Mid-East Roadmap, Is it working?

Never did look promising from the beginning of the Road Map. Too many side roads on the way.

There were a couple of moments I really thought they were on to something.

Shoulda known better.

Back out? This is partly our creation.

When isreal realized that the Palestinians have no real viable alternative to Arafat they tactically removed him and we played along.

We propped up a leader that was not recognized by popular support among it's people in order to sideline the one who is.

Now Isreal has it's wish. As long as they are allowed to get away with the sidelining of the only Palestinian that the Palestinians recognize they will hold the key to avoiding the "painful concessions" in their hands.

It's somethign I worried about very much when they started this campaign to sideline the only Palestinian who could have signed an agreement with Palestinian support.

Many picked up on the lie. It was obvious that with Arafat in physical isolation that the complainst by Isreal that he was responsible for all the terror were illogical.

He could not be both irrelevant and the problem.

But with this lipservice of wanting to make peace many allowed this tactical move to become accepted.

Arafat was making bold moves. He condemed the terrorism in what was a groundbreaking move.

When Isreal demanded a few weeks of calm Arafat helped make it happen.

Isreal's response was to reply to teh weeks of calm with an assasination and to then sideline Arafat.

Now we get to watch. Isreal has managed to, yet again, use the terrorism as a pretext to avoid making what they call "painfull concessions" and what the world calls acting within the boundaries of law.

I still have hope. But if this really falls through watch for continued violence and the continued expantion of Isreal.

See, for some reason many americans seem to think that as long as there are Palestinian extremists who murder Israelis that Isreal is justified in killing even more Palestinians under the guise or retaliation.

That's not half as bad as the fact that few people demand that Isreal stop it's most obvious crime with the systemetic settling of Palestinian land. It's an act of war that is tolerated only because the Palestinian murderers are less tolerable.

The stupidity of this game is infuriating. When we decide to give up and let them go at it what it means is we resign ourselves to watch Isreal grow.

Isreal suffers terrible atrocious acts. They respond by killing more innocents and stealing more land.

The solution to this equation is a simple one and it's heartbreaking to watch political concerns trump the issues of loss of life and bloodshed.

Watch for the following in upcoming weeks:

Isreal will start assasinating more Palestinian terrorists and lowering teh criteria for assasination to involve people less affiliated with terror than they normally kill.

They will attept to expel Arafat in a compromise with the Israelis who want to assasinate him and those who realize that this would bring bad PR.

Now what remains to be seen is if America will allow Isreal to expel Arafat.

Isreal knows Arafat is the only popular leader and teh only guy who has a chance at signing a deal that the Palestinians recognize.

To avoid the deal they will now focus on excalation through assasinations and the explusion of Arafat.

Neither Israel nor the Palestinians have any desire for peaceful coexistence. Each sees the other as the agressor, itself as the victim. Each justifies its predation on the other as righteous redress for the predation of the other. Its a classic no-win situation. The only way to achieve peace in the region is to ruthlessly impose it ... something which not even the Romans ever managed to pull off. Perhaps if all trade and communication were denied the region, pending Israeli desettlement and Palestinian disarmament some progress might be made. It is clear leaving the matter of resolution to the interested parties is a fruitless endeavor.

I refreshed and see your predictions, Craven and think you are correct that Arafat will suffer assasination or expulsion. I believe we are seeing the first shots in a huge escalation in Israel. Bush tried to back out previous to the Roadmap, and was criticised heavily in the international papers. I know he and the admin want to back out--but with elections coming up, it is more iffy that he will. I don't think Bush will try to stop Arafat's expulsion.

I think Bush may try to throw the whole thing to the UN--

Interesting numbers.

Gallup Poll. Latest: June 12-15, 2003. N=510 adults nationwide. MoE ± 5.
.

"In the Middle East conflict, do you think the United States should take Israel's side, take the Palestinians' side, or not take either side?"
Israel's 18%
Palestinians' 4%
Neither 74%
No Opinion 4%

With numbers like that, the election won't affect Bush's desire to dump the issue.

Arafat was a terrorist. Sharon was close to some pretty nasty names as well. I honestly think both want peace right now.



If this is the case I think they are setting themselves up for faliure. We know that there are Palestinian extremists who are as stoutly against the peace process as the Israelis who advocate "greater Isreal".

In short peace has enemies on both sides. Isreal is better able to control their lunatics (this is an understatement) so the key is getting the Palestinian extremists to end their war.

GeorgeOb1 made a damn good point once when he said that even if terrorists start with a valid cause they eventually get caught up in the "struggle" so much that even if the cause were to disappear some would be addicted to teh violence.

To me, the key is making sure the number that fit that description is as small as possible.

IMO having Arafat as a signatory is crucial.



I do. Isreal always goes just far enough to elicit this response from the US. They have never simply done their side.

In this silly game Isreal keeps saying that they'll stop their criminal activity once the Palestinians stop theirs.

It's ludicrous. They can stop anytime they want. They actually have control. They do not need the Palestinians to stop their murder for them to stop their own acts of war.

Isreal can unilaterally withdraw whenever they want. They can seal their border whenever they want.

But instead they choose to give a little when pressured but keep doing things that will not bring them peace or safety.

Ask yourself why they don't close their borders. The reason is because some of them want those borders extended.



Believe it or not both sides have made small steps and both sides have made progress.

In any case no REAL progress will be made until there is a settlement. Isreal does it's best to demand unrealistic progress BEFORE the settlement even though most experts who follow this realize that it all has to be done at once.

It's the case of Parallelism vs Sequentialism. Sequentialism is doomed because it is designed to give each idiot who feels like it the key to stop the process.

Powell and others support parallelism. If Isreal abandoned their settlements once in for good and withdrew to a heavily policed and sealed border (a fair one that the US recognizes) the Palestinians would both lose their casus belli and the ability to attack Israel. They would keep trying for a while but only be as sucessful as Hezbollah is right now.

The bottom line is that Isreal is holding stolen land. When they retreat to the green line, give back Golan etc the casus belli will be gone.

sure there will be some indiot Palestinians who don't drop the struggle, But there will be a lot less of them and Isreal would not suffer so much terror. If they seal the border they will suffer very few casualties (if done right I access this as fewer than 5 deaths a year inside their tehrritory).

At that point when efforts are made to normalize relations this can drop to zero.



If you look in an IDF compound you will find weapons too. Eventually the Palestinians will have their right to weapons granted. This is an inevitability.

I've seen the documents, I receive them with the same lukewarm reception that the US intelligence community did.



sofia, the Israeli actions and efforts to portray Arafat as the problem were obvious. When they took away his communication, and were the ones feeding him and giving him water they still systematically destroyed the PA infrastructure even when they knew the terrorist who they are retaliating against had no ties to arafat.

Israel destroyed the PA infrastructure last time they went in. It was deliberate and not related to fighting terror. they destroyed documents and anything else related to the palestinian ability for self governance.

they destroyed the police headquarters to both destroy the Palestinian ability to rein in their militants as well as their desire to do so.

Being a PA cop tasked with curbing the militants means this:

When Isreal is attacked take off your uniform and leave the police station because they plan to bomb it.

When you arrest a militant wear a mask so you are not executed.

Isreal did theor best to delibate the PA in a way that they CAN'T stop their militants. Then they back off and demand that the militants be squashed by a new unpopular leader leading a delibated PA.

They destroyed the police stations, arrested all teh popular leaders (even the moderates) and then demand results.

When the results don;t come (and they obviously won't) they assasinate Palestinians and start again.

Isreal is as complicit in the violence as is the Palestinians.



I think both the Israelis and Palestinians want peace. But not as much as theor other goals.

If Israel wanted peace they'd unilaterally withdraw TO THEIR OWN LAND and then seal the border. This has worked for them before.

They will not do this because some Israelis want the border to expand more than they want it to be secure. See the Israelis who oppose the fence because they fear it will become the permanent border for just one example.

Isreal wants peace, but not at the expense of their expantionism. Many groups in Isreal have objected to EVERY SINGLE idea for peace that was ever proposed.

It is fair to say that THOSE Israelis do not want peace. And the desires of those Israelis often becomes Israeli policy. They are the ones most vocal about expelling Arafat. They know this is one of the easiest ways to procrastinate. It's the Palestinian's greatest weakness. Arafat's magalomania made it so that they ahve no other figureheads. The Israelis who want Arafat gone want him gone more for the symbol he is than the danger he represents.

They know it will be years before another figurehead with enough clout to sign an agreement materializes and they plan to get busy stealing land during this time.




I'll provide you with the start for your research. I have never been so angry at Isreal as I was at the time this happened.

Isreal was under pressure to start the peace process, the intifada was at it's height. Sharon made one simple demand: he demanded a period of calm.

Arafat set a precedent by condeming the terror. This is easily a point at which Arafat realizes the intifada is a failure (the moderate Palestinians have long admitted that walking out of teh Clinton deal was insipid).

Arafat's clout brough about oever a MONTH of NO terror attacks. this was at the height of teh intifada and this was a spectacular acheivement.

The pressure on Isreal to start talking peace was mounting. so they assasinated Ra'ad Karmi and started the cycle again.

Ra'ad Karmi was a man who was hardly innocent. But the IDF was not retaliating, they were instigating.

The followed him closely, they could have arrested him but decided to provoke instead. So they planted a bomb along his walking route and assasinated him. The Palestinians, as expected, resumed their attacks.





This is untrue. Isreal did not dismantle any settlements with a significant number of inhabitants.

All they did was tear down some towers. The towers were in empty outposts.

At the same time Sharon said that they can "quietly" continue to build settlments.

Isreal is growing every day. There are whole groups that track their settlement grow with sattelites. Every day that the border remains undefined their settlements grow.

The US has demanded the total cessastion of settlement activity a few times and only got temporary freezes.

Sharon is Mr. Settlement. During his tenue there have been many new settlements. They don't make news, but theya re there andif you want to count them you can look up satellite photos.



You are turning a blind eye to Israeli deeds. Israel has stolen more land than it ever had a claim to.

More of Isreal is on stolen land than on land given to them.

If you do not see that as a problem I think you fail to see the situation objectively.

Any nation that steals that much land is not going to be popular among locals. Their creation represented the locals losing homes and land, that in itself was not too popular. That they proceeded to steal even more land than what they were given is their crime.

I do not use the word "crime" rhetorically. You will find no international body that does not recognize this as a crime and that considers it non-criminal.

The Palestinians murder innocent Israelis. But do not lose sight of the less exotic crimes perpetuated by the state of Isreal.

timber, Craven wrote: "Any nation that steals that much land is not going to be popular among locals. Their creation represented the locals losing homes and land, that in itself was not too popular. That they proceeded to steal even more land than what they were given is their crime.

I do not use the word "crime" rhetorically. You will find no international body that does not recognize this as a crime and that considers it non-criminal.

The Palestinians murder innocent Israelis. But do not lose sight of the less exotic crimes perpetuated by the state of Isreal."

My question for you: What has Iraq done that justifices UN Resolution under Chapter VII that Israel doesn't?

Isreal is in defiance of more resolutions than Iraq ever was.

This is despite the consistent veto by the US of any and all resolutions that the US considered "biased" against Israel.

In short, the US has allowed or sanctioned several resolutions against Israel.

That should answer that question. The last resolution that went against Isreal was abstained by the US. When the US doesn't veto and abstains they are usually sending a clear warning to Israel.

The difference between Israel and Iraq is that Israel, for all her other faults (and they are many) is not a despotic dictatorship with a history of invading sovereign neighbors (well, maybe Lebanon), using gestapo terror tactics to subdue and control her own citizenry, conducting blatant genocide, employing WMD both domestically and in foriegn war, participating in smuggling and other illicit trade at a state level and both covert and overt support of international terrorism. On the other hand, I don't feel Israel has made any substantive effort to honor her obligations under the Chapter VI resolutions, but neither have the Palestinians. Perhaps a Chapter VII resolution is in order for both parties; as neither will negotiate or suubmit to arbitration as called for by Chapter VI resolutions, maybe both should be ordered, on pain of economic sanction and/or military intervention, as per Article 42, to comply with a Chapter VII resolution. What's been tried in the past certainly hasn't worked. It may well be time for a "New Chapter".

Now, after Sharon's words -Hamas leaders are "marked for death" and Israel will hunt them relentlessly- and the Arafat - Abbas row, I don't think, any "roadmap" will work with these leaders.

timber's quote: "Perhaps a Chapter VII resolution is in order for both parties; as neither will negotiate or suubmit to arbitration as called for by Chapter VI resolutions, maybe both should be ordered, on pain of economic sanction and/or military intervention, as per Article 42, to comply with a Chapter VII resolution." You know darn well the US will never support such a resolution.

As for "blatant genocide," try telling that to the dead Palestinian children.

The United States should butt the hell out of the Middle East conflict -- because our presence makes things worse, not better.

I. like Sofia, allowed myself a few moments of thinking things could work out between these two parties -- but I can see that I have been right all along.

THERE WILL NEVER BE ANYTHING REMOTELY RESEMBLING PEACE IN THE MIDDLE EAST SO LONG AS THERE IS A STATE OF ISRAEL AND ARABS LIVING IN THAT AREA.

And, Frank, the likelyhood that the US is going to butt out is as remote as there will ever be peace in Israel.

At Least 2 Dead in Rishon L’Tzion Terror Attack
18:24 Sep 09, '03 / 12 Elul 5763


(IsraelNN.com) At least two persons have been killed in a bomb attack at the Jaffa Gate entrance to the IDF’s Tzrifin army base in Rishon L’Tzion, near the entrance to the Assaf HaRofeh Hospital. Over 30 persons, including many IDF personnel, were injured in the terror attack, with many appearing in serious condition.

Most of the wounded have been transported to Assaf HaRofeh Hospital. More details will be published as they become available.

Roadmap to hell.

Just another confirmation that neither side has any desire to reach a peaceful settlement.

If the Golan is given back, then the casus belli will be created and not eliminated. The essence of it will be the Syrian hope to defeat Israel that is impossible when the Golan Heights are under Israeli control and Israeli military facilities deployed there are able to erase Damascus and to eliminate all the Syrian forces proceeding toward the common border in case of necessity (that has never yet appeared, since Syrians are aware of consequences of any attempt of attacking Israel).
In the Arab world the very opportunity to win a war against the "infidels" is a casus belli per se. When the Egyptians lost such a hope, the peace treaty was signed.

It is impossible for the Syrians to defeat Israel regardless of whether Isreal maintains it's hold on the stolen land or not.

I am well aware of the strategic value that the Golan Heights represents to Israel but I am also acutely aware that it is not Israel's land and that allowing nations to forcibly take other nations' land is counterproductive.