T. Belman. The Plan doesn’t depend on Palestinian acceptance. Israel will act in accordance with it and Trump will back them. He has already backed Israel’s annexation of both Jerusalem and Golan. Similarly when Israel annexes all lands west of the Jordan, Trump will back them.
For those who wonder about what will happen to Area A, They should know that Israel will be sovereign of those lands subject to Palestinian autonomy. Jordan will replace the PA as administrator.
It would be a mistake to think Trump’s deal of the century will be completely inconsequential: It could have far-reaching implications on the future of Israeli-Palestinian relations and more importantly, on the future of Israel itself.
by Prof. Eyal Zisser, ISRAEL HAYOM
This coming June, upon the conclusion of the Muslim holy month of Ramadan, the Trump administration will supposedly unveil details of its so-called “deal of the century” to bring an end to the century-old Israeli-Palestinian conflict. Even before its birth, however, many have already been quick to bury it. After all, many of the relevant parties aren’t hiding their reservations, some openly declaring they will refuse to accept it.
The Palestinians are looking on forlornly as their dream of having all their demands of Israel delivered on a silver platter by the international community – rises in smoke. While it might seek to meet the Palestinians’ desires, the deal of the century is light years from the concessions that previous administrations, from Clinton to Obama, were willing to grant them. Trump’s proposal makes no mention of the creation of a Palestinian state, and also makes no demand of Israel to withdraw from all of Judea and Samaria to pre-1967 borders.
Arab countries, which can’t afford to be viewed at home as “selling out” the Palestinian issue for a pittance of American economic aid, will follow in the wake of the Palestinian rejection. Arab rulers would be happy, of course, to bring the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to an end and turn their attention to the real problems afflicting them, such as the Iranian threat or their failing economies. But from there to a willingness to lie on the fence for the Palestinians, Israel and Trump, the distance is great.
Israel, too, particularly its right-wing camp, has expressed trepidation over the deal, which could call on the Jewish state to concede significant portions of Judea and Samaria. While a Palestinian state won’t be established in these areas, the Palestinian Authority’s presence there could become legitimized as a fact on the ground, recognized by the international community.
The script, therefore, is already written: The Americans will propose the plan, which will be rejected or squandered and it will be relegated to the dustbin of history as “another plan” in a long line of them throughout the 100 years of conflict that never amounted to peace.
But it would be a mistake to think Trump’s deal of the century will be completely inconsequential: It could have far-reaching implications on the future of Israeli-Palestinian relations and more importantly, on the future of Israel itself.
First, the details of the plan will become the starting point for any future discussions about the conflict. And thus, instead of or in conjunction with the Clinton outline or former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s offer to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Trump’s plan will also be evoked and used to significantly improve Israel’s bargaining position opposite future American administrations and even the international community, which still views the Clinton and Olmert proposals as the basis for any Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.
Second, the Trump proposal could pave a path to a solution by essentially removing several central issues from the agenda for both sides, chief among them the issue of Palestinian refugees. The American plan, which calls for refusing these refugees the right of return and settling them in their current countries, could materialize even without a final-status agreement and hence make it easier to achieve one in the future.
And finally, the Trump plan could give the Israeli government an opportunity to advance its vision of applying Israeli law over swathes of Judea and Samaria, primarily the large settlement blocs with wall-to-wall consensus in Israel.
In light of the Palestinian rejection, which means Trump’s deal most likely won’t gain any traction, Israel will be able to claim, justified from its point of view, that it cannot wait for the Palestinian side any longer and wants to take unilateral steps in the spirit of the Trump plan – which the administration will presumably support.
And thus, 52 years after the Six-Day War in June of 1967, the deal of the century of June 2019 could bring tidings of change, even to the point of another revolution in the status of Judea and Samaria. This revolution, we can assume, will receive American recognition similar to Trump’s recognition of Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights.
Trump’s proposal makes no mention of the creation of a Palestinian state, and also makes no demand of Israel to withdraw from all of Judea and Samaria to pre-1967 borders.
why do I keep reading/hearing pre-67 borders? but then if its said long and loud enough it becomes truth.
Latest clarification on what the Trump peace plan is not. Which ONE it is NOT Jordan is Palestine.
<strong> https://www.jpost.com/Arab-Israeli-Conflict/Greenblatt-Upcoming-peace-plan-doesnt-include-confederation-with-Jordan-587787
I advocate for Pal-Arabs who wish to emigrate from the Land of Israel to do so to wherever they wish and can be accepted.
There are Pal-Arabs in Chile and lately many have emigrated to Turkey from Gaza. There have been over the years some in France.
In Europe now there is starting to be a backlash against Muslim immigration, including the large Turkish immigration.
If immigrants have some money in their pocket and do not come as new welfare cases more locations are interested in their immigration.
@ Adam Dalgliesh:
There are so many examples Adam.
In an interview to 7sur7 on November 28th 2018, the Belgian Secretary for Migration, Theo Francken, explained that the monthly inflow of asylum seekers from Palestine to Belgium, especially single young men from Gaza, had sharply increased. The number of applications in October 2018 amounted to 350 monthly.
https://www.7sur7.be/7s7/fr/1502/Belgique/article/detail/3498172/2018/11/28/Sommes-nous-vraiment-submerges-par-les-demandes-d-asile.dhtml
This is indicative for all Western European countries.
You should understand, the 2001 UN plan: ‘Replacement Migration: Solution to Declining and Ageing Populations’ established that the EU needs to bring in 674 million immigrants. This migration is required to maintain the “potential support ration”, a measure necessary to maintain an optimal level as estimated by the UN.
The European Commission’s Directorate-General Home Affairs published their own study on this, in 2010, confirming the ‘feasibility’ of receiving 3,8 billion migrants to Europe.
European member states and NGOs subsequently worked out their own local or regional plans in order to execute these blueprints.
Importantly, the EU will most definitely not recruit genteel Philippinos, industrious Chinese, or sturdy church going Mexican immigrant laborers. No, the EU has a long standing commitment to further immigration from Muslim countries.
This was reconfirmed in the EC’s Parliamentary Association’s declaration of 1975, the EC’s memorandum of Cairo of 1975, the EC’s General Committee’s meeting in Luxembourg in 1976, the subsequent meetings in Tunis of 1977, and Brussels in 1977 and Damascus in 1978, the EC sponsored Hamburg Symposium of 1983 and EC’s Barcelona Declaration of 1995.
This was all set in Motion long before Mrs. Merkel’s famous statement of “we can work it out” in 2015, opening the door wide open to over 1 million Arab migrants to Germany in 2015.
@ Hugo Schmidt-Fischer: Sorry, Hugo and Bear. I was replying to Hugo, not Bear.
I agree with Ted about this.
@ Hugo Schmidt-Fischer: Bear, what is your source for saying that the Europeans welcome Palestinian immigrants? It would surprise me if this were true, since the Europeans would anger the Arab states and Iran if it was. The Arab states and Iran want the Palestinians to stay where they are, so they can fight Israel and stake a claim to “palestinian” territory.
@ Hugo Schmidt-Fischer:
Europe accepts all kinds of Muslims but will not accept Palestinians because they want them to stay where they are so they can give israel a hard time. That way Europe has proxies to help it fight Israel.
Bear Klein Said:
For whatever suicidal reasons, Europeans are adamant to take-in many more Palestinians, more than are accountable by any reason.
Today, many of the Afghans, Iraqi’s or Moroccan impostor refugees in Europe are disguised as ‘Palestinians’. Followers of Western European media both print and state owned TV channels, are informed again and again of this ‘Palestinian’ family newly arrived here or that ‘Palestinian’ hairdresser taking up residence there, and how lovely they are. One wonders where these large numbers come from.
In any event, it will be easy to slip in a couple of million extra, seeing that Europeans are very willing and able to receive, while Arabs in Gaza and Judea would jump at the opportunity. All it takes is a one way rickety boat ticket to Lampedusa.
Bear in mind, EU and UN master plans calls to have hundreds of millions immigrants over the next 25 years, in order to counterbalance an own sharply declining demographics.
At the same time, Europe is infatuated with Middle Eastern people, who serve a welcome proxy to Europe’s secret covert hate of Jews. A visceral Antisemitic hate Europeans may not admit, but they are happy their Arab protégés can carry out.
Therefore, Europe will not solve its demographic attrition with churchgoing Latinos or with diligent Chinese immigrants, although these would willingly arrive in large numbers.
Europeans are eager to attract Arab migrants, and Israel can easily cater to this demand by helping Gazans and Judean Arab emigrants reach Germany’s magnanimous social safety net.
By the way for anyone who does not know Jared Kushner has confirmed that the Trump plan will not include a two state solution.
Bibi wants to name a town in the Golan after Trump.
Should this be a new Town?
Should Katzrin be renamed and a Trump Tower Hotel put there?
Any ideas?
No Pal-Arab State west of the Jordan River ever.
To date for 100 Years all Pal-Arab organizations have rejected having the Jewish Nation State of Israel as a neighbor no matter the borders on a permanent basis.
Israel should apply it civil law to all of Area C. It should work on plans for the peaceful voluntary emigration, including financial incentives to the Arab emigres plus purchasing or any property that they can prove they own. This property should then be sold to Jews.
The PA will implode or explode in the near future likely and the IDF should take these areas over 100%.