Trump Deal - details, reactions and development on the ground

[M14 Shooter]

Trump’s Peace Plan Is a Trojan Horse That Aims to Make Israeli Occupation Permanent​

False premise.
Jordan ceded the West Bank to Israel in 1994 - Israel cannot "occupy" its own land.​

Actually, Jordan gave up all ties to the West Bank in 1988, but not to anybody. In the 1994 peace treaty between Israel and Jordan, Israel ceded a tiny stretch of land (a small island, I think) to Jordan.

The 1994 treaty placed the Israel/Jordan border at the river Jordan (and points south), thus ceding all of the territory west of the river to Israel.

 

[MJB12741]

Trump’s Peace Plan Is a Trojan Horse That Aims to Make Israeli Occupation Permanent
​

False premise.
Jordan ceded the West Bank to Israel in 1994 - Israel cannot "occupy" its own land.



​

And a wise move that was by Jordan to dump their Palestinians on Israel to deal with.

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Regarding this: As usual, you have misrepresented the facts. The Palestinians weren't excluded from participation in drawing up the plan, they simply refused to participate.

Did Jared Kushner have any talks with the Palestinians? Did he attempt any talks while formulating this? I don't think he did. He hashed it out first with Israel...no Palestinian invite. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember reading anything about Palestinians being invited 0 only Jared trotting off to Israel.

And add Trump's actions towards them regarding Jerusalem, their consulate, and international aid - of course they weren't going to be part of it later.

Kushner basically trashed the Palestinian people with the type of statement that harkens back to the Paternalistic attitudes of the colonial empires:

"Do they want to have a state? Do they want to have a better life? If they do, we have created a framework for them to have it, and we’re going to treat them in a very respectful manner. If they don’t, then they’re going to screw up another opportunity like they’ve screwed up every other opportunity that they’ve ever had in their existence."

There is at best, a certain naiveté and arrogance in some of it. The development ideas are straight out of an American frame of reference and there is a certain pie-in-the-sky aspect to it (where in the heck is all the money going to come from?). There is a heavy reliance on state of the art this and high speed that and a hell of a lot of infrastructure. It reminds me of a real-estate developer's model for a proposed community sales pitch. Most often, development works best in conjunction with the communities it is supposed to serve and a bottom up not top down approach. Has anyone asked the Palestinian people (not leadership) what they envision?

I've only read the first 30 pages, and this is what I've noticed so far.

That said - I do think there are some possibilities, but it may have been rendered toxic by the method in which it was created.

And still - where will all this money come from? A lot of promises....

Agreed, but there's more to it, which hasn't been touched on. One of the reasons actual reporting links should be included in the op versus what the op wants or doesn't want. Most independent reporting over there is in disagreement with it. Three mods in this thread, btw. You're basically handing foreign agents a free platform to set the terms of controversy in their own interests to dictate the questions as well as rules for discussion.

Anyway...relevant reporting from a deeper perspective...

OMG, you actually read Electronic Intifada, much less take it seriously?

 

[ForeverYoung436]

Trump’s Peace Plan Is a Trojan Horse That Aims to Make Israeli Occupation Permanent
​

False premise.
Jordan ceded the West Bank to Israel in 1994 - Israel cannot "occupy" its own land.



​

And a wise move that was by Jordan to dump their Palestinians on Israel to deal with.

Well, Jordan IS Palestinian ethnically.

 

[Shusha]

Trump’s Peace Plan Is a Trojan Horse That Aims to Make Israeli Occupation Permanent
​

False premise.
Jordan ceded the West Bank to Israel in 1994 - Israel cannot "occupy" its own land.



​

False premise. Jordan didn’t cede territory to Israel. It wasn’t Jordan’s to cede. Jordan tried to take territory by force (which we all know is a no-no). It didn’t work. Jordan eventually abandoned the territory and it was restored to its legal sovereign— Israel.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Trump’s Peace Plan Is a Trojan Horse That Aims to Make Israeli Occupation Permanent
​

False premise.
Jordan ceded the West Bank to Israel in 1994 - Israel cannot "occupy" its own land.​

And a wise move that was by Jordan to dump their Palestinians on Israel to deal with.

They --were-- Jordanians. Jordan stripped them of their citizenship and abandoned them.
Yet, they hate Israel,
Huh.

 

[Coyote]

That is why, in any deal, I think Gaza and WB should be dealt with separately.

What language: "dealt with". Shouldn't Palestinians have some input on that?

Yes they should. But Gaza and WB should be negotiated separately imo.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Trump’s Peace Plan Is a Trojan Horse That Aims to Make Israeli Occupation Permanent​

False premise.
Jordan ceded the West Bank to Israel in 1994 - Israel cannot "occupy" its own land.​

False premise. Jordan didn’t cede territory to Israel. It wasn’t Jordan’s to cede.

Indeed it was - Jordan annexed the WB in 1950 - granted the people there citizenship and voting rights and representation and everything.
It then ceded the land to Israel.

 

[Shusha]

Trump’s Peace Plan Is a Trojan Horse That Aims to Make Israeli Occupation Permanent​

False premise.
Jordan ceded the West Bank to Israel in 1994 - Israel cannot "occupy" its own land.​

False premise. Jordan didn’t cede territory to Israel. It wasn’t Jordan’s to cede.

Indeed it was - Jordan annexed the WB in 1950 - granted the people there citizenship and voting rights and representation and everything.
It then ceded the land to Israel.

I disagree. Jordan's sovereignty over the territory was not legal and was not recognized. Nor was the language used in the disengagement and the Peace Treaty one of "Jordan cedes this territory to the State of Israel". The term "cede" has a very specific meaning, IMO. And it was quite clear that Jordan abandoned claims to the territory with the intent to make the territory available for Arab Palestinian self-determination (see the 31 July 1988 address to the nation King Hussein).

This is not to say that Israel is not legal sovereign over that territory. She is.

Anyway, legal language quibbles. Back to the subject of the thread.

 

[M14 Shooter]

Trump’s Peace Plan Is a Trojan Horse That Aims to Make Israeli Occupation Permanent​

False premise.
Jordan ceded the West Bank to Israel in 1994 - Israel cannot "occupy" its own land.​

False premise. Jordan didn’t cede territory to Israel. It wasn’t Jordan’s to cede.

Indeed it was - Jordan annexed the WB in 1950 - granted the people there citizenship and voting rights and representation and everything.
It then ceded the land to Israel.

I disagree. Jordan's sovereignty over the territory was not legal and was not recognized.

You opinion on the matter does not alter the facts.

Nor was the language used in the disengagement and the Peace Treaty one of "Jordan cedes this territory to the State of Israel".

The movement of the Israeli/Jordanian border form the west edge of the West Bank territory to the Jordan river cannot be taken as anything other than a cession of Jordanian territory to Israel - when borders move land is, necessarily, ceded.

 

[Shusha]

Trump’s Peace Plan Is a Trojan Horse That Aims to Make Israeli Occupation Permanent​

False premise.
Jordan ceded the West Bank to Israel in 1994 - Israel cannot "occupy" its own land.​

False premise. Jordan didn’t cede territory to Israel. It wasn’t Jordan’s to cede.

Indeed it was - Jordan annexed the WB in 1950 - granted the people there citizenship and voting rights and representation and everything.
It then ceded the land to Israel.

I disagree. Jordan's sovereignty over the territory was not legal and was not recognized.

You opinion on the matter does not alter the facts.

Nor was the language used in the disengagement and the Peace Treaty one of "Jordan cedes this territory to the State of Israel".

The movement of the Israeli/Jordanian border form the west edge of the West Bank territory to the Jordan river cannot be taken as anything other than a cession of Jordanian territory to Israel - when borders move land is, necessarily, ceded.

There was never any other border between Israel and Jordan than the Jordan River. Jordan tried to take territory outside its international borders by force. It failed to do so. And eventually retreated, abandoning the territory to its rightful sovereign.

 

[M14 Shooter]

False premise.
Jordan ceded the West Bank to Israel in 1994 - Israel cannot "occupy" its own land.​

False premise. Jordan didn’t cede territory to Israel. It wasn’t Jordan’s to cede.

Indeed it was - Jordan annexed the WB in 1950 - granted the people there citizenship and voting rights and representation and everything.
It then ceded the land to Israel.

I disagree. Jordan's sovereignty over the territory was not legal and was not recognized.

You opinion on the matter does not alter the facts.

Nor was the language used in the disengagement and the Peace Treaty one of "Jordan cedes this territory to the State of Israel".

The movement of the Israeli/Jordanian border form the west edge of the West Bank territory to the Jordan river cannot be taken as anything other than a cession of Jordanian territory to Israel - when borders move land is, necessarily, ceded.

There was never any other border between Israel and Jordan than the Jordan River. Jordan tried to take territory outside its international borders by force. It failed to do so.

From 1950 to 1967, in every respect, the WB was part of Jordan, and the border between Jordan and Israel was the western edge of the WB territory.

 

[Shusha]

I'm really not sure, but it would not be forced expulsions. At one point though you had suggested that Jewish enclaves in Palestininan areas would remain in Palestine and Arab enclaves in Israeli areas would remain in Israel, they could choose to retain their citizenship or take a new citizenship but would not be forced to move. Is that off the table?

Actually yes different from other states in that it is completely surrounded by another state who can control access to other nations, water resources, ports. I'm just curious not give them direct access at some point of the Jordan river or the Dead Sea? Why not allow them a bit of border with Jordan?

I don't think it would be addressed in a counter offer because the ENTIRE plan almost is based on placing a whole new culture over the Palestinian one. For example, a requirement for western style financial institutions yet - suppose what they, as a culture prefer, is Sharia compliant financial systems? When I'm reading this plan, I'm seeing a very Americanized idea of what Palestine should be. Some good, some comes off with a "we know what's best for you" almost colonialist attitude. I would feel more comfortable if there was Palestinian input - doesn't have to be leadership, but Palestinians who would be effected and who would have to make it work.

It's not about a leg up.

No. The opportunity for input is not happening. It's presented to them as fully baked. That's it.

Imagine if Trump unilaterally declared Jerusalem to be the capital of Palestine.

And unilaterally cancelled all aid to Israel.

And closed Israel's embassy in the US.

Then Kushner got together with Abbas, and other Arab states and formulated a Peace Plan and Economic Development plan for Israel and Palestine.

Then presented it to Israel as a "take it or leave it" (and imply that the Jews are morons who don't know what's good for them).

That would go over well wouldn't it? That would really get them to the negotiating table right?

No. There is no "unique evil" trope so quit throwing that out! It's a reality. It happens. My own country walked out of two major international agreements - just. like that. ANY country has to take into account it's own security and the security and well being of its citizens. Why would Palestine be any different? The more points of dependence there are on other countries for basic needs, economy, and resources the more vulnerable they are if that country chose to leave the agreement or act putatively.

Other than the first two paragraphs, which are simply practical problems needing practical and easily negotiated solutions, any number of which would do, the rest of this is just arguing for the sake of arguing.

These are not real problems.

These are simply excuses not to come to the table to negotiate. It would be appalling for Palestine not to work towards its future as a sovereign State because the Framework wasn't Arab-flavoured enough or the invitation to the party came on gold paper instead of silver.

The Palestinians need to start looking at practical solutions to the conflict and not play this game. There is nothing substantially wrong with this Vision. Its good for everyone.




(And there are sovereign States completely surrounded by other States.)

 

[Shusha]

False premise. Jordan didn’t cede territory to Israel. It wasn’t Jordan’s to cede.

Indeed it was - Jordan annexed the WB in 1950 - granted the people there citizenship and voting rights and representation and everything.
It then ceded the land to Israel.

I disagree. Jordan's sovereignty over the territory was not legal and was not recognized.

You opinion on the matter does not alter the facts.

Nor was the language used in the disengagement and the Peace Treaty one of "Jordan cedes this territory to the State of Israel".

The movement of the Israeli/Jordanian border form the west edge of the West Bank territory to the Jordan river cannot be taken as anything other than a cession of Jordanian territory to Israel - when borders move land is, necessarily, ceded.

There was never any other border between Israel and Jordan than the Jordan River. Jordan tried to take territory outside its international borders by force. It failed to do so.

From 1950 to 1967, in every respect, the WB was part of Jordan, and the border between Jordan and Israel was the western edge of the WB territory.

I'm not quibbling that. Jordan did very effectively occupy Israeli territory from 1948 to 1967. Sovereignty did not legally change hands. You can't cede someone their own sovereign territory.

 

[Indeependent]

Why would any West Bank Jordanian want Arab leadership when they receive gainful employment from Israel?

 

[Olde Europe]

That is why, in any deal, I think Gaza and WB should be dealt with separately.

What language: "dealt with". Shouldn't Palestinians have some input on that?

Yes they should. But Gaza and WB should be negotiated separately imo.

I find this to be an error in judgment. The reason for that is simple, and the recent history with Palestinian history governments demonstrates it conclusively: Palestinians are overwhelmingly for a united Palestine. Conversely, separate agreements would be lacking in legitimacy. Moreover, insisting on negotiating the two parts separately would doom every effort at negotiation before it even starts. No Palestinian could be seen sitting down for that without losing any standing with the overwhelming majority of Palestinians. In effect, it is the old divide et impera strategy pursued by Israel since at least Hamas won the Gaza elections, which is particularly galling, or ironic, as the case may be, since Hamas was founded with Israeli help to undermine Fatah.

That's my argument. What's yours?

 

[flacaltenn]

flacaltenn brings up an extremely relevant point (on the other thread).

In the absence of a fully functioning government in Palestine, and given Abbas’ age, can we credibly our faith in government continuity and adherence to any potential Peace Treaty? Assuming an unlikely acceptance.

Of course you can't.. NO PLAN can proceed without a delegation of representatives that come from a STABLE process of selection.. It's all irrelevant if that can't happen...

We made too big a deal about "National Elections".. Pushed the Palis into a Civil War by doing so.. Even when ISRAEL was telling the US it was not TIME for elections, our political calendar said it was.. And it destroyed the PA by exposing the weaknesses in SUPPORT for a "powerful central govt"...

At THIS TIME -- the best way to GET stable and PRESCRIBED Pali leadership might be to just accept the top officials from each of the 5 or 6 biggest Pali cities and ACCEPT THEM as representative.. The local scale politics is more representative of the whole of Pali opinion anyways...

That and the lack of inclusion from any Palestinians is a big weakness imo.

I really don't MIND all the innovative economic visions and bribes in the deal.. I think along the same lines of just not "DIVIDING A MAP", but DEVELOPING that map optimumly for all.. Which means (in my case) free and unfettered trade for all and prosperity.. You blow any peace plan when you start with dividing up land and map.

Land is just land.. Why not have the Egyptians and Jordanians kick in some nice chunks of land ADJACENT to the WBand/Gaza??? VOILA -- MORE LAND... And then CONNECT it all? Brilliant huh? Not something just ISRAEL is expected to solve by their lonesomes..


The West Bank has 2.5 million people 80% of them in large cities.. They are NOT all farmers or grazers.. And they NEED development of CONNECTIVITY more than they need Americas 5G Cell service or other sparkly trinkets.. So the map to me is secondary to providing a higher standard of living and peace and autonomy for the VAST MAJORITY of folks in the disputed area..

Too much focus and over-design of "features" in the Trump plan.. And not enough on PROMOTING a comfortable, workable system of govt that GIVES them representation to negotiate --- AND the connectivity that will make the entire NEIGHBORHOOD of countries capable of caring for their population...

 

[toomuchtime_]

Regarding this: As usual, you have misrepresented the facts. The Palestinians weren't excluded from participation in drawing up the plan, they simply refused to participate.

Did Jared Kushner have any talks with the Palestinians? Did he attempt any talks while formulating this? I don't think he did. He hashed it out first with Israel...no Palestinian invite. Correct me if I'm wrong but I don't remember reading anything about Palestinians being invited 0 only Jared trotting off to Israel.

And add Trump's actions towards them regarding Jerusalem, their consulate, and international aid - of course they weren't going to be part of it later.

Kushner basically trashed the Palestinian people with the type of statement that harkens back to the Paternalistic attitudes of the colonial empires:

"Do they want to have a state? Do they want to have a better life? If they do, we have created a framework for them to have it, and we’re going to treat them in a very respectful manner. If they don’t, then they’re going to screw up another opportunity like they’ve screwed up every other opportunity that they’ve ever had in their existence."

There is at best, a certain naiveté and arrogance in some of it. The development ideas are straight out of an American frame of reference and there is a certain pie-in-the-sky aspect to it (where in the heck is all the money going to come from?). There is a heavy reliance on state of the art this and high speed that and a hell of a lot of infrastructure. It reminds me of a real-estate developer's model for a proposed community sales pitch. Most often, development works best in conjunction with the communities it is supposed to serve and a bottom up not top down approach. Has anyone asked the Palestinian people (not leadership) what they envision?

I've only read the first 30 pages, and this is what I've noticed so far.

That said - I do think there are some possibilities, but it may have been rendered toxic by the method in which it was created.

And still - where will all this money come from? A lot of promises....

Regarding this: As usual, you have misrepresented the facts. The Palestinians weren't excluded from participation in drawing up the plan, they simply refused to participate.

That's crazy.

Jerusalem is off the table. Refugees are off the table Settlements are off the table. The Jordan Valley is off the table. Controlling your own borders is off the table.

So why don't you want to negotiate?

Negotiate with violent losers?

Some points from the article I posted upthread resonated with me. How do we know rocket attacks on Israel made from a future Palestinian state won't happen?

Gazan style.

The plan requires the Palestinians, including Hamas and Islamic Jihad to completely disarm, end all payments to terrorists and end all demonization of Israel and Jews within 4 years or they don't get a state. In four years? Maybe in four generations.

I thought about what you said; and if all what you say comes to pass, there is still the issue of the Hezbollah enclave in Southern Lebanon, and the tunnels they use to attack Israel. Will that ever stop?

I doubt very much the Palestinians will meet the requirements of the Plan, but even if they did, it would have nothing to do with Hezbollah. Hezbollah is entirely an Iranian asset and will continue to do whatever seems to be in Iran's interests.

 

[Hollie]

flacaltenn brings up an extremely relevant point (on the other thread).

In the absence of a fully functioning government in Palestine, and given Abbas’ age, can we credibly our faith in government continuity and adherence to any potential Peace Treaty? Assuming an unlikely acceptance.

Of course you can't.. NO PLAN can proceed without a delegation of representatives that come from a STABLE process of selection.. It's all irrelevant if that can't happen...

We made too big a deal about "National Elections".. Pushed the Palis into a Civil War by doing so.. Even when ISRAEL was telling the US it was not TIME for elections, our political calendar said it was.. And it destroyed the PA by exposing the weaknesses in SUPPORT for a "powerful central govt"...

At THIS TIME -- the best way to GET stable and PRESCRIBED Pali leadership might be to just accept the top officials from each of the 5 or 6 biggest Pali cities and ACCEPT THEM as representative.. The local scale politics is more representative of the whole of Pali opinion anyways...

That and the lack of inclusion from any Palestinians is a big weakness imo.

I really don't MIND all the innovative economic visions and bribes in the deal.. I think along the same lines of just not "DIVIDING A MAP", but DEVELOPING that map optimumly for all.. Which means (in my case) free and unfettered trade for all and prosperity.. You blow any peace plan when you start with dividing up land and map.

Land is just land.. Why not have the Egyptians and Jordanians kick in some nice chunks of land ADJACENT to the WBand/Gaza??? VOILA -- MORE LAND... And then CONNECT it all? Brilliant huh? Not something just ISRAEL is expected to solve by their lonesomes..


The West Bank has 2.5 million people 80% of them in large cities.. They are NOT all farmers or grazers.. And they NEED development of CONNECTIVITY more than they need Americas 5G Cell service or other sparkly trinkets.. So the map to me is secondary to providing a higher standard of living and peace and autonomy for the VAST MAJORITY of folks in the disputed area..

Too much focus and over-design of "features" in the Trump plan.. And not enough on PROMOTING a comfortable, workable system of govt that GIVES them representation to negotiate --- AND the connectivity that will make the entire NEIGHBORHOOD of countries capable of caring for their population...

I see where you’re going with the above but I have a few unsolicited opinions.

I don’t see the incentive for the Egyptians and Jordanians to cede territory to the Pals. Both Egypt and Jordan have / had have border conflicts and an attempted coup instigated by the Pals. I don’t see why either of those nations would feel they have a compelling self-interest to annex territory to a hostile entity. Egypt, in particular, might see their interests compromised by ceding territory that would put Shia Iran and it’s interests even closer.

 

[flacaltenn]

flacaltenn brings up an extremely relevant point (on the other thread).

In the absence of a fully functioning government in Palestine, and given Abbas’ age, can we credibly our faith in government continuity and adherence to any potential Peace Treaty? Assuming an unlikely acceptance.

Of course you can't.. NO PLAN can proceed without a delegation of representatives that come from a STABLE process of selection.. It's all irrelevant if that can't happen...

We made too big a deal about "National Elections".. Pushed the Palis into a Civil War by doing so.. Even when ISRAEL was telling the US it was not TIME for elections, our political calendar said it was.. And it destroyed the PA by exposing the weaknesses in SUPPORT for a "powerful central govt"...

At THIS TIME -- the best way to GET stable and PRESCRIBED Pali leadership might be to just accept the top officials from each of the 5 or 6 biggest Pali cities and ACCEPT THEM as representative.. The local scale politics is more representative of the whole of Pali opinion anyways...

That and the lack of inclusion from any Palestinians is a big weakness imo.

I really don't MIND all the innovative economic visions and bribes in the deal.. I think along the same lines of just not "DIVIDING A MAP", but DEVELOPING that map optimumly for all.. Which means (in my case) free and unfettered trade for all and prosperity.. You blow any peace plan when you start with dividing up land and map.

Land is just land.. Why not have the Egyptians and Jordanians kick in some nice chunks of land ADJACENT to the WBand/Gaza??? VOILA -- MORE LAND... And then CONNECT it all? Brilliant huh? Not something just ISRAEL is expected to solve by their lonesomes..


The West Bank has 2.5 million people 80% of them in large cities.. They are NOT all farmers or grazers.. And they NEED development of CONNECTIVITY more than they need Americas 5G Cell service or other sparkly trinkets.. So the map to me is secondary to providing a higher standard of living and peace and autonomy for the VAST MAJORITY of folks in the disputed area..

Too much focus and over-design of "features" in the Trump plan.. And not enough on PROMOTING a comfortable, workable system of govt that GIVES them representation to negotiate --- AND the connectivity that will make the entire NEIGHBORHOOD of countries capable of caring for their population...

I see where you’re going with the above but I have a few unsolicited opinions.

I don’t see the incentive for the Egyptians and Jordanians to cede territory to the Pals. Both Egypt and Jordan have / had have border conflicts and an attempted coup instigated by the Pals. I don’t see why either of those nations would feel they have a compelling self-interest to annex territory to a hostile entity. Egypt, in particular, might see their interests compromised by ceding territory that would put Shia Iran and it’s interests even closer.

Simple Hollie.. Because they're wasting national resources and getting bad press for the camps and detainment and refugee services to over 300,000 Palestinians in Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon...

If you create a Palestine zone of commerce that INCLUDES those 3 countries, they could close their camps, reuse that land and swap it for border land near the WB, Gaza... Palis could be reconnected thru multi-national cooperation in their freedom to travel and work back and forth.. BETTER environment for the Palis in those 3 Arab countries.. And their host countries don't have a "refugee expat" problem anymore.. They would BE Palestinians in some Federation of Palestine....