Skip to main content

A Halt......Not a Suspension

Perhaps, just perhaps, Israeli PM Olmert and his countrymen have woken up to some of the realities of their actions in relation to securing some sort of peace with their Palestinian neighbours. On his return to Israel post the photo-op Annapolis meeting Olmert has said that a two-State solution is an imperative if Israel is to survive.

Of course, Israel has continued unabated in its development and building of settlements in the West Bank. Those actions have, openly, contradicted all the platitudes about seeking peace with the Palestinians.

A Haaretz editorial hits the mark and the realities in where Israel now sits in the scheme of things:

"When Ehud Olmert warns that the world could impose a "South African solution" on Israel if two states are not created, side by side, he is tacitly admitting that expansion of the settlements is making Israel look increasingly like an apartheid regime.

The agreement to withdraw, or to make "painful concessions," as it is sanctimoniously called, is therefore less painful than any other alternative. The only question is whether another Yitzhak Rabin can be found, who is capable of really halting, not just suspending, the construction of settlements, to leave the Palestinians some territory in which to establish Palestine."

It is interesting to consider that anyone, including people like former President Jimmy Carter, have been slammed and accused of everything diabolical, in speaking of Israel's actions being akin to the former South African apartheid regime.

The editorial concludes:

"Some 10,000 babies are born in the settlements every year. Israel has no moral or other obligation to make sure they have housing in the West Bank. In April 2004 the government promised the Americans that there would be no more construction "beyond the outside line" of each settlement. That outside line has never been set. Annapolis will not lead Israel to any solution with the Palestinians unless Israel stops cheating and learns to restrain its expansion eastward."

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

The Pentagon's eye-popping spending....and waste!

Only a gigantic bureaucracy could get away with spending of such dimensions - and the amazing waste involved in part of that ginormous spend.   Think US Pentagon..... "From spending $150 million on private villas for a handful of personnel in Afghanistan to blowing $2.7 billion on an air surveillance balloon that doesn’t work, the latest revelations of waste at the Pentagon are just the most recent howlers in a long line of similar stories stretching back at least five decades.  Other hot-off-the-presses examples would include the Army’s purchase of helicopter gears worth $500 each for $8,000 each and the accumulation of billions of dollars' worth of weapons components that will never be used. And then there’s the one that would have to be everyone’s favorite Pentagon waste story: the spending of $50,000 to investigate the bomb-detecting capabilities of African elephants. (And here’s a shock: they didn’t turn out to be that great!) The elephant research, of course, represe...

Video: Israel demolishing a Bedouin village

From Mondoweiss - Israel's supposed "most moral army in the world", the IDF, engaged in immoral, and according to international law, illegal action.... "Israeli forces have demolished every home in the Bedouin village of Khirbet Taha in the northern West Bank district of Nablus during three separate demolitions since the start of the year. Unlike most Bedouin villages, the residents in Khirbet Taha own their own land. However that land falls in Area C, territory in the occupied West Bank under full Israeli control. The village’s only school was also destroyed, leaving children to study in a dilapidated 100-year-old mosque — the only structure left standing in the village. According the United Nations, Israel has demolished half as many Palestinian buildings in the first few months of 2016, as they had in all of 2015. In February alone, the UN found that more Palestinians homes were destroyed than any other month since 2009, when the organization began its docum...

What does a no-fly zone actually mean?

As some countries consider imposing a no-fly zone in relation to Libya, the pertinent question must be what does that mean and entail? FP provides the answers: "It depends on the circumstances. There are two primary types of no-fly zones imposed by air forces. The first is imposed by one military over another, while the two sides are at war. In practice, this type of no-fly zone amounts to a warning from one side that it will engage the other's aircraft if they are spotted in a given territory. The second type, more applicable to the situation in Libya, is when an outside power possessing overwhelming air superiority restricts flights over a given country in order to discourage an internal conflict or humanitarian crisis. This is a relatively recent tactic, which was used most famously in Bosnia and Iraq during the 1990s. No-fly zones are often a compromise in situations where the international community is demanding a response to ongoing violence, but full military interven...