The Big Picture
Mideast peace process: Hampered throughout history

Mideast peace process: Hampered throughout history

The Palestine problem remains as intractable today as it was six decades ago.

Nauman Asghar June 01, 2011

The Hamas-Fatah reconciliation deal that concluded on April 27, 2011, was a good omen for the stalled Palestine peace process. Both factions displayed commitment to resolve the outstanding issues and reached an agreement on forming an interim government for holding of legislative and presidential elections. But the news of the resignation of George Mitchell as US Envoy in Middle East dashed the hopes of any progress on the peace front.

Mitchell enjoyed the reputation of being a “tireless advocate” of peace, but his extraordinary skills failed in the face of Israeli obduracy. A few days ago, US President Barrack Obama called for a peace plan for Palestine based on the return to 1967 borders. This speech annoyed Netanyahu who has, in no ambiguous terms, rejected Obama's stance.

Unfortunately the Palestine problem remains as intractable today as it was six decades ago. Rather in many respects it has become more complex and intricate. An understanding of the protracted conflict will require answers to two questions.

One, what are the fundamental thorny issues bedevilling the relationship of the disputants?

And two, why have all peace initiatives, undertaken over the past decades, come to naught?

The dispute

The core contentious issues of long-standing Arab-Israeli conflict include the status of East Jerusalem, Israeli settlements, right to return of refugees and appropriation of natural resources.

The territory of East Jerusalem is sacred for Judaism, Christianity as well as Islam. Both Israelis and Palestinians lay claim to Jerusalem as their capital. It came under occupation of Israel after the Six Day War of 1967.

Israel has concerns regarding its religious places present in East Jerusalem, as during Jordanian control, Jews were not allowed to visit Jewish sacred places and a Jewish cemetery was desecrated. Moreover, Israel is also apprehensive regarding the security of its residents as they have been victims of firing from Arab areas many times in the past. The Palestinians also have legitimate grievances regarding welfare of their sacred sites under Israeli control.

During a period spanning four decades, Israel has also established its communities in the occupied territories of West Bank and East Jerusalem. In 2006 a unilateral disengagement plan was mapped out by Ariel Sharon and all settlement buildings were demolished in the Gaza strip. But Israel has pressed ahead with its policy of building settlements in West Bank. Most of these lie in the western part of West Bank and deep into Palestinian territory dividing the Palestinian population.

The settlements are also the cause of great inequalities in access to natural resources between Israelis and Palestinians. Many settlements are built on fertile agricultural lands confiscated from Palestinians or on water resources like the Western Aquifer Basin. The Palestinians consume almost 80 litres per day per person whilst the Israeli settlers consume above 250 litres per day. Israel receives much of its water from two aquifers, Western and North Eastern aquifers, sprawled across the Green Line. The Palestinians want that their society be contiguous and have sufficient resources to have an economically viable state.

It goes without saying that multifarious efforts to promote peace in the Middle East have failed primarily because of mistrust and suspicion existing between the parties. In the absence of mutual trust and confidence, peace remains elusive as the contracting parties succumb to their imaginary lingering fears. Israel views an independent Palestine state as a vital threat to its existence, while the Arabs are under the threat of Al Naqba (the catastrophe). The demagogue and hawkish elements on both sides have missed no opportunity to hamper the steady progress of peace negotiations. At the same time the unconditional support extended to Israel by the West has encouraged the former to adhere to an inflexible, rigid stance. Thus there is need to free the peace process from being hostage to militants’ extremist agenda.

Steps to take

In order to reach an agreement envisioning an amicable solution to the dispute, the leaders of both parties must break their pre-formulated moulds and get ready for out-of-box thinking.

Israel must face the reality of the Palestinians’ right to self-determination and get rid of its historical attitude of blindness and denial, as the Palestinians are motivated by the slogan Thaura Hat al Nasr (revolution till victory). Israel must do with the condition of recognition of Israel as Jewish state by Palestinians as a pre-requisite to kick-start the genuine peace process.

The UN resolutions coupled with the Arab peace plan propounded by the Saudi King in 2002 could provide guidelines for future peace roadmap.

The Palestinians should also end all internal dissensions if they want to bring peace to the strife-torn region.

The Obama administration should pressurise Netanyahu government to soften its hard-line stance and push Israel towards two-state solution.

WRITTEN BY:
Nauman Asghar An advocate, who is a Rhodes Scholar 2011 from Pakistan. He will start his advanced legal studies at Balliol College Oxford in October 2011.

The views expressed by the writer and the reader comments do not necassarily reflect the views and policies of the Express Tribune.

COMMENTS (22)

Tony Singh | 12 years ago | Reply Dear Mr. G.Din, 1. In a state where people are not matured enough to seperate religion from statecraft, will have the consequences as in Israel and Pakistan 2. Israel is not an exception but an aberration. It is a theological state in the garb of democracy. The quality of life only for jews is good, not for the Arabs. And Israeli Jews are people who have not learnt anything from history. In fact they are doing everything to Palestanians as the Nazis did to them, if not more. In that sense they are modern face of Nazi 3. Give a small population 3 billion dollars (as given by US to Israel) a year and it would be a prosperous society. What is big deal about it? 4.By your logic, then Israel has all the rjght to build settlements in Westbank and Gaza because they have accepted the Jews of other nations thereby depriving the native Palestinians of their lands and property. Am I reading you right? (Read what these settlers did to a mosque a couple of days back) It was your opinion that squatters should be dealt with and i agreed. Only in this case they happen to be Jews in Palestanian land. And yes I have as much respect to myself as for others for I do not see the world through religion, but through cold logic.

G. Din | 12 years ago | Reply @Tony Singh: I had promised myself that I would withdraw from this unholy mire but that was not to be so. "..I firmly believe that religion is a personal affair of each individual. " Thank you for letting us know that but, frankly, no one is interested in the personal beliefs of others unless they, in some ways, impacts them in a material way. In spite of your personal belief , Pakistan still came into being, didn't it! Why? Because there were enough people with the opposite personal beliefs. So much for personal beliefs! "However the mixing of religion with polity or statescraft is a recipe for disaster. We have seen this in our own India. Punjab in the nineties and J & K now are the glaring examples. So are Israel and Pakistan." One exception in the list you have provided is Israel. It is a vibrant, strong, coherent democracy to which immigrants from all over the world are still flocking and which is admired and looked upon with admiration and awe. In what way then was the creation of Israel "a recipe for disaster"? Could it have something to do with the "quality" of the people involved? "The Syrians have also resorted to this peaceful protest against the illegal occupation of Golan heights by Israelis. " Please remind yourself that the people Syrians are killing on a continuing basis are those who are seeking to overthrow their own government. The people that were killed on the Syria-Israel border were shot down by Israel for trying to breach the border, as they indeed should have. You have referred to "illegal occupation of Golan Heights by Israelis", Would you care to elaborate on this characterization and especially the illegality of the occupation? Wasn't Israel attacked by Syria amongst others and didn't Syria, as a result of that unprovoked, wanton attack lose the Golan Heights in a fair and square way? Most would say that Israel conquered the Golan in that war. In wars, conquerors are keepers, aren't they? Was Moghul occupation of India "illegal"? "Please in your argument do not bring the mythical events." If you believe the City of David that the excavation under East Jerusalem, that I referred to in my last post, is mythical (i.e non-existent in real terms), may be you ought to make a trip to see and touch and assure yourself of the solid reality that astounding find represents. "Jewish religion got exported to europe," How did you figure that? "How can Indian Jews have more claim on Israeli land than the Arabs and their forefathers born and died there for generations? They are just following the Jewish religion. This is beyond any rationale. If I extend this logic, Muslims of India should have more rights in Pakistan than the Pakistani Hindus or conversely Pakistani Hindus should have more rights than Indian Muslims. What kind of preverted logic is this?" I agree it is not only perverted but totally unacceptable. If you had read my earlier posts a little carefully, I did point out that all citizens in a Democracy are equal, none more equal than the other. Muslims of India should have rights (not more rights) in Pakistan because that state was established in their name. It is quite another matter if Pakistan won't give those to them. It is Israel's right to give rights to every one who is Jewish and rightly so because Israel was established in the name of all Jews and she honours that obligation. Pakistani Hindus shall have rights in India (not more than any others) if they are accepted as immigrants by India, as indeed many of them have been already. "The Isralis are the squatters here and not the Palestinians. And yes all squatterss should be removed from the land they illegally occupy. Period." Please have some respect for yourself!

VIEW MORE COMMENTS

Tony Singh | 12 years ago | Reply Dear Mr. G.Din, 1. On the onset let me be clear I am not anti Jewish. I firmly believe that religion is a personal affair of each individual. However the mixing of religion with polity or statescraft is a recipe for disaster. We have seen this in our own India. Punjab in the nineties and J & K now are the glaring examples. So are Israel and Pakistan 2. The subcontinent's struggle for independence is littered with examples of Mass protest where british had resorted to firing on unarmed crowd. Jaliawalbagh massacre and the lathicharge on Lala Lajpat Rai in which is summbed to injuries are the two which come to my mind. The Syrians have also resorted to this peaceful protest against the illegal occupation of Golan heights by Israelis. Their quest to free their land from religious zealots can be termed anything but foolhardy 3. Please in your argument do not bring the mythical events. Understand that the Jewish religion got exported to europe, not the inhabitants. How can Indian Jews have more claim on Israeli land than the Arabs and their forefathers born and died there for generations? They are just following the Jewish religion. This is beyond any rationale. If I extend this logic, Muslims of India should have more rights in Pakistan than the Pakistani Hindus or conversely Pakistani Hindus should have more rights than Indian Muslims. What kind of preverted logic is this? 4. The Isralis are the squatters here and not the Palestinians. And yes all squatterss should be removed from the land they illegally occupy. Period.

G. Din | 12 years ago | Reply @Tony Singh: My post in response has been censored perhaps for being too incendiary. Sorry!

G. Din | 12 years ago | Reply @Benjamin & Tony Singh Here is my last bit of input on the issue that agitates you so much. I cannot help you to shed your barely-concealed anti-Jewish or anti-Israel bias and see the issue without an emotional baggage. I will say this: all squatters are ultimately ousted from the land they occupy and no reasonable person will seek their opinion, much less permission, in the matter because the expected response is going to be negative. This happens every day in India where illegal constructions, even mosques and temples, are routinely demolished. Neither were the Palestinians asked their opinion nor their agreement sought when UN decided to issue its mandate precisely for the same reasons!. Here is a clincher which I am sure would not strike a favourable chord with you but some fact you ought to know. Right beneath the town of East Jerusalem, the projected future capital of Palestine, in its subterranean belly as it were, an archaeological dig is uncovering the famed Biblical city of King David, complete with its lanes, byways and water flowing from a spring as described in the Bible. Imagine that! This was 600 years before Mohammed, the self-declared Last Prophet, was brought forth into this world by his mother. So much for Jews converting to Islam! No one can convince you about the right of Jews to their ancestral homeland, but no reasonable person amongst the world's rest can deny this as yet another irrefutable evidence that Jerusalem must remain one organically whole city and rightfully the capital of the Jewish state of Israel. The world does not owe any compensation to squatters but would gladly, Israel hopefully amongst them, offer to mitigate their condition somewhat by extending some help to them in their relocation and settlement. Failing this, there is no solution to this problem, no matter how many deaths we witness! Yesterday, there were 20 men shot down on the Israel-Syria border as they tried the foolishness of breaching it. This foolishness must now cease!

Tony Singh | 12 years ago | Reply @G. Din: Sir, it is not I, but you who do not see the natural justice. The plight of Kashmiri Pandits is not like the Jews but like Palestinians! Like the Kashmiri Pandits, the Palestianians too were driven away by the religious zealots. Only in this instance they are jews. The point is any state which has religion as basis of its existance (two modern states Israel and Pakistan) will supress the the relgious minorities in their midst even for the sake of some co-religionist living in some remote location on earth(and even for an alien if it happens to follow their religion). Remember the original owners of these are Palestinians (they are living in this land for about 10generations if, if not more) and not Jews. I do not want to enter into debate of some promised land promised by someone who lived 2000years ago. This is the most pathetic argument one can put forward. Any sane person (except for Israelis and the US state department) will laugh.

G. Din | 12 years ago | Reply @Benjamin: I am not obscuring anything. On the other hand, I am trying to present the issue in all the clarity that is possible. Holding desperately to the name "Israel" and then arguing that there was no Israel before 1948 is being simply disingenuous . The issue pertains to Jewish homeland, regardless of what name is given to it. The crux is that it was recognized by UN that Jewish homeland, of which they were unjustly deprived, was exactly where the present state of Israel is situated for reasons that are multifarious to recount here. If during the interim between the time that Jews were forced to leave and when they returned to reclaim it, there were any squatters on this land, UN acted correctly in ousting them. We can all empathize with them but we cannot for that reason once again deprive the original owner of his rights. That would be the height of injustice and unfairness. There is no doubt that Palestinians suffered due to this decision but that had to happen when doling out justice to the other party, the Jews. How could, for the life of me, UN take any other kind of a decision, I am at a loss to comprehend. This is not about "villainous" European Jews which seems to gall both you and Tony Singh. I fail to understand this fixation with European Jews. Reclaiming their homeland was a national aspiration of Jews worldwide. It is precisely why the phrase "Next year in Jerusalem" came into vogue amongst them for millenia of their separation from their roots as expressing the national aspiration to return. By virtue of being more prosperous and influential than the rest of the diaspora which got scattered to the four winds, European diaspora did take a leading part in reclaiming their homeland. That does not earn them the firing squad., does it? For Christ's sake, they were representing their whole people. I do empathize with Palestinians contrary to what you may believe. Every one, bar none, does want them to have their own state but how can they even begin the discussion when they preface those with their aim to destroy Israel which is going to be their neighour? Would you like to live next to some one who promises to murder you? Wouldn't you want to make sure that he never becomes your neighour? If you ask me I would say Israel has been extraordinarily generous to Arabs considering how they tried to strangle it while in its infancy. Muslims, throughout their history have acted in the most bestial manner with whomsoever they came into contact. I should know, we were overwhelmed and lorded over for close to 700 years.

Benjamin | 12 years ago | Reply I do not think anyone is flying off of any handle here. Tony is on point where as you seem to want to obscure, and compare the plight of Kashmir to those of European Jews. What is fact is that there has never been an Israel before 1947, furthermore no country in the Middle East was consulted with regards to the partition of Palestine. Do you think that the West consulted the inhabitants to the land before they were forced frm their homes. G.din please stay on topic here. We do not doubt the rights of those in Kashmir, but do you understand, or have any care of what the right are of the Palestinian people, and their plight? Do stay on topic. Thanks!

G. Din | 12 years ago | Reply @Tony Singh: Please read my earlier response again. Counter the facts with arguments based on cold facts not emotional affinity. In particular, respond to my reference to Kashmiri Pundits' plight, because it exactly duplicates the Jewish plight. Are you, as a human being, willing to write off their (Kashmiri Pundits') rights to their homeland namely Kashmir, after having been purged out of that land by goons and hoodlums? If you are, then you may be consistent in your arguments, but it would be the kind of consistency usually called the virtue of fools. On the other hand, if you are not, then you must reconcile the dichotomy of your thinking with regards to two peoples who have undergone absolutely similar life-altering experiences. Israel is ONLY a name for the Jewish state. So, it is NOT important if the name of Israel existed before 1948. We are talking here about a Jewish state on what was historically Jewish land, proof of which fact that very land is yielding from time to time. Jewish state of Israel was established by a UN mandate to right an ancient wrong. Isn't it strange that Muslims are constantly throwing UN resolution on Kashmir in our face even without having studied its contents, while they militate against a UN mandate on Israel. The reason for such contradictory behaviour is an acute sense of chagrin Muslims feel at receiving no respect from the non-Muslims. If they cannot get respect voluntarily, they will extract it by a dagger on your jugular. This is the story of Muslims everywhere. You cannot demand respect, you have to earn it. Similar to Pakistanis, you take your conjectures for facts. They are not. Just as no one can convince Pakistanis in a rational debate, I cannot convince you, if you keep flying off the emotional handle. So, let the matter rest there. History, as I had said earlier, does not begin from a date Muslims find it the most expedient.

Tony Singh | 12 years ago | Reply @G. Din: All your arguments based on premise that Israel was a country that existed. No it was Palestine before 1947. After the WW2, the inhabitants of this land were forced out of their homes to make way for existance of Israel. AND THAT IS A FACT. That is why the right of return of refugees to THEIR HOMES is their fundamental right. This is not the a centuries old problem. Heck this is contemprary problem. Why should these people NOT RETURN to their own homes? Just because the US and those occupying the LAND say so? If some one barges into my home, occupies it forcefully with the help of local goons. and say okay now that spare washroom is yours and that too till my cousin from Russia, Euorpe or some other corner of the earth comes along, then that too you have to vacate. Should I accept such a solution? Would you if you were in my shoes? This proposal a so called "Demilitarised Palestine" where these occupiers will vacate and build by force in the name of "natural growth of jewish population" be acceptable? CAn Any sane person with rational thought believe in this religious crap "about promised land"? The fact of the matter is neither Europe nor US was comfortable with sizable Jewish population in their lands, and so they created ISrael. Since Palestinians are weak and Arabs are divided, the USA and Israel want to push such a lopsided deal down their throat. Even then, with the exception of US and Israel, the UN will accept the state of Palestine in a vote to in UN general assembly. US will veto it in security council and there in lies the hypocrisy of the US.

G. Din | 12 years ago | Reply @Tony Singh: "...The original inhabitants might have been Jews, but the same original inhabitants had converted into Islam. " What is the basis of your rather astounding assertion? Islam is just 1400 years old. The exodus of Jews from Middle East took place centuries earlier. So, pray, how would they have converted to Islam? "Does this conversion to Islam deprive them of their right to be owners of their own land?" When conversion to Islam is itself in question, this rhetorical question loses its basis. "...Is it their fault that Hitler, Mousilini and other European nations (notably Austria and France)followed the policies of discrimination against Jews?" Jews do not claim that their right to their homeland is based on some compensatory reward for atrocities committed against them by unsavoury characters mentioned. Their right is based on the fact that they were unjustly hounded out of their homes and hearths and have returned to assert their original rights to their lands. Emotionalism has no place at all in this debate. Any one who has stolen property in his possession, even though it might have been acquired via a legal instrument, has no legal rights to that property. Any lawyer will tell you that. I quoted the case of Kashmiri Pundits above. Would you deny the birthright of Kashmiri Pundits just because they have been successfully forced out? Exactly, after how many centuries will they have lost that birthright? "1. Do the Arabs born in Isreal not have equal if not more rights than the Jews who have migrated from Russia, Europe, Australia or any other place?" Arabs born in Israel do have equal rights as citizens of Israel. Why should they be entitled to any more rights than others such as immigrants from those other lands once the latter have been accorded citizenship? This argument is simply astonishing. A democratic society does not recognize grades or classes of citizenship. Do you know of any? Does US, a nation of immigrants, accord any higher rights to the original American Indians over those who came later? "2. Where should the Palestinians go? Should they commit mass suicide? Do they have any rights? Should they be kept in an open air prison that is West Bank and Gaza? Do they and their offsprings be unwelcome perpectual refugees in other Arab lands?" Palestinians should have their own state but for that they should not at the same time be threatening the state of Israel with extinction. Are you able to tolerate the perpetual threats to your own country, India, emanating from Pakistan? Isn't there a groundswell of opinion in India to retaliate and retaliate hard if another 26/11 is enacted? In what way do you find Israel's position any different to India's or that of any other state of the world, similarly placed? On the flip side, should Israel be asked to commit suicide so that Palestinians may receive their "rights"? No, most emphatically no! The answer lies in "peaceful coexistence" not to drive Israel into the Mediterranean as was in fact attempted by three bully neighouring Arab states. "3. Is not creation of Isreal, a state based on religious theology, on Palestinian land, one of the major cause of resentment amongst the people in the Middle East, be they Christians or Muslims?" You are muddying up the issue by referring to a mythical "Palestinian land" when state of Israel was created by a UN resolution exactly where it now stands. Sure, Israel is based on religious theology but, then didn't we consent to creation of another state based on religious theology, Pakistan, right next to India? So, how can one object to creation of Israel? Because theological basis has suddenly gone out of fashion in her case? As far as the resentment goes, there is plenty of resentment to go in every corner of the world. People, much less nations, do not drop dead because there are some who resent them. The rest of your post is conjecture. Only Time will tell how much of that will come true! @Benjamin Sir, your strictures against Zionism are not of much interest to me as a non-Jew. I will let Israel deal with that.

Benjamin | 12 years ago | Reply @G. Din: If you think that adhominem attacks will curry you some sort of moral, or political highground, I am sad to state that you are extremely misinformed. My accurate observations are from an educated viewpoint, not one based upon fantasy and revising history. I have nothing but respect and reverence for Judaism. What is taking place in Israeli society is a black eye on this peaceful religion. You must grasp the truth of the matter sir. Zionism is the problem. it has nothing remotely spiritual, or morally compares in anyway to the tenants that drive Judaism. Until you see the great divide here, you will continue to be duped by what is the biggest danger to Judaism, and it is not Islam, Christianity, or any other religion. It is Zionsim period.

Tony Singh | 12 years ago | Reply @G. Din: I stand by what I have stated. The Jews occupying Palestinians lands are Europeans. The original inhabitants might have been Jews, but the same original inhabitants had converted into Islam. Does this conversion to Islam deprive them of their right to be owners of their own land? Is it their fault that Hitler, Mousilini and other European nations (notably Austria and France)followed the policies of discrimination against Jews? Rather it raises a larger questions 1. Do the Arabs born in Isreal not have equal if not more rights than the Jews who have migrated from Russia, Europe, Australia or any other place? 2. Where should the Palestinians go? Should they commit mass suicide? Do they have any rights? Should they be kept in an open air prison that is West Bank and Gaza? Do they and their offsprings be unwelcome perpectual refugees in other Arab lands? 3. Is not creation of Isreal, a state based on religious theology, on Palestinian land, one of the major cause of resentment amongst the people in the Middle East, be they Christians or Muslims? 4.. When it comes to Middleeast, the US state department should lock up as it has no say (or does not want to say what is right). That way it will save some money. After all that desk is run by Isrealis, not Americans. British ruled subcontinent for 200 years, yet we got freedom from them. Same is true for Palestinans. The recent events in the Middleeast, notably the change of guard in Egypt will force Isreal to have a relook at their supressive policies. They will have to give way. Their castle is on weak foundations and they know it.

G. Din | 12 years ago | Reply @Benjamin: Read my post in reply to Tony Singh's. The answer lies in there if only hateful fanatics like you can open your eyes to see. If you don't open your eyes, nothing will convince you. You can continue to be consumed by your hate and manufacture conspiracy theories and the world shall continue to rotate about its axis without missing a beat. Israel is a name Jews gave to their state. Look for Jewish footprints on this land from antiquity when there were no such people as Palestinians or even Muslims. Your view of history is so slanted and skewed that it is a manufacture of your brain full of venom for a civilization you cannot hold a candle to!

Saan | 12 years ago | Reply Theodor Herzl - born 2. Mai 1860 in BudaPest (Hungary) - NOT born in Palestine or Israel Chaim Weizmann born 27. November 1874 in Motal (Russia) - NOT born in Palestine or Israel

Benjamin | 12 years ago | Reply @G. Din: Where is your proof that Jews were the first inhabitants of the land? There are historical relics all over occupied East Jerusalem, and West jerusalem that suggest the contrary. Why not embrace what is really happening here? Israel is a state that is refusing to allow another state to come into its rightful recognized existence. Palestine existed many hundreds of years before any Israeli state was manufactured by the Zionists with the help of the West. There was no such thing as an Israel before 1947..this is a known fact!

Benjamin | 12 years ago | Reply ...The 67 war was insitigated by Israel to expand its borders, and to build settlements, of which directly happened right after the war. There is no proof that Egypt, Jordan, or Syria had plans to attack Israel. This was Israel's doing period. Furthermore, for Zionists to rely on the Bible, or the Torah as a deed to the land is just ludicrous. Both are books of fables, and fairy tales. Nothing in these books resemble anything relating to reality, or real life. European Jews, if they wish to migrate to what was mandated as Israel in 1947, well fine move there, but remember the entire world see's your revisionist thievery, subjugation, and endless premeditated violence as something that must be halted. Take heed, or suffer your place in the abyss....

Tribune Reader | 12 years ago | Reply The two state solution is dead, Israel wont give up an inch of land, while Palestinians wont recognise Israel. The only viable future left is the establishment of a democratic bi national state, to which currently both sides wont agree. The Zionist movement leaders created this conflict by colonising palestine and then ethnically cleansing the country. Its one thing to arrive as immigrants, its another to take it over and claim it as your own based on a religious claim to a land going back to 2,000 years.

Salim Akbar | 12 years ago | Reply hmm... This article is way too biased in favour of the palestinians. Firstly, Israel cannot do away with the palestinians recognizing Israel as a Jewish state, that can only happen if there are prospects for a one state solution where there will be one secular democratic pluralistic country for all the people. However, both the parties are hostile towards that proposition. Secondly, you only urged the Israelis to come up with solutions. Hmm, what about pressurizing the palestinians to stop committing acts of terrorism by not throwing rockets and bombing civilians (yes both of the parties do that), what about urging the palestinians to recognize the state of Israel ? what bout repudiating Hamas by declaring it as a terrorist organization and as an affiliate of Al-Qaeda and creating a better secular party like the one which fought for palestinian freedom before Hamas hijacked the movement ? Whose interests is Hamas serving by making sure that girls do not go out of their houses without wearing the headscarves ? Definitely not the palestinians. Palestinians are one of the most progressive people with the highest number of phd's ad other credits. A beautiful movement has been made ugly by power hungry maniacs who have hampered the movement for palestinian betterment only because their orders come from the draconian ayatollahs and saudi sheikhs.

G. Din | 12 years ago | Reply @Tony Singh: "...You jews are Europeans. " Wrong! We, in India, also hosted Jews for centuries in our South. Does that make all Jews Indian. If not, how did they come to be in India. There was an entire branch of Judaism discovered in Assam, who returned to their homeland very recently after having been away from it for millenia. History does not start from an arbitrary date which is convenient to Arabs. There is not a month when Israelis are not excavating Jewish artifacts reinforcing the fact that Jews were indeed the original inhabitants of that land, a land they were driven out of. If Kashmiri Pundits were hounded out of Kashmir, does that deprive them of their claim on their homeland, the land of Vitasta? So, you are dead wrong, Mr. Tony Singh!

Joe Green | 12 years ago | Reply On June 7, 1967 for the first time in 2000 years, Jewish people took control of their holy city of Jerusalem after coming under attack by Arab nations from all sides. This Six Day War in '67 resulted in the reunification of Jerusalem and saw Israeli paratroopers enter the Temple Mount and defeat the Jordanian forces trying to hold off the Israeli soldiers. Jordanian soldiers asked the Jews if they were going to build their Temple on the Temple Mount where two previous Jewish temples had stood. Ironically, Israeli leaders believed they could acquire peace by appeasing the Muslims and returning control to the Islamic Trust for the Temple Mount. This arrangement has not worked out for 44 years and the situation on the Temple Mount is very explosive and could break into an armed conflict very quickly. In fact, that scenario is what will happen according to the ancient Jewish prophet Zechariah, who said that Jerusalem will become intoxicating to those who are non Jews controlling the Temple Mount and the entire city of Jerusalem, Zechariah 12:2. Zechariah also said that the Lord is aggressively possessive for Jerusalem, He is very sorely displeased with those who are arrogantly secure with their control of the Temple Mount and that the Messiah, Jesus Christ will one day come back to Jerusalem to build His Temple on that sacred piece of real estate and to dwell among the Jewish people there forever, Zechariah 1:14-16 and Psalm 132:12-13.

Fahad Raza | 12 years ago | Reply Israeli mentality is does not consider Palestinians as human beings, whether anyone likes it or not. Peace for them is when they have got all of the land of Palestine. When an Israeli PM says in Congress Washington DC that Jews are not foreigners and Israel considers Judea-Sumeria to be their rightful land and gets a bipartisan standing ovation from american senator, I am not kidding my self with false hope. Only Israeli stubbornness is in the way of Peace.

Replying to X

Comments are moderated and generally will be posted if they are on-topic and not abusive.

For more information, please see our Comments FAQ

Mideast peace process: Hampered throughout history

FOLLOW US