Quote:
Originally Posted by _Q_
Let's dispel some of this once and for all:
On the 96% of West Bank number:
The often-repeated line that Barak offered the Palestinians the Gaza Strip and 96% of the West Bank for a state is completely untrue. Barak offered the Palestinians 96% of Israel’s definition of the West Bank, meaning they did not include any of the areas already under Israeli control, such as settlements, the Dead Sea, and large parts of the Jordan Valley. This meant that Barak effectively annexed 10% of the West Bank to Israel, with an additional 8-12% remaining under “temporary” Israeli control for a period of time.
You can read more about this here:
https://www.theguardian.com/world/20...hepalestinians
On Jerusalem
In the case of East Jerusalem, which was supposed to be the capital of the Palestinian state, Israel refused any form of Palestinian sovereignty over the majority of the city, including many Palestinian neighborhoods. It should be noted that the PA agreed to Israeli sovereignty over Jewish neighborhoods and the Western wall, and even proposed Israel annex settlements in East Jerusalem in return for land swaps elsewhere. This was met with Israeli intransigence, and an insistence that the Noble Sanctuary remain under Israeli sovereignty, and that a part of it should be reserved for Jewish worshippers.
On Palestinian Sovereignty
Israel demanded permanent control of Palestinian airspace, three permanent military installations manned by Israeli troops in the West Bank, Israeli presence at Palestinian border crossings, and special “security arrangements” along the borders with Jordan which effectively annexed additional land. Israel would also be allowed to invade at any point in cases of “emergency”. What constituted an emergency was left incredibly vague and up to interpretation. The Palestinian state would be demilitarized, and the Palestinian government would not be able to enter into alliances without Israeli permission. None of these are ingredients for the creation of an actual sovereign state.
This is ultimately the map proposed by Israel in those accords.
Basically it was asking the Palestinians to permanently accept being forced into Bantustans and signing off on their permanent status as an occupied people. |
This is not correct. This map is what Israel offered prior to the conclusion of the Camp David Summit. By the end of the Summit, Israel had accepted a deal taking only 9%.
What Clinton, however, is referring to is a later peace negotiation called the Taba Summit:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Taba_Summit
Quote:
|
Israel reduced its demands to 6% with territorial compensation that would offset about 3%, while the Palestinians proposed an Israeli annexation of about 3% along with a territorial compensation of the same amount. The Israeli proposal would have given the Palestinians some 97% of the land area of the West Bank.
|
There's a pretty good documentary on the peace process at that time here:
https://www.youtube.com/results?sear...HQ%26t%3D7472s
There was certainly a brief moment when things could have been done. Israel made the offer. It was rejected by Arafat. The Second Intifada rages on, the Israelis elect a more hardline government in response. No further meaningful talks.