No peace progress in mid-east unless Israel makes concessions

[Violet_Crumble]

This is a transcript from The World Today. The program is broadcast around Australia at 12:10pm on ABC Local Radio.

You can also listen to the story in REAL AUDIO and WINDOWS MEDIA formats.

The World Today - Thursday, 19 August , 2004 12:42:00
Reporter: Eleanor Hall


ELEANOR HALL: We've just been hearing that there's talk of early elections in Israel, and that some concessions have been made by Yasser Arafat. Is it at all likely that we might see these two major figures in the peace process, some might even call them two major obstacles, sidelined in the near future?

ILAN PAPPE: No, I don't think there's much… there's no good news coming from either Israel or Palestine at this very moment. And I think it doesn't really matter what Arafat's policies are, what really matters is the Israeli policy, and this is not going to change either by the present government or in the next government, whatever it will be, in the coming elections.

ELEANOR HALL: Is that because you think Ariel Sharon will win?

ILAN PAPPE: It doesn't matter really if Ariel Sharon wins, or Benjamin Netanyahu wins, or the Labor Party wins, I think the present mood of Israel is that Israel is not ready to make any significant concessions that would enable a genuine peace process to begin.

And to begin with, Israel has to end their military occupation, which has entered its 37th year – a very brutal military occupation that is going on, and I think this mini drama, which I understand is very interesting for political reasons inside Israel, is really unfortunately not going to affect – one way or another – the unfortunate outcome of the next year or two, which is more violence, more bloodshed, unless the Israeli occupation ends.


read the rest here

[Jim Sagle]

1. Pssstttt...there's a partial withdrawal goin' on.

If that goes well, maybe there will be another, and then another.
All because of the Peace Fence...making the world a better place, one link at a time.

[Classical_Liberal]

2. Accept what you do want to bet they don't withdraw the settlements

protected by the peace fence. The peace fence would be less offensive on the green line where it belongs.

[IA_Seth]

3. LOL

You and that fence....you say its making the WORLD a better place?

Name one WORLD body that agrees with it.

It is a barrier TO lasting peace, and the sooner that is realized the sooner that real peace may be achieved.

[Name removed]

4. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[Name removed]

5. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[IA_Seth]

6. Was the deleted post yours?

If so go ahead and PM it to me, I missed it.

[Jim Sagle]

7. No it wasn't.

[IA_Seth]

9. Should have figured I suppose....

empty rhetoric...

still waiting for some world body that says the peace fence is a good idea?

[Jim Sagle]

10. I'm looking for a world body that will value the life of a Sudanese

equal to that of a Palestinian.

[IA_Seth]

11. Oh look over there...

Let's stay on topic here, k?

Name a world body that supports the fence Jim. Enough of you trying to change the damn subject.

Start a thread on Sudan in the proper forum and I would be happy to discuss with you.

ON EDIT: I will be away from my PC for the weekend, but that should give you plenty of time to try to find someone to agree with you, right?

I hope to hear from you on Monday.

[Jim Sagle]

12. My point is the hypocrisy of these "world bodies",

as you goddamn well know.

[IA_Seth]

18. So....

I take it then that you are of the opinion that Israel is right and the rest of the world is wrong?

And you want to talk about hypocrisy?

Hypocrisy is the US going to war in Iraq to take out a leader who abused his people and supposedly held WMD's when not part of any NPT - And then sending Israel billions in aid when they continue to abuse the rights of the Palestinians and hold WMD's while not part of any NPT.

That, quite clearly, is hypocrisy! That is a form of hypocrisy that will continue to inflame any anti-semitic and anti-american sentiments present in the region.

[Gimel]

16. World bodies

just don't happen to be threatened by suicide bombers. That's the real cause of their non-support. (on the other hand, maybe they're just hoping the bombers don't threaten them. Glad enough to let Israeli bodies pay the price.)

[IA_Seth]

19. Yeah

You are right...its a scary world-wide plot to have all the "Israeli bodies" pay the price.

Get freakin real. Israel is the not the only nation with blood in her history. Plenty of nations can speak from experience with walls, and none of it has proven that it helps in the long term.

This barrier is the legacy that Sharon will leave behind. The legacy implanted in young Palestinians brains that they are animals to be fenced from civilization. How do you think they will end up? It is a sad reality that this fence will cause more terrorism in the future than it will prevent in the short term.

[Darranar]

13. Well...

states tend to act in their own interests, and it's ridiculous to expect much difference from something that is essentially a large body of such states.

Sudan holds little importance to most states, the Middle East, and by extension the I/P crisis, is a different story.

And for what it's worth, most of the actions of the UN in both cases have amounted to little more than ineffective gestures.

[Classical_Liberal]

15. The UN has made moves in the Sudan, so what's your point

We're fighting a war on terror and the bias displayed toward Israel over the years with the settlers in the root cause of muslim anger toward the US.

[The Magistrate]

20. The United Nations, Ma'am

Has done nothing of signifigance concerning the Sudan. That situation is a genuine genocide, a systematic and brutal extermination campaign that is killing thousands each week in vile and torturous manners.

What do you think ought to be done about it?

[Djinn]

21. what do you want them to do Magistrate

Given the government of Sudan does not want and will not allow foreign forces on their soil do you suggest the UN breaks it's own charter and organises an invasion? Who do you think are feeding and providing medical care to Sudanese refugees?

[Darranar]

22. "Moves" that amount to ineffective gestures...

as the slaughter progresses, and the passivity continues....

[number6]

14. color me skeptical ....

there's a partial withdrawal goin' on."
If that goes well, maybe there will be another, and then another..."
:eyes:

[Zhade]

8. Kick for peace.

(Sending that war criminal Sharon to prison would be a good start!)

[Gimel]

17. Another Pape

Unfortunately, negotiating concessions with the terrorists is also not a solution. The current failure of that approach in Israel is an all-too-common pattern. Concessions are usually incremental and deliberately staggered — thus they fail to satisfy the nationalist aspirations of the suicide terrorists, yet encourage terrorist leaders to see their enemies as vulnerable to coercion.

In the end, the best approach for the states under fire is probably to focus on their own domestic security while doing what they can to see that the least militant forces on the terrorists' side build a viable state on their own. Israel, for example, would be well advised to abandon the territory it holds on the West Bank but to go ahead with building the immense wall, 20 feet high and 20 feet wide, to physically separate it from the Palestinian population. This would create real security for Israel and leave the West Bank for a true Palestinian state.

By ROBERT A. PAPE (New York Times)
NYTimes.com

or: www.middleeastinfo.org