When working on reviving the defunct Arab Peace Initiative, why is Israel so concerned about the demand to return to 1967 lines?
- Amb. Alan Baker
With ongoing and increasing intensity, the Palestinian leadership is fixated on advancing a concerted policy vis-à-vis the international community and public opinion, demanding recognition of what they claim to be the "1967 borders," and acceptance of a unilaterally declared Palestinian state within those borders. There are no provisions in any of the agreements signed between Israel and the Palestinians that require withdrawal to the "1967 borders." There were never any geographic imperatives that sanctify the 1967 lines.(Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs)
- Amb. Dore Gold
Several months after Israel captured the West Bank and Gaza in the 1967 Six-Day War, the UN Security Councildefined the territorial terms of a future peace settlement in Resolution 242, which over the decades became the cornerstone for all Arab-Israeli diplomacy. Resolution 242 made clear that Israel was not expected to withdraw from all the territories that came into its possession, meaning that Israel was not required to withdraw from 100 percent of the West Bank. Moreover, neither Resolution 242 nor any subsequent signed agreements with the Palestinians stipulated that Israel would have to pay for any West Bank land it would retain by handing over its own sovereign land in exchange. (Weekly Standard)
- Amb. Dore Gold
Israel's greatest strategic minds have long opposed the 1967 lines.(Los Angeles Times)
- Dr. Joshua Teitelbaum
While several aspects of the Arab Peace Initiative represent significant and positive developments in the official, collective Arab view of the future of Israel in the Middle East, Israel should refrain from accepting the initiative as a basis for peace negotiations because it contains seriously objectionable elements.(Jerusalem Center for Public Affairs)
Posted with Blogsy
No comments:
Post a Comment