Peace has always been our people's most ardent desire. Our prophets gave the world the vision of peace, we greet one another with wishes of peace, and our prayers conclude with the word peace.
We are gathered this evening in an institution named for two pioneers of peace, Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat, and we share in their vision.
Two and half months ago, I took the oath of office as the Prime Minister of Israel. I pledged to establish a national unity government – and I did. I believed and I still believe that unity was essential for us now more than ever as we face three immense challenges – the Iranian threat, the economic crisis, and the advancement of peace.
The Iranian threat looms large before us, as was further demonstrated yesterday. The greatest danger confronting Israel, the Middle East, the entire world and human race, is the nexus between radical Islam and nuclear weapons. I discussed this issue with President Obama during my recent visit to Washington, and I will raise it again in my meetings next week with European leaders. For years, I have been working tirelessly to forge an international alliance to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons.
Confronting a global economic crisis, the government acted swiftly to stabilise Israel's economy. We passed a two-year budget in the government – and the Knesset will soon approve it.
And the third challenge, so exceedingly important, is the advancement of peace. I also spoke about this with President Obama, and I fully support the idea of a regional peace that he is leading.
I share the President's desire to bring about a new era of reconciliation in our region. To this end, I met with President Mubarak in Egypt, and King Abdullah in Jordan, to elicit the support of these leaders in expanding the circle of peace in our region.
I turn to all Arab leaders tonight and I say: "Let us meet. Let us speak of peace and let us make peace. I am ready to meet with you at any time. I am willing to go to Damascus, to Riyadh, to Beirut, to any place- including Jerusalem. I call on the Arab countries to co-operate with the Palestinians and with us to advance an economic peace. An economic peace is not a substitute for a political peace, but an important element to achieving it. Together, we can undertake projects to overcome the scarcities of our region, like water desalination or to maximise its advantages, like developing solar energy, or laying gas and petroleum lines, and transportation links between Asia, Africa and Europe.
The economic success of the Gulf States has impressed us all and it has impressed me. I call on the talented entrepreneurs of the Arab world to come and invest here and to assist the Palestinians – and us – in spurring the economy.
Together, we can develop industrial areas that will generate thousands of jobs and create tourist sites that will attract millions of visitors eager to walk in the footsteps of history – in Nazareth and in Bethlehem, around the walls of Jericho and the walls of Jerusalem, on the banks of the Sea of Galilee and the baptismal site of the Jordan. There is an enormous potential for archeological tourism, if we can only learn to co-operate and to develop it.
I turn to you, our Palestinian neighbours, led by the Palestinian Authority, and I say: Let's begin negotiations immediately without preconditions. Israel is obligated by its international commitments and expects all parties to keep their commitments.
We want to live with you in peace, as good neighbours. We want our children and your children to never again experience war: that parents, brothers and sisters will never again know the agony of losing loved ones in battle; that our children will be able to dream of a better future and realise that dream; and that together we will invest our energies in ploughshares and pruning hooks, not swords and spears.
I know the face of war. I have experienced battle. I lost close friends, I lost a brother. I have seen the pain of bereaved families. I do not want war. No one in Israel wants war.
If we join hands and work together for peace, there is no limit to the development and prosperity we can achieve for our two peoples – in the economy, agriculture, trade, tourism and education – most importantly, in providing our youth a better world in which to live, a life full of tranquillity, creativity, opportunity and hope.
If the advantages of peace are so evident, we must ask ourselves why peace remains so remote, even as our hand remains outstretched to peace? Why has this conflict continued for more than sixty years?
In order to bring an end to the conflict, we must give an honest and forthright answer to the question: What is the root of the conflict?
In his speech to the first Zionist Conference in Basel, the founder of the Zionist movement, Theodore Herzl, said about the Jewish national home "This idea is so big that we must speak of it only in the simplest terms." Today, I will speak about the immense challenge of peace in the simplest words possible.
Even as we look toward the horizon, we must be firmly connected to reality, to the truth. And the simple truth is that the root of the conflict was, and remains, the refusal to recognise the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own, in their historic homeland.
In 1947, when the United Nations proposed the partition plan of a Jewish state and an Arab state, the entire Arab world rejected the resolution. The Jewish community, by contrast, welcomed it by dancing and rejoicing.
The Arabs rejected any Jewish state, in any borders.
Those who think that the continued enmity toward Israel is a product of our presence in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, is confusing cause and consequence.
The attacks against us began in the 1920s, escalated into a comprehensive attack in 1948 with the declaration of Israel's independence, continued with the fedayeen attacks in the 1950s, and climaxed in 1967, on the eve of the six-day war, in an attempt to tighten a noose around the neck of the State of Israel.
All this occurred during the fifty years before a single Israeli soldier ever set foot in Judea and Samaria.
Fortunately, Egypt and Jordan left this circle of enmity. The signing of peace treaties have brought about an end to their claims against Israel, an end to the conflict. But to our regret, this is not the case with the Palestinians. The closer we get to an agreement with them, the further they retreat and raise demands that are inconsistent with a true desire to end the conflict.
Many good people have told us that withdrawal from territories is the key to peace with the Palestinians. Well, we withdrew. But the fact is that every withdrawal was met with massive waves of terror, by suicide bombers and thousands of missiles.
We tried to withdraw with an agreement and without an agreement. We tried a partial withdrawal and a full withdrawal. In 2000 and again last year, Israel proposed an almost total withdrawal in exchange for an end to the conflict, and twice our offers were rejected.
We evacuated every last inch of the Gaza strip, we uprooted tens of settlements and evicted thousands of Israelis from their homes, and in response, we received a hail of missiles on our cities, towns and children.
The claim that territorial withdrawals will bring peace with the Palestinians, or at least advance peace, has up till now not stood the test of reality.
In addition to this, Hamas in the south, like Hizbollah in the north, repeatedly proclaims their commitment to "liberate" the Israeli cities of Ashkelon, Beersheba, Acre and Haifa. Territorial withdrawals have not lessened the hatred, and to our regret, Palestinian moderates are not yet ready to say the simple words: Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people, and it will stay that way.
Achieving peace will require courage and candour from both sides, and not only from the Israeli side. The Palestinian leadership must arise and say: "Enough of this conflict. We recognise the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own in this land, and we are prepared to live beside you in true peace." I am yearning for that moment, for when Palestinian leaders say those words to our people and to their people, then a path will be opened to resolving all the problems between our peoples, no matter how complex they may be.
Therefore, a fundamental prerequisite for ending the conflict is a public, binding and unequivocal Palestinian recognition of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. To vest this declaration with practical meaning, there must also be a clear understanding that the Palestinian refugee problem will be resolved outside Israel's borders. For it is clear that any demand for resettling Palestinian refugees within Israel undermines Israel's continued existence as the state of the Jewish people.
The Palestinian refugee problem must be solved, and it can be solved, as we ourselves proved in a similar situation. Tiny Israel successfully absorbed tens of thousands of Jewish refugees who left their homes and belongings in Arab countries. Therefore, justice and logic demand that the Palestinian refugee problem be solved outside Israel's borders. On this point, there is a broad national consensus. I believe that with goodwill and international investment, this humanitarian problem can be permanently resolved.
So far I have spoken about the need for Palestinians to recognise our rights. In a moment, I will speak openly about our need to recognise their rights. But let me first say that the connection between the Jewish people and the Land of Israel has lasted for more than 3500 years. Judea and Samaria, the places where Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, David and Solomon, and Isaiah and Jeremiah lived, are not alien to us. This is the land of our forefathers.
The right of the Jewish people to a state in the land of Israel does not derive from the catastrophes that have plagued our people. True, for 2000 years the Jewish people suffered expulsions, pogroms, blood libels, and massacres which culminated in a Holocaust – a suffering which has no parallel in human history. There are those who say that if the Holocaust had not occurred, the state of Israel would never have been established. But I say that if the state of Israel would have been established earlier, the Holocaust would not have occurred. This tragic history of powerlessness explains why the Jewish people need a sovereign power of self-defence. But our right to build our sovereign state here, in the land of Israel, arises from one simple fact: this is the homeland of the Jewish people, this is where our identity was forged. As Israel's first Prime Minister David Ben-Gurion proclaimed in Israel's Declaration of Independence: "The Jewish people arose in the land of Israel and it was here that its spiritual, religious and political character was shaped. Here they attained their sovereignty, and here they bequeathed to the world their national and cultural treasures, and the most eternal of books."
But we must also tell the truth in its entirety: within this homeland lives a large Palestinian community. We do not want to rule over them, we do not want to govern their lives, we do not want to impose either our flag or our culture on them.
In my vision of peace, in this small land of ours, two peoples live freely, side-by-side, in amity and mutual respect. Each will have its own flag, its own national anthem, its own government. Neither will threaten the security or survival of the other.
These two realities – our connection to the land of Israel, and the Palestinian population living within it – have created deep divisions in Israeli society. But the truth is that we have much more that unites us than divides us. I have come tonight to give expression to that unity, and to the principles of peace and security on which there is broad agreement within Israeli society. These are the principles that guide our policy.
This policy must take into account the international situation that has recently developed. We must recognise this reality and at the same time stand firmly on those principles essential for Israel. I have already stressed the first principle – recognition. Palestinians must clearly and unambiguously recognise Israel as the state of the Jewish people. The second principle is: demilitarisation. The territory under Palestinian control must be demilitarised with ironclad security provisions for Israel. Without these two conditions, there is a real danger that an armed Palestinian state would emerge that would become another terrorist base against the Jewish state, such as the one in Gaza. We don't want Kassam rockets on Petach Tikva, Grad rockets on Tel Aviv, or missiles on Ben-Gurion airport. We want peace.
In order to achieve peace, we must ensure that Palestinians will not be able to import missiles into their territory, to field an army, to close their airspace to us, or to make pacts with the likes of Hizbollah and Iran. On this point as well, there is wide consensus within Israel.
It is impossible to expect us to agree in advance to the principle of a Palestinian state without assurances that this state will be demilitarised.
On a matter so critical to the existence of Israel, we must first have our security needs addressed.
Therefore, today we ask our friends in the international community, led by the United States, for what is critical to the security of Israel: Clear commitments that in a future peace agreement, the territory controlled by the Palestinians will be demilitarised: namely, without an army, without control of its airspace, and with effective security measures to prevent weapons smuggling into the territory – real monitoring, and not what occurs in Gaza today. And obviously, the Palestinians will not be able to forge military pacts.
Without this, sooner or later, these territories will become another Hamastan. And that we cannot accept.
I told President Obama when I was in Washington that if we could agree on the substance, then the terminology would not pose a problem. And here is the substance that I now state clearly: If we receive this guarantee regarding demilitirization and Israel's security needs, and if the Palestinians recognise Israel as the State of the Jewish people, then we will be ready in a future peace agreement to reach a solution where a demilitarised Palestinian state exists alongside the Jewish state.
Regarding the remaining important issues that will be discussed as part of the final settlement, my positions are known: Israel needs defensible borders, and Jerusalem must remain the united capital of Israel with continued religious freedom for all faiths.
The territorial question will be discussed as part of the final peace agreement. In the meantime, we have no intention of building new settlements or of expropriating additional land for existing settlements.
But there is a need to enable the residents to live normal lives, to allow mothers and fathers to raise their children like families elsewhere. The settlers are neither the enemies of the people nor the enemies of peace. Rather, they are an integral part of our people, a principled, pioneering and Zionist public.
Unity among us is essential and will help us achieve reconciliation with our neighbours. That reconciliation must already begin by altering existing realities. I believe that a strong Palestinian economy will strengthen peace.
If the Palestinians turn toward peace – in fighting terror, in strengthening governance and the rule of law, in educating their children for peace and in stopping incitement against Israel – we will do our part in making every effort to facilitate freedom of movement and access, and to enable them to develop their economy. All of this will help us advance a peace treaty between us.
Above all else, the Palestinians must decide between the path of peace and the path of Hamas. The Palestinian Authority will have to establish the rule of law in Gaza and overcome Hamas. Israel will not sit at the negotiating table with terrorists who seek their destruction. Hamas will not even allow the Red Cross to visit our kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit, who has spent three years in captivity, cut off from his parents, his family and his people. We are committed to bringing him home, healthy and safe.
With a Palestinian leadership committed to peace, with the active participation of the Arab world, and the support of the United States and the international community, there is no reason why we cannot achieve a breakthrough to peace.
Our people have already proven that we can do the impossible. Over the past 61 years, while constantly defending our existence, we have performed wonders. Our microchips are powering the world's computers. Our medicines are treating diseases once considered incurable. Our drip irrigation is bringing arid lands back to life across the globe. And Israeli scientists are expanding the boundaries of human knowledge. If only our neighbours would respond to our call – peace too will be in our reach.
I call on the leaders of the Arab world and on the Palestinian leadership, let us continue together on the path of Menahem Begin and Anwar Sadat, Yitzhak Rabin and King Hussein. Let us realise the vision of the prophet Isaiah, who in Jerusalem 2700 years ago said: "nations shall not lift up sword against nation, and they shall learn war no more."
With God's help, we will know no more war. We will know peace." _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
"The Iranian threat looms large before us, as was further demonstrated yesterday. The greatest danger confronting Israel, the Middle East, the entire world and human race, is the nexus between radical Islam and nuclear weapons. I discussed this issue with President Obama during my recent visit to Washington, and I will raise it again in my meetings next week with European leaders. For years, I have been working tirelessly to forge an international alliance to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons."
Âûñòàâëÿòü Èðàí ãëóïûì àãðåññîðîì, êîòîðûé â çâåðèíîé çëîáå ðåøèòñÿ íà âîåííóþ àâàíòþðó è ñàì ïåðâûé íàïàä¸ò íà ìîùíîå ãîñóäàðñòâî ïîääåðæàííîå Øòàòàìè. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
×èñòîé âîäû ðèòîðèêà: Äàâàéòå âñòðå÷àòüñÿ! Äàâàéòå ãîâîðèòü î ìèðå! Äàâàéòå äåëàòü ìèð! ß ãîòîâ âñòðåòèòüñÿ ñ âàìè â ëþáîå âðåìÿ!
ß ãîòîâ ïîëåòåòü â Äàìàñê, â Áåéðóò, â Ðèàä. Êàê æå! Äåðæè êàðìàí øèðå! Êòî æå åãî òóäà ïóñòèò òî?
I turn to all Arab leaders tonight and I say: "Let us meet. Let us speak of peace and let us make peace. I am ready to meet with you at any time. I am willing to go to Damascus, to Riyadh, to Beirut, to any place- including Jerusalem. I call on the Arab countries to co-operate with the Palestinians and with us to advance an economic peace. An economic peace is not a substitute for a political peace, but an important element to achieving it. Together, we can undertake projects to overcome the scarcities of our region, like water desalination or to maximise its advantages, like developing solar energy, or laying gas and petroleum lines, and transportation links between Asia, Africa and Europe.
The economic success of the Gulf States has impressed us all and it has impressed me. I call on the talented entrepreneurs of the Arab world to come and invest here and to assist the Palestinians – and us – in spurring the economy.
Together, we can develop industrial areas that will generate thousands of jobs and create tourist sites that will attract millions of visitors eager to walk in the footsteps of history – in Nazareth and in Bethlehem, around the walls of Jericho and the walls of Jerusalem, on the banks of the Sea of Galilee and the baptismal site of the Jordan. There is an enormous potential for archeological tourism, if we can only learn to co-operate and to develop it.
I turn to you, our Palestinian neighbours, led by the Palestinian Authority, and I say: Let's begin negotiations immediately without preconditions. Israel is obligated by its international commitments and expects all parties to keep their commitments.
We want to live with you in peace, as good neighbours. We want our children and your children to never again experience war: that parents, brothers and sisters will never again know the agony of losing loved ones in battle; that our children will be able to dream of a better future and realise that dream; and that together we will invest our energies in ploughshares and pruning hooks, not swords and spears. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
If the advantages of peace are so evident, we must ask ourselves why peace remains so remote, even as our hand remains outstretched to peace? Why has this conflict continued for more than sixty years?
In order to bring an end to the conflict, we must give an honest and forthright answer to the question: What is the root of the conflict?
In his speech to the first Zionist Conference in Basel, the founder of the Zionist movement, Theodore Herzl, said about the Jewish national home "This idea is so big that we must speak of it only in the simplest terms." Today, I will speak about the immense challenge of peace in the simplest words possible.
Even as we look toward the horizon, we must be firmly connected to reality, to the truth. And the simple truth is that the root of the conflict was, and remains, the refusal to recognise the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own, in their historic homeland. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Those who think that the continued enmity toward Israel is a product of our presence in Judea, Samaria and Gaza, is confusing cause and consequence.
The attacks against us began in the 1920s, escalated into a comprehensive attack in 1948 with the declaration of Israel's independence, continued with the fedayeen attacks in the 1950s, and climaxed in 1967, on the eve of the six-day war, in an attempt to tighten a noose around the neck of the State of Israel.
All this occurred during the fifty years before a single Israeli soldier ever set foot in Judea and Samaria. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Fortunately, Egypt and Jordan left this circle of enmity. The signing of peace treaties have brought about an end to their claims against Israel, an end to the conflict. But to our regret, this is not the case with the Palestinians. The closer we get to an agreement with them, the further they retreat and raise demands that are inconsistent with a true desire to end the conflict. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
È òóò îí ïðàâ. Óõîä ñ òåððèòîðèé ïðèâ¸ë òîëüêî ê óñèëåíèþ áîðüáû ïàëåñòèíöåâ ïðîòèâ Èçðàèëÿ è ê óñèëåíèþ òåððîðà.
È ïðîñòîé óõîä ñ òåððèòîðèé íå ïðèâåä¸ò ê ìèðó ñ ïàëåñòèíöàìè. Ýòî âåðíî.
Many good people have told us that withdrawal from territories is the key to peace with the Palestinians. Well, we withdrew. But the fact is that every withdrawal was met with massive waves of terror, by suicide bombers and thousands of missiles.
We tried to withdraw with an agreement and without an agreement. We tried a partial withdrawal and a full withdrawal. In 2000 and again last year, Israel proposed an almost total withdrawal in exchange for an end to the conflict, and twice our offers were rejected.
We evacuated every last inch of the Gaza strip, we uprooted tens of settlements and evicted thousands of Israelis from their homes, and in response, we received a hail of missiles on our cities, towns and children.
The claim that territorial withdrawals will bring peace with the Palestinians, or at least advance peace, has up till now not stood the test of reality. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Achieving peace will require courage and candour from both sides, and not only from the Israeli side. The Palestinian leadership must arise and say: "Enough of this conflict. We recognise the right of the Jewish people to a state of their own in this land, and we are prepared to live beside you in true peace." I am yearning for that moment, for when Palestinian leaders say those words to our people and to their people, then a path will be opened to resolving all the problems between our peoples, no matter how complex they may be.
Therefore, a fundamental prerequisite for ending the conflict is a public, binding and unequivocal Palestinian recognition of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. To vest this declaration with practical meaning, there must also be a clear understanding that the Palestinian refugee problem will be resolved outside Israel's borders. For it is clear that any demand for resettling Palestinian refugees within Israel undermines Israel's continued existence as the state of the Jewish people. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
PRESIDENT OBAMA: Well, first of all, I think it's important not to immediately assess the situation based on commentary the day after a speech. I think any time an Israeli Prime Minister makes a statement, the immediate reaction tends to be negative on one side. If the other side is making a statement, oftentimes the reaction is negative in Israel.
Overall, I thought that there was positive movement in the Prime Minister's speech. He acknowledged the need for two states. There were a lot of conditions, and obviously working through the conditions on Israel's side for security, as well as the Palestinian side for sovereignty and territorial integrity and the capacity to have a functioning, prosperous state, that's exactly what negotiations are supposed to be about. But what we're seeing is at least the possibility that we can restart serious talks.
Now, I've been very clear that, from the United States' perspective, Israel's security is non-negotiable. We will stand behind their defense. I've also made very clear that both sides are going to have to move in some politically difficult ways in order to achieve what is going to be in the long-term interests of the Israelis and the Palestinians and the international community.
On the Israeli side, that means a cessation of settlements. And there is a tendency to try to parse exactly what this means, but I think the parties on the ground understand that if you have a continuation of settlements that, in past agreements, have been categorized as illegal, that's going to be an impediment to progress. On the Palestinian side, whether it's the Palestinian Authority or other groups like Hamas that claim to speak for the Palestinians, a recognition of the Quartet principles, ensuring that there's a recognition of Israel's right to exist, making sure that past agreements are abided to, that there's an end to incitement against Israel and an end to violence against Israel. Those are necessary pillars of any serious agreement that's to be reached.
And those pillars have to be supported by the Arab states, because Israel's security concerns extend beyond simply the Palestinian Territories; they extend to concerns that they have in a whole host of neighbors where there's perceived and often real hostility towards Israel's security. So I'm glad that Prime Minister Netanyahu made the speech. The United States will continue to try to be as honest as possible to all sides in this dispute to indicate the degree to which it's in everybody's interests to move in a new direction. And I think it can be accomplished, but it's going to require a lot of work and a partnership with key countries like Italy in order to help the parties come together and recognize their own interests.
... _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
The harbinger of Arab reaction to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech was Saeb Erekat, head of negotiations with Israel for the Palestinian Authority. Speaking on Al Jazeera TV Sunday night, he enumerated the faults of Netanyahu's speech. Without a mention of an acceptable Israel position on Jerusalem, refugees, water or a settlement freeze, the editors of the important newspapers in the Middle East could not help but adopt the Palestinian line and attack Netanyahu's address. "No one in Egypt or anywhere else can accept Netanyahu's demand to recognize Israel as the state of the Jews," Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak too said in a loud voice that reverberated from the Middle East to Washington. Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said as much to President Obama in May. Their position is that recognition would harm not only Israeli Arabs, but mean an end to the Palestinian right of return.
That is an issue over which Jordan is particularly concerned. A solution to the refugee problem outside of Israel and Israel being defined as a Jewish state means "an intention to exile 1.5 million Palestinians beyond the Green Line," an editorial in the Jordanian daily Al-Arab Al-Yawm said, a step that might come at the expense of Jordan. Jordanian newspapers were directed to pull out all the stops. "Netanyahu presented his credentials officially as an extreme terrorist, an enemy of peace, steeped in the policy of occupation .... this is an Israeli plan to perpetuate the struggle with the Palestinians and the Arabs and not to make peace in any form," Al-Arab Al-Yawm also wrote. Other Jordanian papers were not far behind: "Netanyahu sold damaged goods that no one will buy," Al Rai wrote.
Syria and the Gulf States toed the Jordanian-Palestinian-Egyptian line. No one in the Middle East was impressed that Netanyahu had uttered the words "Palestinian state." It seems to the Arabs that Israel has taken on the role of the Arab League conference that coined the the "three nos" in 1967 with respect to Israel, and that Israel has lost the Arab peace initiative. _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
SaebPalestine, June 15 (Pal Telegraph) - Chief Palestinian Negotiator Dr Saeb Erakat today said that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's speech at Bar-IIan University set further preconditions for negotiations and, in effect, announced Israel 's intention to unilaterally dictate a solution, rather than negotiate a peace.
"Benjamin Netanyahu spoke about negotiations, but left us with nothing to negotiate as he systematically took nearly every permanent status issue off the table. Nor did he accept a Palestinian state; instead, he announced a series of conditions and qualifications that render a viable, independent and sovereign Palestinian state impossible," Dr Erakat said.
"He blamed Palestinians for their own occupation, and then imposed a set of preconditions for negotiations that demand Palestinians give up their inalienable rights and surrender their national aspirations for a sovereign and independent Palestinian state."
"He failed to engage with the Arab Peace Initiative and its promise of regional peace. In this sense, his call to meet with Arab leaders was vacuous."
"And he failed to set the stage for negotiations: there was no acceptance of the two-state solution, no announcement of a comprehensive settlement freeze including all natural growth, and no intention to lift all restrictions on Palestinian movement, including an end to Israel's siege on Gaza."
"This speech fell far short of every single one of the benchmarks required of Israel in line with international law and existing agreements, including the Road Map. Palestinians will not be alone in their disappointment over Benjamin Netanyahu's failure to show himself to be a genuine partner for peace."
"Netanyahu demonstrated that he lacks even the most basic understanding of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. The Palestinian struggle for statehood is based on the denial of our fundamental rights and freedoms under occupation, and the outstanding historical grievances of 1948," Dr Erakat concluded _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
Egyptian leader says Israeli PM’s call to recognise Israel as state for Jews complicates things further.
CAIRO - Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak said on Monday that hardline Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's call for the Palestinians to recognise Israel as state for Jews torpedoed the chance for peace.
"The call to recognise Israel as a Jewish state complicates things further and scuppers the possibilities for peace," state news agency MENA quoted Mubarak as saying at a military ceremony.
Netanyahu on Sunday gave a speech in which he endorsed for the first time the creation of a Palestinian state, but with many unrealistic conditions.
He ruled out a halt to all Jewish settlement activity, said that Palestinian refugees' return would not be negotiated and that Jerusalem would be Israel's capital, all countering international law.
"I told (US President Barack) Obama that the solution to the crises of the Muslim and Arab world passes through Jerusalem," Mubarak said, after the US president gave a major speech to the Muslim world from Cairo on June 4.
"The call for a modification of the Arab peace initiative to eliminate the right of return will not be accepted by anyone in Egypt or elsewhere," Mubarak said, referring to a 2002 Saudi peace plan.
The initiative, backed by all 22 members of the Arab League, offers Israel full normalisation in return for a withdrawal from all Arab territory that Israel occupied in the 1967 Middle East war that it waged against its neighbours, a Palestinian state and an equitable solution to the Palestinian refugee problem.
"I said to Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that negotiations on the definitive status of the Palestinian territories must resume from where they left off, immediately," Mubarak said.
Egypt is Israel's closest Arab ally after signing a peace treaty 1979, the first between an Arab state and Israel.
Cairo is also a key US ally in the region and recently was involved in mediating between the democratically elected Hamas in the Gaza Strip, and Israel.
Mubarak said that when he spoke with Obama in Cairo, the US president's "positions were extremely positive."
"We agreed to continue to work together for a just peace which will end the Palestinian people's suffering, allow the creation of an independent state and open the way for a comprehensive peace and an end to the Arab-Israeli conflict once and for all." _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
15/06/2009 Syria, like all Palestinian factions, was dissatisfied with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's Sunday speech.
Syrian state newspaper, Tishreen, published an editorial on Monday saying, "The Zionist government, according to Netanyahu's speech, agrees to set up Palestinian cantons reminiscent of the Africans' cantons in South Africa in the days of the racist regime."
In his speech, the prime minister did not mention the issue of the Golan Heights, but did declare that he was willing to go anywhere – including Damascus.
The editorial, titled 'Canton mentality', read, "The cart is being put before the horse – this has always been the principle Israel's leaders have relied on in their attempts to get to the root of the Arab-Zionist dispute, as they view themselves as the victims and not the aggressors and view the Palestinians as the aggressors and not the ones with the rights.”They speak of a captive Israeli soldier but do not mention over 10,000 Palestinian prisoners – women, men and children – who are kept in their prisons."
Regarding Netanyahu's economic vision, the article read, "They talk about energy, water desalination, economic investments and economic peace before they talk about retreating from the occupied lands and recognizing the Palestinian people's rights.
"They talk about a 'territory under Palestinian control' that they can invade at any moment, since it will have no military. They overlook the military arsenal with which they can invade anywhere they wish."
The editorial went on to address Netanyahu's vision of a "demilitarized Palestinian state" saying,"They speak of their right to use the Palestinian territory's skies, as if it is an open area with no people and where there will never be a state.
"These densely populated areas have no rights, no sovereignty over the land, the border or the sky, and the term 'state' is a trivial term void of all political or legal meaning."
"Netanyahu's speech torpedoes all peace efforts" wrote the Al-Watan daily in its report of Sunday's speech.
A
l-Baath newspaper, for its part, commented: "Netanyahu has confirmed that he rejects the Arab initiative for peace along with all the initiatives and resolutions of the Security Council relative to peace" in the Middle East.
Another Syrian newspaper, Ath-Thawra, said Israel appeared to be far from thinking about peace.
The Israeli leader's speech "shows it is useless to await any change in the program of Netanyahu or the Israeli government," it said.
"The United States, which is working for peace, finds itself today with two alternatives: they can either go back and maintain the status quo marked by crisis, which we hope doesn't happen, or assume their responsibilities in pushing Israel to talk seriously in order to bring about peace and security." _________________ A la guerre comme a la guerre èëè âòîðàÿ ðåäàêöèÿ Çàáóãîðíîâà
FAQ
