ryanb741
Posts: 5058
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 6:36 pm

Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sat Aug 24, 2002 1:24 am

Outlined below is the main body of a letter I received from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office, outlining official UK policy on israel/Palestine. Please take the time to read through it all, as it should clear up any uncertaincy and bickering as to EXACTLY what our policy is.

Best regards

Ryan



The Government is gravely concerned by the situation in the region. There has been terrible human suffering on both sides and the mistrust between the communities runs deep. Actions by both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have contribute to the crisis. Neither side can achieve lasting security through force, and neither side has a monopoly on right or wrong. Both Israelis and Palestinians deserve to live free from fear.


We condemn suicide bombings and the deliberate targeting of innocent civilians. Terrorism is inexcusable, and Israel is entitled to act in self-defence against such attacks. The Palestinians’ legitimate national aspirations cannot be achieved through violence and worldwide support for their cause is weakened every time the suicide bombers act. Such attacks strengthen the conviction amongst Israelis that the Palestinians are not interested in peace, only in destroying Israel, and therefore make peace more difficult to achieve. The Palestinian Authority must do more to stop further attacks.


At the same time, some Israeli policies and practices give the Government cause for grave concern. The ongoing cycle of violence and retribution, the restrictions imposed by the IDF on the movement of Palestinian people and goods, and the demolition of property and of agricultural land have had a severe impact on the Palestinian economy and the provision of health, education and social services. Recent IDF operations have accelerated this decline and resulted in further destruction of Palestinian infrastructure, affecting water, sanitation and other basic services, and the destruction of homes and businesses. We believe that it is right and in Israel’s interest to cease these practices. We are discussing with international partners, including the World Bank, how to respond to the emergency situation they have created. We are providing practical support through our contributions to UNRWA (United Nations Relief and Works Agency). We have disbursed £12 million of our annual contribution to UNRWA’s General Fund, and made a £5 million contribution to UNRWA’s Emergency Appeal.


The imposition of the closures, settlement expansion, incursions, extra-judicial killings and the alleged misconduct by the IDF are counter-productive. Continuing settlement activity is illegal under international law and an obstacle to peace. We support the recommendation of the Mitchell Committee that Israel should freeze all settlement activity, including the ‘natural growth’ of existing settlements. These practices fuel Palestinian anger and confirm to Palestinians their fear that Israel is not interested in ending the occupation. The Prime Minister has raised some of these concerns personally with Israeli prime Minister Sharon and the Foreign Secretary has raised them with the Israeli Foreign Minister Peres and Israeli Defence Minister Ben-Eliezer. Our Embassy in Tel Aviv is in frequent contact with the Israeli Government and conveys our concerns frankly.


We have also raised our concerns about about the damage to EU and other donor-funded projects in the West Bank and Gaza Strip caused by Israeli military actions and demanded that this practice stop. The UE reserves the right to demand compensation. The European Commission continues to monitor and cost this damage.


We welcome President Arafat’s statement on 15 May committing himself to institutional reform and for fresh elections. The UK has long supported the development of more effective and accountable Palestinian institutions in preparation for Palestinian statehood. We also welcome his desire to review Palestinian Authority structures and management, including its security apparatus. With our EU partners, we stand ready to help the Palestinian Authority rebuild and reform its security structures so that it can clamp down on violence and root out terrorism. Commitments must now be translated into action.


UK POLICY ON A NEGOTIATED PEACE SETTLEMENT


There is now a clear international consensus on the parameters for a negotiated comprehensive settlement – the exchange of ‘land for peace’ leading to a viable state of Palestine alongside the State of Israel, both secure and respected within recognised borders. Security Council Resolutions 242 and 1397 set out these principles, which, following Saudi Arabia’s initiative, were also adopted by the Arab Summit in Beirut on 28 March.


We support the right of the Palestinian people to establish a sovereign, independent and viable Palestinian state and look forward to the early fulfilment of this right, provided there is a concomitant recognition of Israel’s right as a state, and the return of its citizens to live in peace with security. The issues of permanent status, including that of territory, are for negotiation between the parties. It is not for the UK to prescribe the form of any Palestinian state. The right of the Palestinian people to self-determination is not subject to any veto.


Jerusalem is a key permanent status issue. Its status is be determined in negotiations between the parties. We recognise no sovereignty over the city. Jerusalem has a unique religious and cultural importance for Christians, Jews and Muslims, and we attach great importance to ensuring access to Jerusalem and freedom of worship there for people of all faiths.


We recognise the importance to Palestinians of the right of return. The Government supports UN General Assemble Resolution 194 (1948), which calls for the return and compensation of Palestinian refugees.




I used to think the brain is the most fascinating part of my body. But, hey, who is telling me that?
 
Arsenal@LHR
Posts: 7510
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:55 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sat Aug 24, 2002 3:42 am

I think that clears everything up for all those confused on our policy in the ME, what other's in Europe have in mind i'm not sure.
In Arsene we trust!!
 
go canada!
Posts: 2886
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sat Aug 24, 2002 3:59 am

I agree with the uk position, regarding right to turn, when this finally happnes, the talks will be more complex, eg why cant israelis live in palestine but the palestinians can live in israel?

We have a sensible position and i call on all of airliners to back it.
It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
 
ryanb741
Posts: 5058
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 6:36 pm

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sat Aug 24, 2002 7:45 am

Come on guys - 48 people viewing this is pathetic! One of the very few time the TRUTH about a country's policy towards the Middle East is published and nobody bothers to read it! Maybe I should have headed the thread 'Israelis must all die, hahahahahaha!' or 'Arafat is a paedophile, by Ariel Sharon'. Now THAT would have raised debate!


My post was to shed light on what the ACTUAL UK policy is, forget what SAS23 and co say.......
I used to think the brain is the most fascinating part of my body. But, hey, who is telling me that?
 
Arsenal@LHR
Posts: 7510
Joined: Tue Mar 20, 2001 2:55 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sat Aug 24, 2002 8:12 am

You see Ryanb741, some people find it hard to stomach the truth.
In Arsene we trust!!
 
Alpha 1
Posts: 12343
Joined: Sat Feb 03, 2001 12:12 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sat Aug 24, 2002 10:25 am

It is a well-balanced policy on paper, but, as any government will tell, what's on paper isn't what always ends up as policy. For the most part, I think the UK has followed it's stated policy very well, to be honest. I have no complaints there-all societies have their nuts on either side, though-SAS23 is walking proof of that.

I think why more people haven't read or responded, is it's not controversial enough!  Smile Whether we like it or not, people like topics that are truly controversial. That's just human nature, especially in this age of instant and worldwide communications.
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sat Aug 24, 2002 10:34 am

I agree with every word in that statement. Thank god someone in a position of power is talking sense.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
go canada!
Posts: 2886
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sun Aug 25, 2002 2:54 am

i have to agree, its typical that when we have a sensible thread regarding israel-palestine the anti-israelis dont respond, i will bring this thread intoevery discussion i have with any of them on israel-palestine.
It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
 
GDB
Posts: 12652
Joined: Wed May 23, 2001 6:25 pm

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sun Aug 25, 2002 3:40 am

The long, hard often tedious work of political negations, settling bitter disputes etc, is not media friendly.
We all expect instant or quick solutions in so much of life, delivered with a handy soundbite for good measure.
That partly explains the lower level of viewings and replies to your post!
 
avi
Posts: 878
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 1:27 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sun Aug 25, 2002 7:52 pm

Hi,

I don’t think the UK government knows what is their policy.

There is now a clear international consensus on the parameters for a negotiated comprehensive settlement – the exchange of ‘land for peace’ leading to a viable state of Palestine alongside the State of Israel, both secure and respected within recognised borders.

We support the right of the Palestinian people to establish a sovereign, independent and viable Palestinian state and look forward to the early fulfilment of this right, provided there is a concomitant recognition of Israel’s right as a state, and the return of its citizens to live in peace with security.

As I understand it from this two paragraph, the UK policy is to have 2 countries, one for each people, secure and respected.

BUT (there is always a but) lets check the last paragraph.

We recognise the importance to Palestinians of the right of return. The Government supports UN General Assemble Resolution 194 (1948), which calls for the return and compensation of Palestinian refugees.

Lets make a simple math. There are 6.5M Israelis today in Israel. 5.3M are Jews and the rest are many minority groups but most of them are Moslems.
Also, there are about 4M PA refugees in the GS, WB, the Arab world and the rest of the world.

According to the UK policy they want (support) 4M PA to enter Israel. That’s mean Israel immediately won’t be a Jew state anymore (simple math, nothing else) and in all of us life time Israel won’t be a state at all (since an average Israeli family has 2-3 children and an average Arabic family has 5-10).

In other words, the UK policy is to bring to the end of Israel!
The Israeli and PA people CAN’T live together. It is a fact that we all can see and no one can say otherwise.
What exactly does make the UK government to believe that the 2 people could live together in peace inside Israel tomorrow?
What does the UK government want to happen here?

These two things simply don’t go together!
You can’t say that our policy is to have two separate states and at the same time one of them will be a state for the two people.

You said you got the letter from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office. I guess you send them a letter or an e-mail.
I really want an answers to my questions but not from you or anyone else in this forum but from the Foreign and Commonwealth Office.
It is not that I don’t respect your (or others) opinions but I do want them to answer it and to explain the contradiction.
Can you send them another letter or an e-mail?
Long live the B747
 
ryanb741
Posts: 5058
Joined: Thu Mar 28, 2002 6:36 pm

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sun Aug 25, 2002 8:14 pm

I think what you'll find is that they support the right of Palestinian return to PALESTINE - their homeland, which the Israelis will have vacated to create Palestine. The UK Government isn't advocating that the Palestinians come back and settle in Tel Aviv!
I used to think the brain is the most fascinating part of my body. But, hey, who is telling me that?
 
Hepkat
Posts: 2134
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2000 8:22 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sun Aug 25, 2002 9:20 pm

Why shouldn't displaced Palestinians be allowed to return from where they were displaced? After all, it wasn't their fault that they were displaced to begin with. And how can Israel tout itself being a free democratic outpost of Western ideals, when the state exists ONLY for the existence of Jews? Why can't it simple be a state and not a Jewish state, which implies racism and unequality for non-Jews? Avi, you've stated as much when you claim the return of Palestinian refugees would bring an end to Israel. I disagree.
 
go canada!
Posts: 2886
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sun Aug 25, 2002 10:41 pm

hepkat, 4 million palestinians living in israel would mean the end of israel, israel was created as a homeland for the jews, it has 1 million israeli arabs living it in and thats fine, but there is no point creating a state for the palestinians and then saying that 4 million palestinians should live in israel. It defeats the point of creating a palestinian state as in effect you will get two palestines, once there is a palestinian majority in israel do you really think that the states wont merge?

You will get the whole area becoming palestine. The palestinians cant expect their own state to be free of israelis and then expect israel to have 4 million extra palestinians in it, its simply wont work.

the palestinians dont want israel and jewish settlements in their palestine, by the same token they cant expect 4 million to move into israel. At the same time israel cant expect settlements to stay when it doesnt want 4 million extra people living in its country, a very small country come to that, even smaller when you take out the west bank and the gaza strip.

the other issue to remember is that israel didnt evict the palestinians, the first israeli pm stated that israel must share the lands with the arabs. It was the arab leaders who told the palestinians to leave their homes.

Palestinians have a right to live in palestine, israelis a right to live in israel, you either have two states, seperating the peoples or you have one state for both, but of course that doesnt work, we have seen it and it doesnt work.

you cant have a wholly palestinian state and then a half israeli state.
It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
 
qatarairways
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 6:02 pm

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sun Aug 25, 2002 11:20 pm

"the other issue to remember is that israel didnt evict the palestinians, the first israeli pm stated that israel must share the lands with the arabs. It was the arab leaders who told the palestinians to leave their homes."

Only 6 settlements out of a total of 442 depopulated were directly attributed to orders from Arab leaders.


Here is a Diary Entry in Yitzhak Rabin's diary written after the occupation of Lydda and Ramla in July 1948:

"After attacking Lydda and then Ramla, .... What would they do with the 50,000 civilians living in the two cities ..... Not even Ben-Gurion could offer a solution .... and during the discussion at operation headquarters, he remained silent, as was his habit in such situations. Clearly, we could not leave hostile and armed populace in our rear, where it could endangered the supply route [to the troops who were] advancing eastward.
Ben-Gurion would repeat the question: [u]What is to be done with the population?, waving his hand in a gesture which said: Drive them out! [garesh otem in Hebrew]. 'Driving out' is a term with a harsh ring, .... Psychologically, this was on of the most difficult actions we undertook[/u]".

From: Soldier of Peace: The Life of Yitzhak Rabin: 1922-1995 by Dan Kurzman.

----and----

"Great Suffering was inflicted upon the men taking part in the eviction action. [They] included youth-movement graduates who had been inculcated with values such as international brotherhood and humaneness. The eviction action went beyond the concepts they were used to. There were some fellows who refused to take part. . . Prolonged propaganda activities were required after the action . . . to explain why we were obliged to undertake such a harsh and cruel action." From Rabin's Interview with David Shipler of the New York Times in the late 70's.

----and----

". . . after April 1948, the flight acquired massive dimensions. Abd al-Rahman Azzam Pasha, secretary general of the Arab League, and King Abdullah both issued public calls to the Arabs not to leave their homes. Fawzi al-Qawukji, commander of the Arab Liberation Army, was give instructions to stop the flight by force and to requisition transport for this purpose. The Arab government decided to allow entry only to women and children and to send back all men of military age (between eighteen and fifty). Mohammad Adib al-Umri, deputy director of Ramallah broadcasting station, appealed to the Arabs to stop the flight from Jenin, Tulkarm, and other towns in the Triangle that were bombed by the Israelis. On May 10, Radio Jerusalem broadcasted orders on its Arab program from Arab commanders and AHC to stop the mass flight from Jerusalem and the vicinity." From "The Birth of Israel" by Simha Flapan an Israeli Politician.

----and----

In 1948 Yosef Weitz wrote in his diary:

"Our army is steadily conquering [Palestinian] Arab villages and their inhabitants afraid and fleeing like mice. You have no idea what happened in the [Palestinian] Arab villages. It is enough that during the night several shells will whistle over them and they flee for their lives. Villages are steadily emptying, and if we continue on this course --and we shall certainly do so as our strength increases-- then villages will empty of their inhabitants." From "Israel: A History" by Martin Gilbert

I'll provide more quotes if you want. And if you want a list of all the de-populated settlements I will provide it.




The policy is known as "Transfer". The person who planned all of this is Yosef Weitz a Jewish immigrant who helped set up the "Trasnfer Committee". You can read about this in a book by Tom Segev called "1949 The First Israelis" and many others. There are many people who deny that Palestinians were depopulated and it is just like others who deny that the Holocaust never happened.



 
Guest

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sun Aug 25, 2002 11:35 pm

The Palestinian refugee problem was brought about by Zionist terrorism and ethnic cleansing. They wanted the Palestinians out to create a Jewish state - and didn't care who got hurt in the process.

If you're Jewish, you have the right to an Israeli passport and live in Israel - but if your parents or grandparents were forced from their homes at gunpoint; your homes, businesses and other assets stolen by the Zionists, then you have no rights whatsoever.

Indeed, if you live in one of the refugee camps in the Occupied Territories, you will be prevented from leaving your area, whether for work, medical or any other reasons; if you support direct action to try to get the oppressor out you and your family with be targetted by the IDF; you may be exiled and your home will be bulldozed.

When Israel was founded in 1947, there were agreed borders. Since then, the Israelis have aggressively expanded beyond those borders. Palestinian and Israeli territory was agreed at that time - but the Israelis reneged on that.

In the 21st Century, a religious state is a dangerous thing - whether it is Iran, Saudi Arabia or Israel. One of the fundamental cornerstones of Zionism is a "wall of steel" where the State of Israel only contains Jews ... no Christians or Muslims welcome.

You can find an interesting report from the BBC on the links between the fundamentalist Christians and Israel here: http://www.inminds.co.uk/boycott-news-0202.html

I believe that a single Israeli/Palestine state - as long as it is a secular (ie non-Jewish or Muslim) will work. The only problem is, such a state would not be acceptable to the Zionists - the Palestinians would be happy with that solution, as long as they could reclaim that which was stolen from them.
 
qatarairways
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 6:02 pm

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Sun Aug 25, 2002 11:47 pm

What is Ironic is that this policy is similar to the policy of the Nazi's which saw property and land belonging to Jews and others being transferred to Germans.

BTW Go Canada! a lot of information on this issue is still waiting to be declassified. I think though that already there are declassified documents that document some of the policies and the actions of the Israeli forces. An example is Dir Yaseen which saw about 245 Palestinians killed by Irgun and the Stern Gang, and the documents from the Shai on this issue have already been declassified.

There is an online memorial for the people who died in that massacre http://www.deiryassin.org/
 
go canada!
Posts: 2886
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2001 1:33 am

RE: New Historians Etc

Mon Aug 26, 2002 12:47 am

Segev, oh how interesting.......

The fact is that the palestinians and the arabs attacked the israelis, the fact is ben-gurion stated in a letter to his son that "we must share the land with the arabs".Ben gurion wanted to share the lands, he recongised that the palestinians wouldnt just disappear. You have taken quotes and wrapped them around.

Im inclined to agree with most of them, in the right context,especially Gilbert, his book is an excellent work regarding the history of israel, its been praised from most sides.

Im not denying that the palestinians didnt lose their lands, im simply readdressing some of the enthic cleansing remarks.

"Israel’s view of itself has been challenged by new historians who claim, for example, that Arabs who fled during the War of Independence were expelled rather than left on their own accord. Indeed, there are Israeli historians revising the nation’s historical perspective. What the report failed to do, however, was to indicate that these historians represent a minority view; that the majority of Israeli scholars reject the extreme negative portrayals of Israel’s birth."

http://www.adl.org/opinion/truth_v_revisionism.html

The problem is is that a number of works, including Benny Morris, Segev etc werent exactly telling the truth.Morris and others began rewriting the traditional view of israeli history, that all arabs were bad and the israelis were angels into a self-critical anaylis of israel, trying to 'expose' the truth.They have cast israel as the regional villan, bearing sole responsibility for the cycle of violence in the middle east since 1948. for some, zionism is an archaic remnant of western colonialism, eventually destined to wither away. for others it is an exploitative and aggressive movement which has brought about the Palestinian tragedy and has perpetuated the conflict with Israel's Arab neighbours.

Benny Morris has made many misleading and erroneous statements. An example of flawed conclusions was a quote by Benny Morris from the Hebrew text of Ben-Gurion's statements in a letter to his son Amos. Morris says, BG said, "We must expel Arabs and take their places" whereas, what was actually written (in Hebrew) was: "We do not wish, we do not need to expel Arabs and take their place." Morris intentionally distorted that letter as he did with others and it was not merely a mistranslation or a typographical error.

The London Economist wrote at the time of Arab flight, that the main reason the Arabs left was because of "the Higher Arab Executive, urging the Arabs to quit...It was clearly intimated that those Arabs who remained in Haifa and accepted Jewish protection would be regarded as renegades." Clearly it would have been very dangerous for the Arabs to be considered renegades by the invading Arab armies.

Edward Atiyah (then the secretary of the Arab League Office in London) described the situation by saying "This wholesale exodus was due partly to the belief of the Arabs, encouraged by the boasting of an unrealistic Arab press and the irresponsible utterances of some of the Arab leaders that it could be only a matter of some weeks before the Jews were defeated by the armies of the Arab states and the Palestinian Arabs enabled to re-enter and retake possession of their country."(The Arabs, London 1955p.183).

Before you go any futher, perhaps you should read Efraim Karsh's:Fabricating Israeli History, the new historians. Karsh who is the director of Mediterranean Studies at King's College in London. others are Anita Shapira and read Joan Peter's "From Time Immemorial" (the newest edition - Feb, 2001 with updates and corrections)

Karsh focuses on three main issues: David Ben-Gurion's alleged endorsement of "transferring" Arabs out of the territory to become Israel, "collusion" between the Zionist movement and King 'Abdallah of Jordan to snuff out a Palestinian state, and secret British support for this joint effort. To establish his case, Karsh digs deeply into the documentary record, even going so far as to interpret crossed-out sections in Ben-Gurion's handwritten letters.

Yohanan Reshet of Ha-aretz, which is generally considered a left leaning Israeli newspaper says this about Efraim Karsh's book: "Provides dozens of proofs that the foremost new historians...are not historians but propagandists at the very best...The systematic falsification of historical facts exposed by Karsh in this astounding book is a rarity even in these days when so many falsifications are being exposed."

Menahem Ben of the Tel Aviv Weekly says, "Systematic and efficient demolition of all fundamentals fo the `new historians'revolutionary conclusions."

Morris says, "Karsh has a point. My treatment of transfer thinking before 1948 was, indeed, superficial."

Danial Pipes, the editor of the Middle East Quarterly calls the "scholarship" of the New Historians "pseudo-scholarship of propagandists".

Hyam Maccoby from Midstream Magazine, says that Karsh refers to "relevant documentation in English, Hebrew, and Arabic" and his research "far outweighs that of the New Historians," and "has delivered a crushing blow to them, revealing how hollow and superficial theri theses are." Of course he does - because many of these (some younger) Israeli New Historians didn't bother to consult the Arab documentation, relying strictly on the Israeli documentation - because they claimed they didn't have access - but the truth be known, they did and some of them, like Bennie Morris simply did not or could not translate the Arabic.

Norman Berdichevsky of Contemporary Review says Karsh, who used the right tools (Hebrew, Arabic, and English) with which "to demolish the `new historians' who have created the myths which dominate the airwaves and headlines of much of the media."

David Rodman of The Partisan Review says that Karsh "strips away the academic cloak with which the New Historians have wrapped themselves.. Not only has Karsh shattered the myths created by the New Historians by ripping apart their historiography, but he has also produced a very important contribution to the literature on the Arab-Israeli conflict. For in the process of debunking the debunkers, he has powerfully suppoorted the traditional interpretation of the conflict's origins."

look at http://www.danielpipes.org/reviews/199709g.shtml

and http://www.kcl.ac.uk/depsta/humanities/medstu/rev2bk.html for reviews on karsh.

Lets have a look at the right of return issue, the following link shows an extract from Commentary, a respected historical journal dealing with jewish historical affairs.Ive read it before so i know that the organisation prinitng it hasnt changed the tex of it.If this article simply appeared on this site i would be more spectical of its contents.

http://www.aijac.org.au/review/2001/266/essay266.html

Regarding the flight of the arabs, lets look at Hafia, where the arabs fled before the fighting broke out, the social elite started an exdous, which is typical, the higher classes running away. the Arabs in beruit told the arabs there to leave. Arab propaganda also played a part. Hazem Nusseibeh, an editor of the Palestine Broadcasting Service's Arabic news in 1948, admits that he and Hussein Khalidi, the secretary of the Arab Higher Committee (the representative body of the Arabs of British Palestine), fabricated atrocities in reporting about the battle at Deir Yassin "so the Arab armies will come to liberate Palestine from the Jews." Nusseibeh said in a BBC television series (Israel and the Arabs: the 50 Year Conflict) that, "This was our biggest mistake. We did not realize how our people would react. As soon as they heard that women had been raped [a fabrication] at Deir Yassin, Palestinians fled in terror."

You can look further into this, although of course please be aware that there is bound to be some zionists out there who while take Karshs work and the debate regarding the new historians totally out of context. While conducting a search, i had to be careful, even with historical training not to be suck up by zionist propaganda.Whether searching the internet, its always best to cross reference and double check.

Regarding the collision with the King of Jordan,http://www.sagepub.co.uk/journals/details/issue/sample/a010062.pdfThe article was publsihed in the respected,Journal of Contemporary History, a well respected historical journal.

kind regards, its nice to see some historical debate.


It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
 
Guest

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 12:51 am

Rather interesting description of the wanton massacre of Palestinian civilians - including women and children - at Deir Yassin here ... http://www.findarticles.com/cf_0/m2082/2_63/72435149/print.jhtml

"As ye shall sow, so shall ye reap..."
 
go canada!
Posts: 2886
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 12:57 am

regarding the states issue, a two state is the only way, SAS23, you know as well as i do that the palestinians wouldnt accept a one state soultion unless they have control of the goverment. The palestinian terror groups wouldnt accept a single jew living in palestine. The P.A itself doesnt want jews living in palestine.

the only way to peace is the UN,world accepted view, that calls for two states, side by side, one state would be an eridication of israel and more jewish suffering or the continuation of palestinian suffering. There simply wont be a non-secular state, neither side would accept it, both sides would want independence, civil war and more death and suffering would occur. The palestinians would only be happy with their own state. Since the israeli goverment, in your eyes sas23 is hardly jewish, therefore being non-secular then if the palestinians are happy with a non-secular state why arent they happy with israel at the moment?

because they want peace and security and freedom, they deserve it, so do the jews.but one state wouldnt work, both sides would want control.

Irgun and the Stern Gang were terror groups, i cant support them. Their actions have had consquences for the way palestinian terror groups behaved. Begin was unrepentant when the King David Hotel was bombed, killing over 50 civilains, many of the dead were british. I cant back the killing of my countrymen in cold blood by any terror gang, jewish, muslim or christain.
It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
 
avi
Posts: 878
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 1:27 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 1:21 am

Ryan,
I think what you'll find is that they support the right of Palestinian return to PALESTINE - their homeland, which the Israelis will have vacated to create Palestine. The UK Government isn't advocating that the Palestinians come back and settle in Tel Aviv!

I don’t think I understand you here. Are you talking about the ‘right of return’ to the GS and the WB (What may be one day a Palestinian state)?

Because if you read the last paragraph again, and here it is: The Government supports UN General Assemble Resolution 194 (1948), which calls for the return and compensation of Palestinian refugees. and check the date of this resolution you will understand that it does talk about Tel-Aviv (since Israel wasn’t in the GS and WB at that time).

If you (they) don’t mean the center of Tel-Aviv but the area around it (and other places inside Israel) so what is the difference (with relation to I said)?

Hepkat,
… when the state exists ONLY for the existence of Jews? Why can't it simple be a state and not a Jewish state

I already answered that question for YOU in the past. You can read it here:
http://www.airliners.net/discussions/non_aviation/read.main/251330/6/

Avi, you've stated as much when you claim the return of Palestinian refugees would bring an end to Israel. I disagree.

Why? Please tell me how it will work.

SAS23, you can answer to that question too since it looks like you also believe that the 2 people can live in the same place.
Long live the B747
 
qatarairways
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 6:02 pm

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 1:43 am

Go Canada,

I have intentionally dis-regarded any quote from any of Bennie Morris' books since his views can be viewed as very one sided and he has flaws in his research.

I took two quotes from Rabin, one from Gilbert's book and one from the former National Secretary of the MAPAM (socialist) party in Israel. I think these sources can be seen as credible.

WRT to the flight of the Arabs, you are right many left volantaraly. Historians put the number at between 100-150 settlements where the populace left voluntaraly for various reasons. Only 6 were directly linked at orders from Arab leaders but many Israeli historians say that the palestinians left entirely on voluntary reasons or from direct orders from leaders. That is not true because there are at least 40 settlements were people were forcebly expelled by Israeli forces and about 100 settlements were the population fled (not expelled) after attacks from Israeli Forces or Israeli Terrorist Organizations. It really sickens me when people deny that especially when I know well some Palestinians from the ones who have been expelled.

I will try to get the population numbers for the people who were forcebly expelled or ran away after attacks and the numbers for people who left on their own accord.
 
Guest

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 2:01 am

Everyone in the 'old' South Africa said that a South Africa incorporating all the races wouldn't work, either. However, it's now eight years on and it's not doing too badly.

The only reason that a single state, with equal rights for all, would not work is if the new state were to be a religious one (either Islamic or Jewish). I firmly believe that any religious state is an outdated anachronism that does not have a place in the 21st Century - religion, after all, has caused more conflict and suffering over the course of human history than any other factor. I can see nothing positive in Israel (or Iran or Saudi Arabia) continuing in such a manner as it merely serves to polarise opinion locally, regionally and globally.

As for the flight of the Palestinians, you need only look at what happened in Bosnia, Croatia and Kosovo to have a good idea of what would have happened with the Palestinians. As the Zionists attacked villages such as Deir Yassin and massacred the inhabitants, so the news would have spread around the country like wildfire. Now, imagine you are a family man - do you stay and fight, and risk your family being murdered; or do you flee with whatever you can carry?

They might have left voluntarily, but under fear of death. That's most certainly not the same thing as leaving willingly.
 
avi
Posts: 878
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 1:27 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 7:05 am

SAS23,
South Africa? What kind of an example is that?
In South Africa you had a very small minority who ruled on a very big majority. Only rule had to change hands. No one had to move anywhere and the demography (or the balance if you want) didn’t change. This is not the case in Israel. The 'right of return' will change everything and it simply doesn’t going to happen. There was no majority for this idea even before the Intifada started so you can only guess how much "support" this idea has today in Israel.
Palestinians could return only to a Palestinian state. If you want to see this conflict ends, you can’t support the ‘right of return’ because otherwise you simply perpetuation it.

Long live the B747
 
cedarjet
Posts: 8101
Joined: Mon May 24, 1999 1:12 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 8:35 am

Without wishing to sound self-congratulatory (indeed my contribution thus far has been minimal), this is an excellent debate on a usually thorny subject. That's all I wanted to say. Have a good day y'all.
fly Saha Air 707s daily from Tehran's downtown Mehrabad to Mashhad, Kish Island and Ahwaz
 
Guest

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 4:56 pm

Avi - you must be thinking of Rhodesia, not South Africa where the whites, coloureds (long time supporters of the National Party), and Asians make up a very significant part of the population - not too dissimilar to the Palestinians when taken as part of a combined Palestinian/Israeli state.

You can't have a 'right of return' for Jews that have not lived in the region for countless generations and deny it to those who had their land and livelihoods stolen from them at gunpoint. Look at what is happening in Bosnia and other parts of the former Jugoslavia - those who were driven from their homes by ethnic cleansing are now returning. The Jews who were driven from their homes and businesses by the Nazis have been reclaiming those properties for many years now - but you would deny that same right to the Palestinians?

The only way that I can see a compromise to this right of return is that significant amounts of compensation are paid to all Palestinians - as the Jews have demanded from Germany and businesses that employed concentration camp slave labour - in full and final settlement of their claims and create a genuine, independent nation for them rather than a dubious quasi 'protectorate' as you have today in the Occupied Territories. Obviously, one of the things that you'd have to do as part of that would be to withdraw all settlements and give up all claims to 'Judea/Sumaria'.
 
Hepkat
Posts: 2134
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2000 8:22 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 5:55 pm

I suppose the biggest bone of contention between historians on both sides is whether the Arabs left voluntarily or were forced out, and the solving of this issue will undoubtedly determine which party should shoulder most of the historical blame.

I've done a bit of searching around, and historians seem to be sharply divided on this issue, claiming that the Arabs either left voluntarily or were expelled. Even the U.S. Congress Country Studies on Israel (http://lcweb2.loc.gov/frd/cs/iltoc.html) is VERY careful not to take sides on this issue, despite painting a very unflattering picture of Israel's treatment of indigenous Arabs, and despite this being one of the most highly accurate and unbiased accounts on the history of Israel that exists.

I suppose for reasons of politics and sensitivity, only those around at the time can truly lay any claim to the truth.
 
avi
Posts: 878
Joined: Sat Sep 15, 2001 1:27 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 10:42 pm

SAS23,
What happened in Yugoslavia?
The one who created it build a country with many people who hated one each other and one day it all exploded.
The biggest ethnic cleansing was done by Serbs in Bosnia (not Serbia) and those who are returning home today are going to Bosnia (where there are majority) and not to Serbia.

To allow the PA to go to Israel is to create a second Yugoslavia without learning from the past. It will explode one day, and as I said in all of us lifetime. This is not the solution if you want to see the conflict end.

If you want you can look at the situation like that. Each people are like a chemical substance. For itself, it harmless and doing nothing to no one. Mix them both and you have one hell of a flame.

On your last paragraph you suddenly change your opinion. You don’t support any more the ‘right of return’ but you look at a reasonable solution.
It may surprise you but the solution you suggested is the same one that the Israeli government supports including Sharon government although they against giving anything to the PA as long as the terror continue and I agree with that.

It says, very few refugees will enter Israel as part of a family reunion, the majority of PA refuges in the GS and WB remain there, some refugees in the Arab world will enter a PA state (and it is not Israeli problem how many) and others will remain where they are and the international community will work to improve their life.
All of them will get compensations.

When this solution was brought up Israel mentioned that it will demand a compensations for the Jews who lost everything they had when they left their Arab countries because they were not allowed to take anything with them. The local governments took it all.
Long live the B747
 
Guest

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Mon Aug 26, 2002 11:12 pm

Avi, the main reason that Jugoslavia fell apart was because there was just too much hatred between the various peoples. It is possible for old enemies to live together in harmony - look at the English and the Scots or the French and the Germans. However to do that there has to be a willingness to turn one's back on the past and move forward. That certainly isn't the case in the Balkans - and it isn't the case with Israel/Palestine either.

On the Israeli side, the problem seems to be the Zionist cornerstone of the 'wall of steel' which results in the aggressive attitude towards all non-Jews and their own desire for racial purity - which is not something that I have noted on the Palestinian side.
 
go canada!
Posts: 2886
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Tue Aug 27, 2002 1:15 am

sas23, thats a load of rubbish, palestinian leaders, especially those linked to terrorists have called for the total liberation of palestine from the jews, despite your spinning everyone knows that the terrorists and those linked to them dont want a single jew living in their palestine, thats why they dont want the settlements.

the reason why you support a single estate is because its easier for you, the fact is the palestinians and the israelis both will not accept a single state.Israel i repeat has 1 million arabs living in it, a high proportion of its total population,free to pratice their religion but the palestinians living in gaza and the west bank want their own state and wont be content with living in israel. the only way they would be happy if the country is renamed palestine.

anyone thinking that palestine would be better than israel is living in cloud cuckoo land.This isnt south africa and sas23 would do well to remember that some of the white army officers tried to reimpose minority rule through the planning of a military coup. in the middle east, terror would continue rather than peace, the UN is right, two states, side by side is the way for peace, a single state called palestine is simply an avenue to get rid of the israelis.It simply wont happen.
It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
 
Guest

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:08 am

Actually, Go Canada! the coup you refer to never happened nor was it (to the best of my knowledge) ever planned. Thabo Mbeki claimed that people within the ANC tried to mount a coup against him, but this was also false.

So, do you agree that Israel should shrink back to its original 1948 borders if two countries are to be created? And if not, why not?
 
Hepkat
Posts: 2134
Joined: Fri Aug 11, 2000 8:22 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Tue Aug 27, 2002 2:20 am

sas23, thats a load of rubbish, palestinian leaders, especially those linked to terrorists have called for the total liberation of palestine from the jews, despite your spinning everyone knows that the terrorists and those linked to them dont want a single jew living in their palestine, thats why they dont want the settlements.

But Go Canada, it can be equally argued that there are those in Israel that want to see a total liberation of Israel and Palestine from the Palestinians. They won't be satisfied until the entire area is inhabited by the Jews, thus fulfilling some biblical prophecy. I have seen a documentary about fundamental Christians from the U.S. going to Israel to agitate fundamental Jews (as if they need further agitation!) into cleansing the area of the infidel Palestinians. Many such people have already moved into the settlements, and believe by doing so, they're doing their part in driving out the Palestinians and thus fulfilling biblical prophecies. The Israeli government had to actually cancel the visas of some of these Christians as they were too radical for their taste.

So I believe you have the same sentiments being expressed on both sides, but that in itself is no excuse to stop the pursuit of peace.
 
go canada!
Posts: 2886
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Wed Aug 28, 2002 12:05 am

sas23, i do not shrink from questions, israel should revert to pre-1967 borders as the UN has stated.As i have said in another thread, jersualem should be declared an open city, it should neither be israeli nor palestinian, sectioning it off will only create haterd and another berlin situation. It is a city of three faiths and that should be respected.

The palestinians rejected peace at every opportunity and turned down a state bigger than the one they will get know.They and the arabs attacked israel in 1948.Everyone accepts, un, israel and now the arabs(after the last arab summit,well most of them) that a palestinian state should exist and israel should withdraw to pre-1967 levels.the settlements must be dismantled but the palestinains cant expect to chuck the jews out and then expect 4 million palestinians to move into israel.

I fully back the uk policy for peace.

Hepkat, christain radicals are not the same as those in the israeli goverment, the way to peace is two states side by side.
It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
 
go canada!
Posts: 2886
Joined: Wed Jun 06, 2001 1:33 am

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Wed Aug 28, 2002 12:08 am

perhaps you could answer some questions yourself?

http://www.airliners.net/discussions/non_aviation/read.main/270651/

ps- im fully aware regarding the planned coup thank you.i pointed it out to show not everything in south africa is simple.
It is amazing what can be accomplised when nobody takes the credit
 
qatarairways
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 6:02 pm

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:31 am

"The palestinians rejected peace at every opportunity and turned down a state bigger than the one they will get know."

In Oslo Yasser Arafat accepted 22% of the combined land of Israel and WB/Gaza. If that is not a compromise for peace I don't know what is. Yasser Arafat previously wanted a Palestine "from the River to the Sea" but later removed his claim for 78% of that land.

There is a lot of talk of how generous Barak's Camp David peace deal was. I was thinking if the deal was so generous how come Arafat never accepted it. I have done some research on the subject and found out the following:




1 - Barak only proposed to relinquish control of about 80% percent of the West Bank excluding East Jerusalem rather than 96%. This is because 69 Jewish settlements in the West Bank housing 85% of the West Bank settlers would be annexed into Israel, Israeli security forces will remain in the area. The fertile area near the Jordan Valley will remain under temporary Israeli control for an indefinite period.

2 - Barak wanted sovereignty over one-third of occupied East Jerusalem and all of West Jerusalem.

3 - Barak wanted control of al-Haram al-Sharif housing Al-Aqsa and the Dome of the Rock (which Israel refers to as the 'Temple Mount'). Later in Taba Barak's stance changed and he would allow Palestinians control over the site.




Look at:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/Archive/Article/0,4273,4170339,00.html
http://www.fmep.org/reports/2000/sr0012.html#2
http://slate.msn.com/?id=2064500
 
qatarairways
Posts: 864
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 6:02 pm

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Wed Aug 28, 2002 2:44 am

While in now way do I say that this site is un-biased you can see a map of how the West Bank would look like if Arafat accepted Barak's "generous" peace offer.

http://www.gush-shalom.org/media/barak_eng.swf
 
Guest

RE: Official UK Policy On Israel/Palestine

Thu Aug 29, 2002 8:55 am

look qatarairways, it wasn't a perfect plan, but while those offers of more than 90 percent of the West Bank, Gaza and parts of East Jerusalem may not have been sufficient for Palestinians, they were a serious opening bid. The right response was a Palestinian overture to the Israeli people to persuade them to give up 100 percent — not murderous violence.

It wasn't as if Palestinians' aspirations were being ignored and their only alternative was violence.

The Israeli silent majority and the world's silent majority were both poised for a serious deal, and had Sharon spurned a Palestinian peace package he would have been swept aside. But instead, Palestinians offered a suicide package.

This led me to only one conclusion: the priority of the Palestinians is not achieving an independent state. Their priority, apparently, is to kill Jews and get revenge for Israel's assassination of a Hamas leader whose only claim to fame was organizing previous suicide bombings — a regular Thomas Jefferson.

TNNH

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Baidu [Spider], einsteinboricua, kngkyle, TheF15Ace and 11 guests