HomeLatest ThreadsGreatest ThreadsForums & GroupsMy SubscriptionsMy Posts
DU Home » Latest Threads » Forums & Groups » Topics » Foreign Affairs & National Security » Israel/Palestine (Group) » After yet another no, isn...

Mon Feb 17, 2020, 12:09 PM

After yet another no, isn't it time for a Palestinian peace plan?

The Trump plan for Palestinian-Israeli peace will almost certainly go the way of all the other failed blueprints intended to resolve our hundred-year conflict. With leaders across the Arab world backing Palestinian opposition, the plan will likely remain an American-Israeli conversation about peace, a wedding without the bride.

And yet the release of the plan has already had one bracing consequence: it has exposed deeply held myths about peace among both Israelis and Palestinians.


It is long past time for Palestinian leaders to do what they have never done in the history of this conflict: offer their own detailed peace plan. We know what Palestinian leaders oppose; but what exactly do they support? Beyond the repetition of the formula of “two states along the 1967 borders,” what is the Palestinian position on refugees, land swaps, settlement blocs, holy places?


2 replies, 950 views

Reply to this thread

Back to top Alert abuse

Always highlight: 10 newest replies | Replies posted after I mark a forum
Replies to this discussion thread
Arrow 2 replies Author Time Post
Reply After yet another no, isn't it time for a Palestinian peace plan? (Original post)
Mosby Feb 2020 OP
no_hypocrisy Feb 2020 #1
aranthus Mar 2020 #2

Response to Mosby (Original post)

Mon Feb 17, 2020, 12:19 PM

1. The way this current "peace plan" was formulated was Israel making a wish list,

Jared Kushner drafting it into a so-called agreement, and then going to the Palestinians with a "take it or leave it" so-called offer.

I do civil negotiation and mediation in the courts. That's not how it's done. You have two or more sides making demands and start the new offer and acceptance in phases. Some items are dropped in exchange for gaining some items that are a priority. Either both sides go home feeling dissatisfied for not getting everything demanded (but the controversy is over and settled) or there is no resolution and the matter must be litigated.

Israel had every right to make a list of what it wanted. But so did the Palestinians. From what I understand, the latter was not seriously approached with a good faith interest in consideration of what they wanted.

If a true resolution is wanted for a "peace plan," all parties have to be prepared to give something up.

Unfortunately, both Israel and the Palestinians want the same land.

There are ideas that could have been explored. For example, while an argument can be made that the U.N. doesn't recognize more than Israel control w/o sovereignty on the disputed land, Israel could have offered to purchase the land from the Palestinians (assuming they would be willing to engage in a sale). This is an arbitrary example, but you can see where I'm going with this.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Response to Mosby (Original post)

Mon Mar 2, 2020, 09:47 PM

2. Here's the problem.

If the Palestinian leadership proposes a plan and it doesn't include a demand for right of return, then they are dead meat. Their own people will reject it. If they include a demand for right of return, then the Israelis will accuse them of not being serious about peace. Committing to a plan of there own is a lose-lose for them.

Reply to this post

Back to top Alert abuse Link here Permalink

Reply to this thread