporary ceasefire with hamas, PNA, Fatah etc. This is not the required disarment, and even if he desired to disarm them I don't think he has the capability. So expect this portion of the deal to blow up in the face of it all.

Unless Bush has sufficiently frightened Syria, they will continue to fund and incite hezbollah and attempt to undermine any longterm peace in Palestine, Syria still sees the Palestinian and Israeli areas as part of the larger Syrian state.

So, with all of this I expect that Sharon will give a good show and wait for the terrorist to undermine the peace iniative and then he will wash his hands of it, come back as fierce as ever all the while saying.."We did our part" and maybe he will be right in a sense, but not morally correct in another. After all of this, if Bush is still in office I expect he will push for a nato mission to enforce peace and sort the thing out..of course this will come with a trillion dollar price tag and many new contracts to arms producers.

end of my rambling thoughts, don't make too much of them or criticize too harshly...they are not presented in supportive debate like form.

Did you post this, or did I post this?

 

[kat]

Originally posted by Zero
Did you post this, or did I post this?

Ahahaha you only WISH you could be so objective! *good natured needling*

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by schwarzchildradius
Do you think that the presence of Bush will help or hurt prospects for near-term peace?

Well seeing as how the prospects for long term peace come from Bush (his proposal), the prospects for short term peace depend on the reaction of both sides to the proposed long term peace. It certainly looks to me like one side is making a serious effort to attain this long term peace while the other is making a serious effort to derail it.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by russ_watters
It certainly looks to me like one side is making a serious effort to attain this long term peace while the other is making a serious effort to derail it.

Apparently its not quite so simple. Though many arab groups are stepping up the terrorism, several arab countries have now publically supported Bush's peace plan.

 

[drag]

kat, NATO ?!
I thought that pathetic organization was
almost finished anyway.

Peace and long life.

 

[schwarzchildradius]

I hope that it works. Bush will take credit for it if it works, but if it fails, he'll take none of the blame. It's win-win. Seriously, that's a country with monsterous problems, what with all the fundamentalists on BOTH sides, claiming the land as a gift from god/allah. Yet even with settlements dismantled, if Jerusalem remains in Israeli hands, I doubt terrorism will cease.
Einstein once suggested that a State of Israel be located in South America. Hey, its never too late.

 

[russ_watters]

Originally posted by schwarzchildradius
I hope that it works. Bush will take credit for it if it works, but if it fails, he'll take none of the blame. It's win-win. Seriously, that's a country with monsterous problems, what with all the fundamentalists on BOTH sides, claiming the land as a gift from god/allah. Yet even with settlements dismantled, if Jerusalem remains in Israeli hands, I doubt terrorism will cease.
Einstein once suggested that a State of Israel be located in South America. Hey, its never too late.

Yeah, its always win-win for a president to go for mid-east peace.

Jerusalem is certainly the key. People tend to focus on the side issues like the settlements, but I agree that it will be very difficult to stop the terrorism if Jerusalem is still in Israeli hands.