• This is a political forum that is non-biased/non-partisan and treats every person's position on topics equally. This debate forum is not aligned to any political party. In today's politics, many ideas are split between and even within all the political parties. Often we find ourselves agreeing on one platform but some topics break our mold. We are here to discuss them in a civil political debate. If this is your first visit to our political forums, be sure to check out the RULES. Registering for debate politics is necessary before posting. Register today to participate - it's free!

Trump peace package for Middle East likely to stop short of Palestinian statehood

Rogue Valley

Rogue Valley

Lead or get out of the way
DP Veteran
Joined
Apr 18, 2013
Messages
94,171
Reaction score
82,449
Location
Barsoom
Gender
Male
Political Leaning
Independent
Trump peace package for Middle East likely to stop short of Palestinian statehood

Releasing a U.S. proposal that is bound to fail would legitimize Israeli annexation.

imrs.php

The Troika - Trump, Kushner, Netanyahu.

4/14/19
President Trump’s proposal for a “deal of the century” to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict promises practical improvements in the lives of Palestinians but is likely to stop short of ensuring a separate, fully sovereign Palestinian state, according to people familiar with the main elements of the effort. The White House is expected to roll out its long-anticipated peace package later this spring or by early summer, after more than two years of effort by Trump adviser and son-in-law Jared Kushner. Officials have kept details of the plan secret, but comments from Kushner and other U.S. officials suggest that it does away with statehood as the starting premise of peace efforts as it has been over the past two decades. Most analysts give Kushner little chance of success where decades of U.S.-backed efforts have failed. His prospects are worsened by the perception among European and some Arab leaders that Trump has shown his cards through a series of actions favorable to Israel.

Arab officials familiar with Kushner’s sales pitches said he has offered no specifics but suggested that the plan turned on economic opportunities for Palestinians and an enshrining of Israeli control of disputed territory. Kushner and other U.S. officials have linked peace and economic development to Arab recognition of Israel and acceptance of a version of the status quo on Palestinian “autonomy,” as opposed to “sovereignty,” people who have spoken with the Kushner team said. Kushner described the plan as having four pillars: freedom, respect, security and opportunity. The Palestinian Authority cut off all official contact with the Trump administration in December 2017 when Trump followed through on a campaign promise to recognize Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. The package is expected to call for tens of billions of dollars in aid and investment in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, the two areas where most Palestinians live, and billions more to Egypt and Jordan, the two Arab states that have made peace with Israel. Kushner has been less keen to discuss the U.S. financial contribution, analysts said, and it is not clear whether Congress would back any large-scale U.S. spending toward a deal that did not promise Palestinian statehood. “I think this plan is dead on arrival,” said Goldenberg, who directs the Middle East Security Program at the Center for a New American Security. “The biggest concern is, if the plan is heavily biased toward Israel, which is what we expect, and they put it down and the Palestinians reject it, then it becomes a predicate to move toward annexation.”
Click to expand...

In essence, the Trump/Kushner plan is to buy Palestinian acceptance of statelessness. The payoff money would come from America (how can the US afford Kushner's payout plan with a historically high federal deficit and debt?) and Trump-friendly wealthy Arab states. In a display of Trumpian logic, Kushner explained to the Saudis that Trump moving the US embassy to Jerusalem is an example of Trump being able to keep his promises (the Palestinians would understandably reject such pretzel logic). Frankly, I believe such an initiative is DOA. Always the transactional whore, Trump believes the Palestinians will barter away their nationhood for 30 pieces of silver. Hard line politicians in Israel will disingenuously argue that they have no peace partner and should simply annex key parts of the West Bank.

Related: Palestinian state likely not in US proposed peace plan: Report
 
Rogue Valley said:
Hard line politicians in Israel will disingenuously argue that they have no peace partner and should simply annex key parts of the West Bank.
Click to expand...

This happens regardless of the American plan.

The Palestinians have been peace rejectors under the last US administration too. It hasn't changed since. They're not willing to come to the negotiations table, and as such it's impossible to create anything or to refer to them as peace partners. That is before even addressing the elephant in the room which is the fact that there is a complete separation between the Hamas faction in Gaza and the PA faction in the West Bank and any agreement with the PA is not an agreement with Hamas and vice versa.
 
Apocalypse said:
This happens regardless of the American plan.

The Palestinians have been peace rejectors under the last US administration too. It hasn't changed since. They're not willing to come to the negotiations table, and as such it's impossible to create anything or to refer to them as peace partners. That is before even addressing the elephant in the room which is the fact that there is a complete separation between the Hamas faction in Gaza and the PA faction in the West Bank and any agreement with the PA is not an agreement with Hamas and vice versa.
Click to expand...

Sorry, but the OP is dealing with the here and now, not what preceded.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Sorry, but the OP is dealing with the here and now, not what preceded.
Click to expand...

What's here and now is what I responded on.
Here and now the Palestinians refuse to come to the negotiations table, to even talk about the peace process.
The fact that it wouldn't change when the American plan is presented is quite meaningless.
 
What is needed is not yet another "peace plan" presented by the US (or by any other outside power), but rather a willingness among all the parties involved in the conflict (Israel, its Arab neighnors and the Palestinians) to reach a compromise peace based on the reality and facts on the ground. I see very little prospect for that in the immediate future but am more optimistic over the longer term.
 
Erekat: Palestine leadership rejects ‘deal of the century’

img313576.jpg

Saeb Erekat

4/17/19
Secretary-General of the PLO Saeb Erekat said the Palestinian leadership “categorically” rejects the US proposed peace plan to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict dubbed the “deal of the century”, adding that the Palestinians will not accept anything less than an independent Palestinian state on the 1967 borders. Erekat’s remarks came in response to a report by the Washington Post that the deal does not adopt the two-state solution as a basis for solving the conflict. According to the US paper, the American peace plan includes proposals to improve the standard of living of Palestinians by injecting investments, but will not allow for the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state alongside Israel.

“What the US administration is doing is not a peace plan, but a plan to destroy peace, international law, international legitimacy and the terms of reference for achieving peace,” Erekat said, adding that “there will be no peace without the end of the Israeli occupation and the establishment of a Palestinian state on the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital”. However, Palestinian Authority Foreign Minister, Riyadh Al-Maliki, said this week that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas is ready to meet Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu without “any preconditions” if Moscow hosts the summit.
Click to expand...

As I stated in the OP, such a disingenuous offer by the Trump administration will be, predictably and understandably, DOA.
 
Rogue Valley said:
Erekat: Palestine leadership rejects ‘deal of the century’

img313576.jpg

Saeb Erekat



As I stated in the OP, such a disingenuous offer by the Trump administration will be, predictably and understandably, DOA.
Click to expand...

The Palestinian so-called "leaders" have an unbroken record of always rejecting everything. That being said, there simply is no real willingness for peace among the parties involved at this time, and the conflict is pretty well contained. So it will take probably quite a few more years before any meaningful progress can be made. In the meantime the position of the Palestinians will continue to deteriorate (which actually is also what Israel and all the Arab countries are counting on).
 
Rogue Valley said:
You can't exactly hand someone a poison pill and then blame them when they reject it.
Click to expand...

It's not a poison pill. Poison kills you while the end result of the plan proposed by the US is better for the Palestinians than the current situation.

Regardless what I meant in my earlier words is that it's irreleavnt to discuss whether one plan is more suiting or not for one side when that side is constantly refusing the very concept of negotiations.
 
Apocalypse said:
It's not a poison pill. Poison kills you while the end result of the plan proposed by the US is better for the Palestinians than the current situation.

Regardless what I meant in my earlier words is that it's irreleavnt to discuss whether one plan is more suiting or not for one side when that side is constantly refusing the very concept of negotiations.
Click to expand...

I mostly agree with you. Just one point: any deal would be a "poison pill", not so much for the Palestinians but for the so-called "leaders" of the Palestinians. They would not physically survive any real compromise that established peace on the basis of the reality and facts on the ground because they have themselves spewed such completely unrealistic and imaginary aims for so long. The sad fact of the matter is that the Palestinians must be the people in the world with the absolutely worst "leaders" (which is saying something, given the state of "leadership" in other parts of the world.
 
Apocalypse said:
This happens regardless of the American plan.

The Palestinians have been peace rejectors under the last US administration too. It hasn't changed since. They're not willing to come to the negotiations table, and as such it's impossible to create anything or to refer to them as peace partners. That is before even addressing the elephant in the room which is the fact that there is a complete separation between the Hamas faction in Gaza and the PA faction in the West Bank and any agreement with the PA is not an agreement with Hamas and vice versa.
Click to expand...

Peace rejecters? Too bad you didn't feel the need to mention Oslo and Netanyahu's cynical derailing of the only prospect for real peace for decades. Why did he do that? There's only one answer; he is not interested in peace.
 
Apocalypse said:
What's here and now is what I responded on.
Here and now the Palestinians refuse to come to the negotiations table, to even talk about the peace process.
The fact that it wouldn't change when the American plan is presented is quite meaningless.
Click to expand...

You know, when Israel insists on completely unacceptable pre-conditions to talks, such as no halting of settlement programmes, and not allowing a future Palestinian state an army for self-defense-let alone a two-state solution, is it any wonder Palestine won't negotiate? Would you?
Furthermore involving Kushner who provides funding for settlements doesn't exactly inspire confidence in impartiality. The US is not an honest broker; this is entirely one-sided in Israel's favour.

No more two-state solution, by Dominique Vidal (Le Monde diplomatique - English edition, February 2017)
 
Last edited:
snakestretcher said:
Peace rejecters? Too bad you didn't feel the need to mention Oslo and Netanyahu's cynical derailing of the only prospect for real peace for decades.
Click to expand...
Netanyahu may well have tried to derail Oslo, but he did not succeed.

Oslo was derailed by the Palestinian Authority.


snakestretcher said:
Why did he do that? There's only one answer; he is not interested in peace.
Click to expand...
Not at all. There are other possible answers. I think it is more likely that Netanyahu believed that Oslo would lead to Israel's destruction instead of leading to peace.


snakestretcher said:
You know, when Israel insists on completely unacceptable pre-conditions to talks, such as no halting of settlement programmes,
Click to expand...
That's not a precondition, that the absence of a precondition.

Obama got Israel to halt settlement construction for nearly a year in exchange for a large supply of 5000-pound bunker busters. Guess what? The Palestinian leadership still refused to negotiate even when settlement construction was halted.


snakestretcher said:
and not allowing a future Palestinian state an army for self-defense
Click to expand...
That is not a precondition either. That is Israel's position at the bargaining table.

The reason why Israel opposes such an army is because it is not for self-defense, but rather for attacking Israel.


snakestretcher said:
-let alone a two-state solution,
Click to expand...
Israel has repeatedly offered the Palestinians a two-state solution.


snakestretcher said:
is it any wonder Palestine won't negotiate?
Click to expand...
Yes, it is a wonder. The Palestinian leadership should accept peace with Israel and a two-state solution.


snakestretcher said:
Would you?
Click to expand...
Yes. I would choose a peaceful two-state solution.


snakestretcher said:
Furthermore involving Kushner who provides funding for settlements doesn't exactly inspire confidence in impartiality. The US is not an honest broker; this is entirely one-sided in Israel's favour.
Click to expand...
Good. At this point a total Israeli victory is appropriate.
 
It's quite clear Yahoo and his cronies don't want peace. He wants war.

Sad, truly.
 
Fledermaus said:
Why?

...
Click to expand...

Because the Iranian leadership are anti-Semitic goons who want to not only eradicate Israel, but also jews. Iran, however, has not waged an offensive war overtly in ages.
 
Obscurity said:
Because the Iranian leadership are anti-Semitic goons who want to not only eradicate Israel, but also jews. Iran, however, has not waged an offensive war overtly in ages.
Click to expand...

<Insert name of many Muslim nations> leadership are anti-Semitic goons who want to not only eradicate Israel, but also jews.

Why does 'Bibi' want war with Iran?
 
Fledermaus said:
<Insert name of many Muslim nations> leadership are anti-Semitic goons who want to not only eradicate Israel, but also jews.

Why does 'Bibi' want war with Iran?
Click to expand...

Why wouldn't he want war with iran? Bibi is a neo-fascist right wing demagogue and a psychopathic criminal to boot. His annexations are completely illegal and his actions in the west bank are completely reprehensible.
 
Obscurity said:
Why wouldn't he want war with iran? Bibi is a neo-fascist right wing demagogue and a psychopathic criminal to boot. His annexations are completely illegal and his actions in the west bank are completely reprehensible.
Click to expand...

You seemed to miss the question.

Why does 'Bibi' want war with Iran?

Your opinion on Bibi is noted. It still does not answer the question.

Oh, and annexations and/or West Bank =/= Iran.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom