1. BobW said:

Shalom Ted,

First, in effect, Israel does not have a bona fide government of institutions. Second and third parties deal with personalities fully aware there is no "pending approval of the home office". Another way of saying this is Israel does not field institutions but rather personalities. This is the weakness of the party list system of government used in Israel. All that's needed is to pay off or offer inducements to a few people and all else follows. The personalities' signatures are ironclad well before the journalists know what happened.

It's not "inconceivable" as to why Israel accepted a "contiguous" Palestine. It started with Jackson-Vanik and the huge introduction of non-Jews into Israel. What significance is there to a Jewish Israel? Do any Ruskie Olegs care that West Virginia was once part of Virginia until Lincoln carved out the new state for his reelection? There is no significance to all this for most. Some type(s) of inducements were made for agreement to a split Israel. It could not have been comprehensive threats. There's enough talent in Israel to know if they approached America's Christian Zionists, certain valves would have been activated in Washington, D.C. America's Christian Zionists do not want Jerusalem and Bethlehem to transition into brothels and mosques. They already know Manger Square features a mosque and there is pent up fury here.

.........................................................................
Even in final status negotiations, the center of Israel is nonnegotiable.
.........................................................................

Israel was betrayed by Jews in Israel and Jews in the diaspora.

Actually, the "sufficient land" making Palestine contiguous already incorporates a wide passageway negating a "passageway to Gaza". The "Safe Passage Routes" agreed to on 28 September 1995 provides for the seminal borders of the passageway spliting Israel via a Polish Corridor or a Vienna to Trieste route. The southern border is the agreed to route from Gaza toward (but not all the way) Hebron. The northern border of this passage is from Gaza to Ramallah. This was agreed to on 28 Sep 95 and signed by PM Rabin and Arafat, yemach sh'mo.

The US State Department is powerful but in decline thanks to President Bush. Power is being transferred to the Defense Department at the expense of the State Dept. Our problem is not external such as the State Dept. It's internal involving those self-hating Jews in Israel and the diaspora who think they will be accepted into Anglican society if Israel is dissolved. Freud cannot help them and Kafka realizes they are the walking dead.

Kol tuv,
Bob

2. Bill Narvey said:

Ted, your article and the two other articles you wrote to which you make reference are excellent in both your analysis and your insights.

Israel has made what to many at the time seemed to be mistakes and many more with the benefit of hindsight have joined the chorus of condemning Israel for the mistakes it has made along the way.

To return to a point I have made before, which is that in judging the degree of Israel's accountability for these mistakes, one must first delve into the circumstances within which Israel made these suspect decisions.

At the time the Oslo accords were struck, I think the pressures on Israel were not nearly as great as they quickly became and in that regard, Israel allowed fatigue from war and terrorism and desperate hopes for peace to blind itself to both the immediate and long range dangers of agreeing to what it did agree to. It has always been those same factors of fatigue of war and hope for peace that blinded Ben Gurion after 1948 and each successive Israeli governments.

Can Israel, so beseiged and set upon by genocidal Arabs and a world that says to Israel, "Well you won and now lets go back to the way things were" be harshly blamed for being tired of war and being desperate for peace?

Shamir and Begin were not nearly so blinded and could not be so easily pressured, though I recall there was great pressure put on them at the time.

With new leadership and changing circumstances, American pressure did have greater influence, if not to the point of forcing Israel to enter into new agreements and accords which had as an end goal, a sovereign independent Palestinian state.

It seems that Israel long ago, once it announced its desire to trade land for peace, set itself up for the slippery slope of conceding more and more by each agreement.

Did Israel along the way, have wiggle room to avoid agreeing to what it agreed to and if so how much? I do not know, but there is no question that Israel's decisions were all made in the context of choices that were limited, if not severely limited by American and world pressure.

As you have pointed out Ted, these string of agreements have practically rendered the end result a fait accompli in favor of the Palestinians and there is little or nothing of significance that has been left for Israel to negotiate to ensure its security and chances of survival are enhanced.

If there is any chance to still resile in some strategic ways from the agreements Israel has already committed to, Sharon had better very quickly find not only those ways, but the necessary strength and support both from Israelis and diaspora Jews that he will need to move the yardsticks back.

3. Leonard said:

Gaza now effectively has open borders with Egypt for the purpose of arms smuggling.Any route to the West Bank will simply become a conduit to arm the militia's there. Since there is no sign of the PLA making any real effort to disarm and arrest Hamas or Islamic Jihad terrorists there is no point for Israel to even contemplate such a link, that would be impossible to secure in any event.