T. Belman. This is very odd. I can’t imagine Abdullah or Hamas agreeing to it let alone backing it. This trial balloon would only be acceptable to the Saudis if Mudar had replaced Abdullah as leader and Hamas was banned.
I have spoken to a very knowledgeable source in the intelligence community and he tells me that I have it partially wrong. The Saudis have nothing to do with this plan. This new version comes from certain elements in Abdullah’s office who are trying to avoid his replacement by showing he has softened his approach. But don’t believe it. Abdullah has always kept the Palestinians in Jordan suppressed and he intends to do likewise if he takes over lands to the west of the Jordan river. Under his control they would have fewer rights than they have now.
This plan is not being considered by either Israel or the Saudis.
Bottom line, ignore it.
There are major changes to the original version of the Saudi Plan in a revised version that has not yet been published. Op-ed.
Dry Bones – The 3 godfathersY. Kirschen
The Saudi-based Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine plan (Saudi Plan) – initially published in Al Arabiya News on 8 June 2022 – has been revised in a later document containing amendments that appear to have been made at the request of and agreed to by Jordan, the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO) and Hamas – the three parties most affected if the Saudi Plan is successfully implemented.
The revised version has not been published in Al Arabiya News or on any other news site. It is written in Arabic – but an English translation – a copy of which is in the writer’s possession – is very informative in clarifying certain parts of the original version which were apparently vague or unacceptable to Jordan, the PLO and Hamas.
The Saudi Plan calls for Jordan, Gaza and part of Judea and Samaria (aka ‘West Bank’) to be merged into one territorial entity to be called the Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine.
This plan trashes the creation of an independent Palestinian Arab State between Israel and Jordan – the solution proposed by:
- The 2002 Arab Peace Initiative,
- The United Nations – after adopting Security Council Resolution 2334 in 2016,
- The 2020 Trump Peace Plan – and
- Jordan and the PLO since the signing of the 1993 Oslo Accords
The major changes to the published version of the Saudi Plan made in the revised version on are:
The area of Judea and Samaria (‘West Bank’) to be included in the Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine – approximately 70% in the published version – has been reduced to about 30% in the revised version.
This concession would purportedly weaken Israel’s claim to sovereignty in the Jordan Valley – 87% of which is situated in Area C – currently under Israel’s full administrative and security control, but that is open to negotiation..
The possibility that Israel could regain sovereignty in up to 90% of Judea and Samaria (‘West Bank’) for the first time in 3000 years – with Jordan, PLO and Hamas consensus – is a potential game changer.
The Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine – will be under Hashemite rule. The original version did not designate who would be its ruler.
Important changes have been made in relation to Jerusalem:
The original version states:
“The formal relinquishment of any claims to Jerusalem (with an appropriate arrangement for the holy places)” will be “a key bargaining chip in Palestinian hands”.
The revised version states:
“The formal renunciation of Jerusalem (while giving the Holy Places special status)” will be a major bargaining chip in the hands of the Palestinians.”
Sole Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem is now promised – if agreement on all other issues can be resolved.
Under the radar contact already commenced between Israel and Saudi Arabia will certainly focus on implementing the revised version – not the published version.
I reached out to the author of both the original and revised versions – Ali Shihabi – asking him to explain why his original published plan was substantially revised and not published.
I offered to publish his reasons verbatim in an article which I would submit to him to approve before publication.
Shihabi has not replied to my request.
@David
While this is true, you are taking this truth out of the context of Bibi having had a govt which, at the time, contained Blue and White, rather than a completely Right wing govt which he has today. Furthermore and more relevant, however, the Trump plan was far more appetizing an undertaking than the Ali Shihabi plan, to which I will note, the Saudi’s have still not endorsed, or mentioned, or even alluded in any of their various statements referencing peace, but let’s not digress. The Trump plan had a sunset clause which would have passed before any Pal would have accepted it, so Bibi knew his acceptance a strategic gamble which demonstrated his flexibility while knowing he was in fact accepting nothing at all.
More than this, and much more relevant to the motivation of Bibi’s acceptance of the Trump plan, Trump agreed to recognize, outside of the Trump plan which the Arabs would ultimately reject, Israel’s right to 30% of the territory in J & S including the settlements and the Jordan Valley. This recognition by the US was directly related to Bibi’s acceptance of the Trump plan, not its successful completion, and he well knew the Arabs would not and could not agree to any plan which gave a single clump of land to the Jews. Had it not been for the treasonous efforts which Gantz confessed to having put in place, Trump would not have reneged on the bargain he struck, but again, let us not digress. Bibi had refused to fly to Washington for the announcement of the Trump Plan until he received in writing, Trump’s recognition of Bibi’s extension of sovereignty to the lands in question.
Hence, Bibi’s acceptance of the 2020 Trump plan is nothing remotely similar to the notion that he might similarly accept the Shihabi plan. In fact, I think it is so remotely similar, that the connection between the two reveals your argument to be more than a bit disingenuous, to be honest. Forgive me for noting it, but I think this is a fair observation.
Edgar G
You state
No comment.
https://youtu.be/_YrNQaXdOxU
@David
I wasn’t aware there were any comments in moderation. I just approved your comment.
@DAVID SIBGER_
About your “last comment still awaiting moderation”…Perhaps, we are ALL hoping that this IS your LAST comment……!!!
If the PM dares to suggest giving up a part of YESHA, his government will be in shambles tout suite…..
Why is my last comment still awaiting moderation 6 days after it was posted?
Ted
I have posted this comment on my Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine Supporters Facebook page:
You and your readers are invited to visit this site and make any comments you or they wish to which I will always reply.
A new Hebrew group has been initiated and I hope to find other people around the world to start Arabic and other language groups supporting the Saudi solution.
This plan is too important to be buried without a trace by the international media and their analysts. They need to be held to account for doing so. Thanks again for showing them all how a responsible news organisation should respond to an item of news of major importance.
Trash the news – but never ignore it
Ted
You state:
That is certainly your prerogative. I appreciate your readiness to discuss the Saudi solution at the length you did and your voluntary publishing of my articles.
Your opposition to the plan is backed by many others – which I readily acknowledge. Giving up one inch of Judea and Samaria is anathema to you and them.
There is however a competing view – held by Bibi – that resolving the conflict will require Israel to do just that – providing Israel retains full security control of all territory west of the Jordan River.
Might I add that no other media commentator or analyst world wide (with one exception at my request) – and the UN to boot – has been prepared – like you – to even acknowledge that there is a new Solution emanating from Saudi Arabia in 2022 which is an alternative to the failed two-state solution – which we both have argued against for years.
We have proposed different ways to replace the two- state solution. It is a pity our solutions diverged from our commonly shared position that:
1. Jordan comprises 78% of the former territory called “Palestine”
2. Jordan and Israel – The two successor states to the Mandate for Palestine – should determine the allocation of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria (West Bank) and Gaza – the remaining 5% of “Palestine” under neither Israel nor Jordan’s sovereign control.
I appreciate that I can comment on your site at any time to promote the Saudi solution as you and your supporters can – and have done – in commenting on your solution in response to my articles where published.
Hopefully these exchanges will inform our respective readers of two solutions to end 100 years of conflict that they will not read about anywhere else.
The media, their analysts, the UN, the NGO’’s and private think tanks treating their readers and financial backers like mushrooms- keeping them in the dark and feeding them *** – have had their reputations and credibility shredded in failing to mention the existence of this Saudi solution since its publication 9 months ago.
Like you – they could disagree with the Saudi solution – but then be ready to defend their position when challenged.
Those eminent analysts I approached (with one exception) have failed to express their opinions.
Bibi and Mohammed Bin Salman will hopefully expose how shameful their failure to totally ignore the Saudi solution has been.
The mind boggles when you think how many millions of column inches have been printed after the announcement and publication of previous plans and their eventual consignment to the dust bin of history.
The Saudi solution – zilch – except for you and me.
Thanks Ted. We need to find others prepared to do the same. It won’t be easy. They have had the opportunity to do so for nine months and remained silent.
To all sides in this Mudar and King of Jordan thing
I would halt all treaties with Arabs
I would leave Jordan strictly alone.
Forget about the Temple. That is an impossible situation.
Forget symbols . Get to real things.
Such as Ukraine and Antisemitism.
And back Russia opposing NATO with all you have.
@#David
I am bowing out of this discussion. I have made myself clear.
@David Only hudnas are possible with Muslims, especially Arabs. Any binding “final agreement” that involves Israel conceding sole sovereignty, in principle, of even one centimeter of land is, by it’s very nature, illegitimate and doomed to failure.
iI don’t know if Mudhar Zharan will succeed in coming to power, or if he does, for how long, but it incentivizes Muslim Arabs to leave the territories so I support it.
I think Numberes 33:55 and I’m not religious though I do believe there is a God and one of the very few things that an be surmised about him is that it still holds.
But there is a limit to how in practical terms.
Ted
You state:
I have provided you with my evidence in points 1 and 2 of my comment dated 24 January at 11.25 am. You have failed to respond.
You further state:
Good to see you have at least changed your previously stated view:
So the questions you now need to answer are:
1. What do you think of Ali Shihabi – the person whose name appears on the Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine solution published in Al Arabiya News on 8 June 2022?
2. Do you think Ali Shihabi could have published this solution in the Government-controlled Al Arabiya News trashing 20 years of Saudi Arabian foreign policy without Saudi Government approval?
3. Do you think the revised solution – which you acknowledge exists – is now worthy of discussion – since it clarifies that the Hashemites will govern the newly-created Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine – not the PLO or Hamas – neither of whom has sought to reject this provision in the revised Plan – when one comment from either of them would probably be the end of the plan or at the least make it so much more difficult for the plan to be implemented?
I actually forgot to include
The parallel from Israel to Russia is striking
Russia cannot live with a Fascist state on its border
Even more a Fascist state and a NATO proxy.
These are incompatibles.
Israel is in quite a similar situation. The same Fascism from these enemies called wrongly Palestinian.
I do not think we should discuss this problem without basing this problem on understanding Ukraine. They are so alike.
David Singer
In point 2 above you write
“Abbas and Haniyeh have agreed to the revised Plan which clarifies that the Hashemites – not the PLO or Hamas – will be governing the newly created Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine.”
Now this will entail the state of Palestine” which is the 78 per cent of the original Transjordan from 1922, plus part of Judea plus Gaza with Arabs still dangerous in Israel proper.
At the same time replacement of the Hashemite ruling class will leave the same figures. If even possible.
My suspicion is that all this is a rationalisation of Israeli weakness.
They are bankrupt. They refuse to bite the bullet and act independently
So all of these plans are a diversion from what needs to be done.
@dAVID
Of course it should. But my quarrel with you is not about the Plan but about whose plan it is. You keep writing that its the Saudi Plan or in the case of the revised plan that it is backed by Hamas and Abbas and by Jordan and I keep asking you for evidence of that.
We have already discussed the contents of the Plan and you approve of it and I reject it.
Finally not all plans must be evaluated. Only plans that merit discussion should be discussed.
I prefer to wait to see whose proposing the Plan before deciding if it is worth discussing or just a waste of time.
Ted
You state:
Does that principle also apply to the Zahran-Belman Jordanian Option? Shouldn’t any plan be judged on its merits – no matter who proposes it? Should everyone give you the same answer because no country has taken ownership of your plan?
@ David.
Until some country takes ownership of the Plan and/or the revised plan, I will
ignore it.
@David
😀
What are you talking about, promised?
“I promise you to generously to gift you your own wallet which has been in your pocket all this time in exchange for concessions you haven’t made yet.”
reminds me of:
https://youtu.be/kAkLzbq2K3I
Ted
1. This is a Saudi Plan. Its author Ali Shihabi is a close confidant of Crown Prince and Prime Minister Mohammed Bin Salman(MBS), a member of the MBS Advisory Board on Neom – a US$500 billion megacity presently under construction – and a staunch defender of MBS for years. The Plan itself – trashing 20 years of Saudi foreign policy was published in the Saudi Government- controlled Al Arabiya News. Google “Jamal Khashoggi” to find out what happens to Saudis who criticise Saudi policy. Shihabi is still there defending MBS and his policies.
2. Abbas and Haniyeh have agreed to the revised Plan which clarifies that the Hashemites – not the PLO or Hamas – will be governing the newly created Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine. If this was not done by agreement wouldn’t Abbas and Haniyeh be screaming from the roof tops that this plan was dead in the water? Not a murmur from either of them.
3. There is no other plan Bibi and MBS would be possibly discussing – certainly not the failed UN 2016 two-state solution nor the short lived Trump 2020 two-state solution nor dare I suggest the Zahran-Belman Jordanian Option or the solutions posited by the PLO or Hamas Charters. This Saudi solution trashes the UN and Trump proposals and opens up possibilities never before contemplated by any other plans in the last 100 years. The Saudi plan makes two concessions before the recently commenced discussions between Bibi and MBS were even commenced:
and:
Bibi said before the November elections that he would make peace with Saudi Arabia and end the Israel-Arab conflict. The path to achieving this centers on successfully implementing the Saudi solution.
It really is time that you accepted this revised Saudi solution means business – having been endorsed by Abdullah, Abbas and Haniyeh.
@David
My source discredits what you have claimed.
All we know for sure is who authored the Plan and who published it. and, presuming my guy can be believed, who drafted a revised Plan. nothing more.
When I claimed you have not offered any evidence to substantial [sic] all your claims, you asked:
All of them including:
1.) That this is a Saudi Plan
2.) That Abbas and Hamas are good with the revised Plan
3.) Bibi and MBS certainly would have this revised copy of the Saudi Solution on the agenda for their discussions
You offered no evidence for any of this. It is pure speculation on your part.
Ran out of time. NY Times. Usually, the whole article is based on “anonymous administration sources” or some such nonsense. It’s like citing The Coast.
https://youtu.be/H9EVEM3_5Rs
@David I short, if you -anybody- can’t trust me – the reader- enough to know your source’s identity, sources and methodology- why should I trust you. Plus spies always lie; that’s a given. So, I’m taking in everything both of you are saying about this fantastical “Saudi” plan with a sack of salt. I kinda’ doubt I’m alone. Why? Am I being too subtle and indirect?
Don’t feel bad. TOI and any times does this all te time
https://youtu.be/BFy4zQlWECc
@David At times, when he’s referenced posted articles or videos using anonymous sources such as you are doing. His own articles are often terrific. Even peer reviewed bibliographies can be flawed but to expect the reader to accept, “I know a guy, and believe you me, he knows his stuff though I can’t tell you who”, won’t fly.
Ted
You state:
Sebastien:
You state:
Are you suggesting Ted is gullible or do you accept Ted has been told by a “very knowledgeable source in the intelligence community” that a revised version of the Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine solution exists?
@David
Yes, my source is corroboration of the revised plan. Not of the original plan. You still have not offered any evidence to substantial all your claims.
Why on earth would any but the most gullible persons take the word of spooks about anything, especially anonymous spooks? Disinformation and disingenuous spin is their business!
😀
Ted:
1. You have now confirmed that your “very knowledgeable source in the intelligence community” has acknowledged there is a revised Plan. This confirmation coming from such an independent important source is welcomed. It also confirms that Bibi would have been given a copy and full briefing..
2. You rightfully state:
Correct Ted – not one word from Abbas or Haniyeh since the original plan was published because they have agreed to the revised version.
3.. You state:
His assessment is wrong. The revised Plan does not come from Abdullah. Read my article again and you can readily determine that the revisions I detail needed the consent of Abdullah, Abbas and Haniyeh.
4. The UN, international and Israeli media, analysts and think tanks need to think again in the light of someone in the intelligence community confirming to you there is indeed a revised Plan. They need to let their readers and donors know about the revised Plan or risk losing whatever little credibility they possess after failing to acknowledge the existence of the original plan. Maybe you can explain their behaviour. Given the ground breaking and revolutionary nature of the original published Plan and its obvious newsworthiness – their blanket wall of silence has been nothing short of disgraceful.
I exclude Arutz Sheva and Israpundit in Israel and my other publishers in Australia and Canada who have published my articles week after week on the Saudi solution. They can hold their heads high.
The rest cannot now be allowed to bury the existence of the revised Saudi Plan – which trashes the failed two-state solution proposed by the 1993 Oslo Accords, Saudi Arabia foreign policy and the Arab Peace Initiative since 2002, the 2004 Bush Plan, the Obama-Biden land swaps-deal, the UN since 2016 and Trump’s 2020 Peace Plan – as well as Barak and Olmert’s crazy offers.
This is big, unprecedented and real and people need to know about it – not have it buried and totally ignored as the UN, the media and those with opinions on the Jewish-Arab conflict have sought to do.
Bibi certainly appreciates what has been proposed and the opportunity to secure his place in history if he can deliver on implementing the revised Saudi Plan in negotiations with Mohammed Bin Salman.
@David
Let me put it another way. Your evidence that this is a Saudi Plan is purely circumstantial. You have no evidence that the Saudis are behind the revised plan.
What evidence do you have that of this. I called it BS because it runs totally contrary to the Charters of both PLO and Hamas and to everything they have said and done to date. Its just not believable and they haven’t said a word about it.
My source acknowledges the revised Plan as having come from Abdullah and offers a reason why Jordan would switch gears so substantially. By the way, he is the onI am waiting to hear.ly one to have acknowledged the revised Plan. To date it has been adamantly opposed to amalgamating with the Palestinians and totally supportive of the TSS as it is known. Jordan itself has also not acknowledged this plan. What evidence do you have that it came from them?
Ted
You state:
My article makes it clear that Jordan, the PLO and Hamas have agreed to major revisions of the published Saudi Plan which is contained in an unpublished revision acceptable to Jordan, the PLO and Hamas.
Calling it “bullshit” with nothing to substantiate your claim is not worthy of you.
Saying you can’t imagine Abdullah or Hamas agreeing to it let alone backing it –
after I pointed out the existence of a revised unpublished copy of the Saudi solution – is burying your head in the sand.
Like the original plan published on 8 June 2022 – no one in the United Nations, the international media, media analysts like -Thomas Friedman and Daniel Pipes – or well endowed think tanks – want to even acknowledge its existence or analyse what the Saudi solution offers.
Trash it if they like – but their refusal to even acknowledge its existence is shameful.
Ted – to my knowledge – you have been virtually the only person besides myself to discuss this Plan and its subsequent revision.
I can assure you your “knowledgeable source in the intelligence community” doesn’t know what he is talking about.
Bibi and MBS certainly would have this revised copy of the Saudi Solution on the agenda for their discussions. It represents a major breakthrough in what the Plan itself details:
You better believe this is what is going to happen – not ignore it.
The revision to the original Plan explains why Jordan, the PLO and Hamas have not uttered one word rejecting the Saudi Plan since its publication.
Mudar and the Jordan Option is next in the queue if this Saudi solution is not successfully implemented. Mudar’s arrival to take over Jordan is a long time off – if ever. This revised Saudi solution could well see a peace agreement between Israel and the Hashemite Kingdom of Palestine signed or ditched in 2023.
What you and your readers should do is pray that negotiations between Bibi and MBS will see this revolutionary and groundbreaking plan successfully implemented.
I would suggest that this deal is unacceptable because It retains the Hashemite monarchy.
But if Mudar replaces the King as leader than this plan looks a lot like the Jordan Option.
There is no way that the PLO or Hamas will support this revised Plan. That’s pure bullshit.
By Hamas and Fatah. 😀
C’mon man.
Let’s circle back.
Sounds like fake news to me.
Anyway, what’s the difference?
The result is the same as the TSS – Israel surrounded and cut at the waist by a “Palestinian” state, no matter what name you give it.
If this state is Jordan, it is going to be 100 times worse.
@Peloni
Well said.
You might liken it unto a hail-Mary pass. An act of desperation.
@Ted
This explains quite well the likely reality which lies behind the impossible nature of this newly leaked change to the non-Saudi endorsed so called Saudi plan.
The Hashemites living in a state of terror of being overthrown by the Pals is why the Pals have been so badly subjugated within Jordan’s borders and why the Hashemites severed the right of citizenship for the Pals living inside the territories. It isn’t that they don’t want to extend the Pals any rights, which they don’t, but rather, they couldn’t afford the risk to their regime to do other than they have been doing for decades. The Hashemites know this. The Hashemites loyalists know this. The Israelis and the Saudis know this. And the Pals certainly know this. In no way is it slightly reasonable that the Pals would support the prospect of being placed under the control and domination of this anti-Pal authoritarian regime which has subjugated and abused them for as long as they have ruled.
Conversely, it is quite reasonable that the Hashemite loyalists would support it – the same Hashemite loyalists whose own authority and privileged within their raise status in the Hashemite power structure extends from the necessary survival of their duplicitous, authoritarian Pal-hating master.
Both Israel and the Saudis are well past the need or desire of holding Abdullah and his regime in place, as it stands as an obstacle to Israel and the Saudis maturing their plans for their own peace arrangements which are inseparable from their desire to face the Iranian menace and many other improvements in the region. As with the Pals, neither the Israelis nor the Saudis have any reason to support the continuation of the Hashemites, and every reason to be rid of their over-ripened decayed existence. In truth, the very reason why the Saudis and the Israelis will gravitate towards the Jordan Option is also the very reason why they will never find this current trial balloon worth the chase. They desire a meaningful resolution to the Pal issue which can not even be attempted to be resolved with the involvement of the Pal hating Hashemite regime. Replacing the Hashemites with Mudar, however, remedies this and many other issues.
Try as much as they like, the benefits which Mudar affords the region can not be approached without him, and certainly not with the continuation of the Hashemites, whose only role has been to maximize their own power and wealth at the cost to all who later regret having dealt with them.
This is very odd. I can’t imagine Abdullah or Hamas agreeing to it let alone backing it. This trial balloon would only be acceptable to the Saudis if Mudar had replaced Abdullah as leader and Hamas was banned.
I have spoken to a very knowledgeable source in the intelligence community and he tells me that I have it partially wrong. The Saudis have nothing to do with this plan. This new version comes from certain elements in Abdullah’s office who are trying to avoid his replacement by showing he has softened his approach. But don’t believe it. Abdullah has always kept the Palestinians in Jordan suppressed and he intends to do likewise if he takes over lands to the west of the Jordan river. Under his control they would have fewer rights than they have now.
This plan is not being considered by either Israel or the Saudis.
Bottom line, ignore it.