Powered by WebAds

Friday, July 13, 2012

Olmert's trial had nothing to do with the 'peace process'

Ruthe Blum answers the accusations that the trial of Ehud K. Olmert was somehow related to 'peace' with the 'Palestinians,' an accusation also made by Olmert himself.
No, their key pronouncement is that Lador is at fault — get this — for having hindered the “peace process” with the Palestinians.

According to this assertion, Olmert was on the verge of getting Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas to sign an agreement with Israel. And had the prime minister not been forced to resign as a result of a cloud of corruption allegations that hung over him, we might all have been celebrating the end of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict by now.

Are they joking?

While it is true that Olmert practically begged Abbas to take the 1967 borders on a silver platter — and even threw in a partial “right of return” for refugees — the Palestinian Authority chief didn’t even bother dignifying the offer with a response. This is because Abbas had no more intention of reaching a deal with the Jewish state than his predecessor, Yasser Arafat.

It is getting tiresome restating the obvious, for which (unlike the Olmert trial) there is and always has been endless evidence: There is nothing Israel can offer the Palestinians, short of ceasing to exist, that they will accept.

Nor is Abbas at liberty to forge a treaty, even if he actually wanted to, without getting Hamas-controlled Gaza on board. It therefore does not matter which Israeli prime minister is doing the groveling at any given moment. What matters is which Palestinian leader will emerge whose goal is to achieve peace with Israel, not to annihilate it.
Of course. Read the whole thing.

Shabbat Shalom.

Labels: , ,


Post a Comment

<< Home