Israel Matzav

Now or never?

Former Prime Minister Ehud K. Olmert gets it so, so wrong in Thursday's New York Times.

The parameters of a peace deal are well known and they have already been put on the table. I put them there in September 2008 when I presented a far-reaching offer to Mr. Abbas.

According to my offer, the territorial dispute would be solved by establishing a Palestinian state on territory equivalent in size to the pre-1967 West Bank and Gaza Strip with mutually agreed-upon land swaps that take into account the new realities on the ground.

The city of Jerusalem would be shared. Its Jewish areas would be the capital of Israel and its Arab neighborhoods would become the Palestinian capital. Neither side would declare sovereignty over the city’s holy places; they would be administered jointly with the assistance of Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the United States.

The Palestinian refugee problem would be addressed within the framework of the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative. The new Palestinian state would become the home of all the Palestinian refugees just as the state of Israel is the homeland of the Jewish people. Israel would, however, be prepared to absorb a small number of refugees on humanitarian grounds.

...

These parameters were never formally rejected by Mr. Abbas, and they should be put on the table again today. Both Mr. Abbas and Mr. Netanyahu must then make brave and difficult decisions.

That's not how Abu Mazen sees things. Let's go back - again - to Jackson Diehl's May 2009 interview with Abu Mazen in the Washington Post.

In our meeting Wednesday, Abbas acknowledged that Olmert had shown him a map proposing a Palestinian state on 97 percent of the West Bank -- though he complained that the Israeli leader refused to give him a copy of the plan. He confirmed that Olmert "accepted the principle" of the "right of return" of Palestinian refugees -- something no previous Israeli prime minister had done -- and offered to resettle thousands in Israel. In all, Olmert's peace offer was more generous to the Palestinians than either that of Bush or Bill Clinton; it's almost impossible to imagine Obama, or any Israeli government, going further.

Abbas turned it down. "The gaps were wide," he said.

'Wide gaps' sounds like a pretty definitive rejection. Moreover, current Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu is highly unlikely to go as far as Olmert went on either Jerusalem or 'refugees,' let alone on other territorial issues, and most Israelis would support Netanyahu's position if asked.

We Israelis simply do not have the luxury of spending more time postponing a solution. A further delay will only help extremists on both sides who seek to sabotage any prospect of a peaceful, negotiated two-state solution.

This is standard Leftist thinking that every problem has a solution. It's wrong. This problem has no solution, at least right now. And if Egypt and Jordan don't want to keep to their treaties... then what? The Egyptians don't talk about the issues between Israel and the 'Palestinians.' They talk about abrogating the treaty so that they can remilitarize the Sinai. Their displeasure with the treaty has little to do with the Israeli-'Palestinian' conflict.

In Israel, we are sorry for the loss of life of Turkish citizens in May 2010, when Israel confronted a provocative flotilla of ships bound for Gaza. I am sure that the proper way to express these sentiments to the Turkish government and the Turkish people can be found.

But the Turks don't want an expression of regret - Netanyahu offered that. They want an admission of guilt, compensation and an end to our legal blockade of Gaza - thereby opening Gaza to all kinds of weapons that they cannot get right now.

And then there's the 'now or never' title of Olmert's article. Now or never? We've been hearing that for at least as long as the State of Israel exists. In Olmert's mind, does 'now or never' mean that if it's not now, we ought to give up?

Olmert represents an element of Israel's Left that says that we want a solution SO badly that the other side must want it as well. It's wishful thinking.

Labels: Abu Mazen, Ehud K. Olmert, Jackson Diehl

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:52 AM