As I see it there are two jobs to do. First find an agreement that the negotiators can agree on. Second will this agreement be able to be sold to the people for support.

Remember that a negotiation is not just saying that you are wrong and we want this. Rather a true negotiation is finding middle ground where both sides give up things they really want in order to compromise.

I do not think that a debate about current leadership would be helpful because very simply "bad" leaders have suprised and shocked me over the last 20 years or so by even attempting peace. Even bad leaders have listened to their advisors and entered into negotiations or found common ground to agree upon. In Israel both Likud and Labour have entered into peace talks or contributed to peace. So very simply saying "well Sharon will never agree to anything so go to hell" IMHO is not a valid answer.

Now the first issue is obvious the Israelis withdraw from the territories. I suggest that they withdraw from 99%. The remaining 1% will be nothing more than a buffer or border you could say.

How do you mediate a negotiation without the parties?

The first step would be to have the parties identify their competing demands. Eliminate the issues where there is little or no dispute and then set down to work on a compromise for the outstanding issues.

quote:

---

Originally posted by WingNut:
You are approaching this from the wrong position as a mediator. You have already told one side what they can give up and asked the other side if that is acceptable without hearing from either side what they want?

---

Actually I never stated that I wanted a mediator role. Rather I hoped that we would put on our negotiations hats and try to see what might be offered or could be offered to get to peace.

After reading many threads on Israeli / Palestinian issues I have come to the opinion that we here do have positions and opinions on how peace should be reached.

If the UN really worked, we would have applied the Cyprus model to Israel/Palestine once the vicious cycle became clear. I know that it is, at first especially, an over-simple model, but it at least establishes peace long enough for a generation of relatively equal negotiators to emerge.

The problem in Israel/Palestine is the gross inequality of power -- Israel, backed up by the U.S., has it all, and can thus never negotiate in good faith.

In any other such confrontation, we would insist on a neutral third party or international team (1) imposing and enforcing peace; and (2) running negotiations.

But how can we have fair negotiations when one of the interested parties is running them?

I see no short-term solution to this dilemma. Two truths on the ground are undeniable: Palestinian society has probably been destroyed for a full further generation; and Palestinians will soon outnumber Israelis, however you cut the borders.

quote:

---

Originally posted by johnpauljones:
Now the first issue is obvious the Israelis withdraw from the territories. I suggest that they withdraw from 99%. The remaining 1% will be nothing more than a buffer or border you could say.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Um, Phonicidal: you seem to be proposing that, even in an independent Palestinian state, a residual IDF occupying force would remain?

---

quote:

---

I'm not sure 1% would be enough of a force to provide the security you refer to.

---

You are referring to the IDF, right?

quote:

---

Originally posted by skdadl:
Perhaps jpj could clarify what he meant by the one per cent. I thought he meant territory, but perhaps I am wrong.

---

quote:

---

Palestinian society has probably been destroyed for a full further generation; and Palestinians will soon outnumber Israelis, however you cut the borders.

---

Why is that rotten? If Palestinians will soon outnumber Israelis, doesn't it mean that the Israeli government will soon be forced to improve Palestinian living conditions? if they don't do that, Israelis (both Jewish and Arab) run a serious risk of being expelled from the "holy land"
The way I look at it, the demographic problem could have some very positive side effects. It will make the well being of the palestinian people vital to isreal's survival.

[ 10 January 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 10 January 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
...the demographic problem...

---

quote:

---

Report claims to debunk 'demographic bomb'
By Yair Ettinger, Haaretz Correspondent

...The document, which Haaretz has obtained, argues that 2.4 million Palestinians live in the West Bank and Gaza Strip today, and not the 3.8 million claimed by the Palestinian Authority.

In sharp contrast to population studies conducted in Israel by professors Arnon Sofer and Sergio della Pergola, the document argues that Jews continue to maintain a solid 60 percent majority between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea.

---

quote:

---

An Israeli-American group whose members are clearly identified with the right authored the ABC Demographic Project. The group undercuts a prevailing assumption in Israel's public debate - that Jews have ceased, or will soon cease to be, a majority in that territory. The demographic danger is not "all it's made out to be," the writers state.

Della Pergola called the document "groundless," politically slanted and baseless from a research perspective. None of the signatories to the document is a professional in demographicresearch. Among its authors are former Israeli consul in Texas Yoram Ettinger (no relation to this reporter), former West Bank Civil Administration head Brigadier General (res.) David Shahaf and former Israeli health official Prof. Ezra Zohar.

The research was initiated and funded by Los Angeles Jewish businessman Ben Zimmerman and U.S.-based partners, historian Dr. Roberta Seid of the University of South Carolina and businessman Michael Wise.

---

quote:

---

But della Pergola rejects the new document entirely. He refers to a figure that has no basis in the Israeli population registry, a claim in the document that 300,000 Palestinians have become Israeli citizens since 1967, noting the lack of segmentation of the statistics according to age, "critical in any Israeli-Palestinian demographic study."

He added, "The authors seek to prove the political theory that the status quo is good for us and time is on our side. They are trying to attach some demographic claims to that thesis."

The demographer claims there are distorted figures in the document, in addition to a lack of familiarity with professional literature and accepted research methods." Sofer's response was unavailable.

---

I think it's pretty clear what the best long term solution is to this war: One state with equal rights (including property rights) enshrined for Jews and non-Jews alike. The right of return for valid exiles. Extremely harsh penalties for racially based violence. A reconciliation tribunal for those whose lands and homes were stolen or destroyed.

But I can't see the justice of pretending that negotiations are fair when one side is running the whole show, has all the power, and is occupying the other.

quote:

---

Originally posted by Lard tunderin' jeesus:
It was the Brits & League of Nations who started this mess; it would be appropriate for the U.N. and Commonwealth peacekeepers to undertake mending it.

---

[ 10 January 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

The right of return for valid exiles.

---

Dude, they can't all come back. Granted, most of the land that was abandoned by the refugees during the Naqba stands empty, but Israel Isn't big enough to support every Palestinian exile from every refugee camp. some of them will have to accept compensation. Remember that the Isreali state will soon have to accommodate large numbers of Israeli Arabs as well.*

*Sorry if the above paragraph made me sound like a patronizing git. I'll try not to wag my finger at you in the future.

[ 10 January 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

[ 10 January 2005: Message edited by: CMOT Dibbler ]

quote:

---

It's hard to argue that there's no room for the Palestinian exiles when the country continually calls for Jews worldwide to emigrate.

---

Worldwide, the claim is 5,000,000. Given the length of time since 1948, and the natural tendancy of people to grow new roots, I really doubt that 5,000,000 is an accurate representation of the number who would like to return.

*If one were to treat the destruction of Palestine and the emergence of Israel as a civil war between two populations of the same state, that is.

This site claims 4,000,000.

quote:

---

I didn't say there was no room for Palestinian refugees. I said that the Israel couldn't accept the entire refugee population.

---

I don't understand the difference, being a pesky secularist. (I'm kinda yanking your chain. I understand what you mean, but I'm not really accepting of the whole religionist/demographic basis for a state structure.)

What is most remarkable about the whole Abbas election is that he has not said even one thing that distinguishes him from Arafat. His stated public position is carbon copy of the Fatah position under Arafat. The fact that people have not noticed this is most remarkable.

Most stunning that this has not been noticed at all be the media, who seem hell bent of presenting Abbas as a big change from Arafat. Admitting that the Fatah position is more or less a political fait accompli forced by the political circumstance under which the Palestinian voice must be expressed -- there is simply no way that the Palestinian position can be any softer because there is no room to manouver. This may be hard to accept, (and therefore recognize) for some people in the media because they simply can not bring themselves to see that it is almost solely Israeli intransigence under Sharon, not Palestinian 'terrorism' which has led to the present blockage of the peace process.

The recieved wisom is that the problem was Arafat, and with his demise things will change. But we must ask, why, if it is Arafat that was the problem, is Abbas's stated position no different than Arafat's?

quote:

---

In Gaza and the West Bank, there are about 1.5 million, according to this site. As well, there are about 200,000 internally displaced within Israel proper.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by Briguy:
I presume that they have Israeli citizenship, but lost their family/ancestral homes during the 1948 offensive. But really, I don't know what the site means by 'internally displaced' within Israel. I'm just surfing here.

---

quote:

---

Originally posted by CMOT Dibbler:
There are supposidly 1.3 million Israeli arabs in Isreal proper. I think your numbers are wrong.

---

quote:

---

In the 1948 war tht resulted in the creation of the state of Isral in 77% of Palestine, some 750,000 Palestinians were displaced and dispossessed of their homes and land. Approximately 100,000 Palestinians remained in the territory that became the state of Israel and subsequently were nationalized as Israeli citizens. Some 40,000 of these Palestinians were internally displaced from their land and homes and most were prevented from returning even though they became Israeli citizens.

---

This is from my first link. As I said, not my numbers (nor my claim), I'm just trying to find information like most others here.

Edited to add: Even if we leave the 200,000 number from that first post out of consideration, it doesn't change the tenor of the refugee problem nor the scale of the refugee population (by much). We don't need to harp on that one point in our little peace discussion thread.

[ 11 January 2005: Message edited by: Briguy ]