Strictly from a humanitarian point of view, this is good news:
Bowing to worldwide pressure and condemnation, Israel on Sunday formally announced an eased blockade of Gaza that could significantly expand the flow of goods overland into the coastal Palestinian enclave, which the Israelis have increasingly isolated for the past three years…
…Mr. Netanyahu said that Israel “seeks to keep out of Gaza weapons and war-supporting matériel that Hamas uses” to attack Israel and its civilians. He said, however, “All other goods will be allowed into Gaza.”
In what amounted to a reversal of the system of the last three years, Israel said it would create a list of items not permitted to enter Gaza for security reasons, rather than allowing in only those items that were specifically approved, as before.
The naval blockade will remain in place, however. And the impasse is completely unresolved. As long as Israel considers itself in a technical state of war with the Hamas government of the Gaza Strip, they will continue to violate their sovereignty and refuse to negotiate with them. And as long as they not only refuse to uproot their settlements but continue to expand them in East Jerusalem and throughout the West Bank, the Americans have no argument to make against armed struggle by the Palestinians. Every single day, the Palestinians’ position gets just a little bit worse.
Of course, the Israelis’ position is deteriorating, too. I don’t think they have ever been so isolated and despised as they are right now. Losing Turkey as an ally is a brutal blow. I don’t know what the plan is for Gaza, but something has to change because neither side can afford for this to continue. It won’t continue. The check is going to come due someday soon.
How does a state negotiate with an entity whose very existence is predicated (pdf) upon your elimination?
I’m sure that discussion would be fruitful…
Hamas has already stated that they’re willing to live with long-term peace in return for Israel to go back to the 1967 borders.
Still, Hamas has been rejected by Palestinians. Palestinians understand that Hamas is just like Fatah. Both are propped up by foreign powers with vested interests. Hamas is not supported by Palestinians of West Bank or Gaza.
What Palestinians need now is the resurgence of the PLO of yore who were secular leftists.
Oscar, you do know that that document is from 1988, right?
Not only is that document from 1988, it is not and has never been an official document of Hamas or of any other Palestinian group.
Please explain.
Here is less dated and more relevant information: link
From the link:
When you are dealing with an organization that is predicated upon your eradication the absolute minimum that is required for any substantive negotiation is their explicit acceptance of your right to exist.
They have refused to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. I refuse to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, as well. I refuse to recognize Iran as a Muslim state, and even though Pakistan likes to claim that it is secular, I call bullshit and refuse to recognize their failure as well.
“When you are dealing with an organization that is predicated upon your eradication the absolute minimum that is required for any substantive negotiation is their explicit acceptance of your right to exist.“
OK, let’s just say just for the sake of discussion that Hamas IS predicated on the eradication of Israel, and for that reason it is reasonable to demand that Hamas explicitly accepts Israel’s right to exist. By any reasonable logic, if that were really the reason, then Israel would only demand that recognition of those, such as Hamas, whose positions are predicated on its eradication. It would not demand that acceptance of, for example, the members of the Arab League, every one of which has repeatedly offered formal recognition of and full normal diplomatic and economic relations with Israel. Clearly no entity that would make that offer can be predicated on Israel’s eradication, And yet, despite the fact that every single Arab state has offered it formal recognition and full normal diplomatic and economic relations, Israel continues to demand their explicit recognition of its right to exist as a necessary condition for peace.
So much for your argument.
I don’t suppose that you can differentiate between “bare minimum” and “only” – acceptance of one’s existence is a bare minimum requirement, not the only terms for peace. After all, the Palestinians could have had their own state in 2000 if they’d abandon their demand for East Jerusalem and their hope for a so called right of return. Both/all sides have terms that they’re pursuing; I don’t fault either for sticking to their own terms. Ultimately, a two-state solution is more important to the Arabs than to the Jews so the impetus for making it happen is on the Arabs if they want it. If they insist of getting everything that they want then the status quo will continue indefinitely.
.
The Palestinians
Declaration of a State
A unilateral Palestinian declaration of the establishment of a Palestinian state will constitute a fundamental and substantive violation of the agreements with the State of Israel and the scuttling of the Oslo and Wye accords. The government will adopt immediate stringent measures in the event of such a declaration.
Settlements
The Jewish communities in Judea, Samaria and Gaza are the realization of Zionist values. Settlement of the land is a clear expression of the unassailable right of the Jewish people to the Land of Israel and constitutes an important asset in the defense of the vital interests of the State of Israel. The Likud will continue to strengthen and develop these communities and will prevent their uprooting.
The Partition of the Negev
Israel rejects out of hand ideas raised by Labor Party leaders concerning the relinquishment of parts of the Negev to the Palestinians. The practical meaning of this plan is that the “Green Line” should no longer be viewed as a “Red Line”, which draws us closer to the partition plan of 1947 as it opens the door to the principle that the fate of the Galilee, the Triangle and additional areas within Israel is negotiable. The Likud asserts that such proposals by the Labor Party leadership may literally cause the dismemberment of the State of Israel.
…
The permanent status arrangement shall be based on the following principles:
Self-Rule
The Government of Israel flatly rejects the establishment of a Palestinian Arab state west of the Jordan river.
The Palestinians can run their lives freely in the framework of self-rule, but not as an independent and sovereign state. Thus, for example, in matters of foreign affairs, security, immigration and ecology, their activity shall be limited in accordance with imperatives of Israel’s existence, security and national needs.
Jerusalem
Jerusalem is the eternal, united capital of the State of Israel and only of Israel. The government will flatly reject Palestinian proposals to divide Jerusalem, including the plan to divide the city presented to the Knesset by the Arab factions and supported by many members of Labor and Meretz. The government firmly rejects attempts of various sources in the world, some anti-Semitic in origin, to question Jerusalem’s status as Israel’s capital, and the 3,000-year-old special connection between the Jewish people and its capital. To ensure this, the government will continue the firm policies it has adopted until now:
No diplomatic activity will be permitted at Orient House. The government stopped the stream of visits by heads of state and ministers at Orient House, begun under the left-wing government.
The presence of the Israeli police in eastern Jerusalem will be increased. This in addition to the new police posts and reinforcements in the neighborhoods.
The Likud government will act with vigor to continue Jewish habitation and strengthen Israeli sovereignty in the eastern parts of the city, while emphasizing improvements in the welfare and security of the Arab residents. Despite protests from the left, the Likud government consistently approved the continuation of Jewish living within the Old City and in ‘City of David‘.
The Jordan River as a Permanent Border
The Jordan Valley and the territories that dominate it shall be under Israeli sovereignty. The Jordan river will be the permanent eastern border of the State of Israel. The Kingdom of Jordan is a desirable partner in the permanent status arrangement between Israel and the Palestinians in matters that will be agreed upon.
[Links added are mine – Oui]
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."It’s kind of obvious that a peace agreement lies in the parties repudiating one of the provisions of their key ideological documents. Such a repudiation has been done before in order to end a war.
I fully agree – when you are dealing with an organization that is predicated upon your eradication the absolute minimum that is required for any substantive negotiation is their explicit acceptance of your right to exist.
Does Likud accept the right to exist of a Palestinian state.
Judge this statement against the Hamas document.
It’s easy to see why negotiations are going nowhere at the moment.
For Likud, the right of existence of Israel has to do not with the right of existence in the pre-1967 borders but a broader right of existence that extends to all of the putative Israel that was on the 19th century Bible Lands maps. Or in Likud’s terms, “including Judea and Samaria”.
No. That’s why I said that I agree with Oui on that point – expecting Likud to bargain in good faith for a two-state solution is about as unrealistc as expecting Hamas to bargain in good faith for a two-state solution. I simply don’t credit either/any side with rightness/righteousness, and I take issue with those who blame Israel only and always.
Let’s not single out Likud here. There hasn’t been a single government in Israel’s history, including that of the sainted Yitzhak Rabin, that has been serious about withdrawing from the Occupied Territory and leaving the Palestinians free to form a sovereign, independent state.
I guess I missed it when North Korea explicitly accepted South Korea’s right to exist. Or even the USA’s, for that matter. If we were all good buddies there would be nothing to negotiate. The Likud charter is an obscene excuse for theocratic landgrabbing.
The same thing applies to North Korea – how have negotiations with them fared over the last 60 years? There’s a reason why there’s no peace treaty on the Korean peninsula. This also applies to Likud as it relates to the Palestinians, as I’ve said. Repeatedly. And it applies to Hamas pertaining to Israel.
You’re spinning. You said, “the absolute minimum that is required for any substantive negotiation is their explicit acceptance of your right to exist.” Negotiations have been going on with NK for years…decades. You can argue that they’ve been useless if you want, but contrary to the “standard” for negotiation you assert, they’ve been going on.
Dave, Oscar’s whole argument falls flat on its face when you look at the fact that it is making the same “absolute minimum” demand of countries that clearly are not bent on eradicating Israel since they have offered it formal recognition and normal relations. The “right to exist” demand is purely a ploy, and an avoidance device. It is too bad that so many well-meaning supporters of Israel have fallen for it.
People can always talk – ongoing negotiations, if you will – but nothing substantive will come of it if they don’t accept your right to exist. You may get a signed piece of paper, but it will be about as relevant as the Munich Agreement…
Oscar, please find some new sources for information that are outside the list of standard hasbara disseminators. It will make for a much more intelligent conversation, and it might even ease your mind somewhat.
1. Hamas is not predicated on anyone’s eradication, including Israel’s. In fact, no less a figure than Khalid Mesh`al has said he will accept a Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza if that is the will of the Palestinian people. Going back at least five years there have been numerous statements by various high level Hamas officials accepting Israel within the 1967 boundaries. Historically Hamas has been far, far better than Israel at honouring its word, and maintaining ceasefires.
By contrast, from the beginning of Zionism Israel’s creation WAS predicated on the eradication of the non-Jewish majority in whatever land was chosen for the Jewish State. The evidence for that is overwhelming both in word and deed, and increases as time goes on.
Care to tell us again, Oscar, who it is that is not interested in a peaceful resolution of the conflict?
Israel cannot legally have it both ways.
Either Gaza is occupied by Israel or it is sovereign. If it is occupied, Israel has an obligation under the Geneva Conventions (that quaint document) to provide aid to Gaza.
If it is in a technical state of war, it is recognizing that Gaza is sovereign with the power to negotiate an end to the state of war.
If that is the case, Israel has de facto recognized a three state solution – Israel, Gaza, and the area nominally controlled by the Palestinian Authority. The only political question to settle are the terms of peace.
And the only workable terms to get past the impasse is an exchange of Palestinian right of return to pre-1967 Israel for withdrawal of settlers from areas outside pre-1967 Israel. Until that deal is struck, it is endless war in which the legal niceties play little part. And we all know what happened to the last Israeli Prime Minister who moved in the direction of that grand bargain.
The main question is when folks in the region stop looking at historical claims and start looking to a future without war.
The consistent consensus of international leaders has been that Israel has a right to exist, but only within its pre-1967 borders. The UN Security Council over decades has confirmed this position.
.
GAZA, Palestinian Territory (NY Times) – Three years after Israel and Egypt imposed an embargo on this tormented Palestinian strip, shutting down its economy, a consensus has emerged that the attempt to weaken the governing party, Hamas, and drive it from power has failed.
In its three years in power, Hamas has taken control of not only security, education and the justice system but also the economy, by regulating and taxing an extensive smuggling tunnel system from Egypt. In the process, the traditional and largely pro-Western business community has been sidelined.
This may be about to change.
“We need to build a legitimate private sector in Gaza as a strong counterweight to extremism,” Tony Blair, who serves as the international community’s liaison to the Palestinians, said in an interview. The views of Mr. Blair, a former prime minister of Britain, reflected those of the Obama administration as well. “To end up with a Gaza that is dependent on tunnels and foreign aid is not a good idea,” he said.
Businesspeople in Gaza say that by closing down legitimate commerce, Israel has helped Hamas tighten its domination. And by allowing in food for shops but not goods needed for industry, Israel is helping keep Gaza a welfare society, the sort of place where extremism can flourish.
“I can’t get cocoa powder, I can’t get malt, I can’t get shortening or syrup or wrapping material or boxes,” said Mohammed Telbani, the head of Al Awda, a cookie and ice cream factory in the central town of Deir al Balah. “I don’t like Hamas, and I don’t like Fatah. All I want is to make food.”
‘Yes to coriander, No to kassams’
≈ Cross-posted from my diary — Israel Feels Growing Isolation ≈
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."“by allowing in food for shops but not goods needed for industry, Israel is helping keep Gaza a welfare society…“
Well duhhhh – that is exactly the idea.
Oh yeah, and they have not even allowed in adequate food.