Netanyahu defies Biden, insisting there’s ‘no space’ for Palestinian state
theguardian.com
Defiant Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu doubled down on opposition to Palestinian statehood, deepening the divide with Israel’s closest international allies, as cracks in his wartime “unity” government became increasingly evident.
Anger with Netanyahu is also increasingly visible on the streets, even though there is broad public support for the war. On Saturday, protesters gathered in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Caesarea and Kfar Saba, some calling for bolder action to secure the release of hostages, and others demanding the prime minister step down.
One in Jerusalem held a placard that read: “Mothers’ cry: we will not sacrifice our children in the war to save the rightwing.”
Why does the "sole remaining Superpower nation" bow to a small onery loud mouthed pseudo-nation? Which one is in charge? Curious.
Because taking them to task implies that supporting them for the last seventy years might have been a mistake.
We're Americans. We don't quit just because we're wrong. We just keep doing the wrong thing until it turns out right!
Boo-rah!
Also, turn out at the polls. Certain Christian voting blocks think supporting Israel is critical for end of days prophecies. And some swing districts have old retirees that show up to vote and have sympathy for Israel.
Because Israel has put a great deal of effort into shaping US public opinion and controlling US politicians since the 1980s, when the Israeli left effectively rolled over and croaked, because the Israeli right knew the day would come when they'd need to stall for time while they finished up their genocide.
One reason is that they're a militarily important foothold for our presence in the middle east. Same goes for the UK.
It seems like people genuinely do not know about the nukes that Israel definitely does not possess wink wink. Kinda changes the dynamic a little bit, I think.
“If there were not an Israel, we’d have to invent one.” ~Joe Biden
The State is absolutely necessary to U.S. interests in the Middle East.
Seems that this policy didn't age well. SA is getting closer to Iran, China is everywhere, Turkey is shaping its own regional policy. There's no much room anymore for Yankee interference in the Middle-East. Even the US government wants to refocus much of its foreign policy toward Asia-Pacific.
Israel has spent decades building a powerful lobbying bloc in Washington. American-Israel PAC is one of the top 3 donors of Congress competing with NRA. They made ties with evangelicals and give free vacations to Israel for every politician. They establish ties with both major political parties and spend millions to defeat any congressman who criticizes Israel.
It seems weird that another country can lobby our government. Are there any others doing that? Russia? China? Like do they all have officially recognized lobbying groups?
Foreign countries are legally banned from donating to US politicians and any foreign lobbyists have to be registered. AIPAC has skirted around those laws and even been caught in some scandals over it (e.g. Larry Franklin passing classified documents to the Israeli ambassador) but has made powerful friends and avoided law enforcement.
Because they have nukes and would use them on their neighbors.
While screaming and crying about how all those neighbors hate them
To be fair, they do. Iran, Jordan, and Egypt have tried repeatedly to eliminate Israel entirely.
Jordan?
His true colours are on full display, yet many still try to say this is not genocide.
It's sick to the core.
UK's David Cameron: "to suggest there's genocidal intent? I do believe that's wrong"
They'll bend over backwards to support Israel, and people are asking what Israel has over the UK to make it so. At some point, answers will have to be given.
Read some British history. This is their last colony and they are very determined to keep it
I just wish there was some historical example to show how it's wrong to eliminate an entire group of people. Then, they could teach the Israeli government that the systematic removal of a group of people is wrong. But none such example exists. We need to build a great hall that tells of the cost of life by war and hatred. It will be called the great Hall of Cost.
There were Zionists in Israel who were actually supportive of the Nazis, both because they hated the British that much, and because they thought that if the Nazis forced the Jews out of Europe, those Jews would move to Mandatory Palestine to take up arms and exterminate the Arabs.
The Stern Gang, otherwise known as the Lehi terrorist organization (and later integrated directly into the IDF as it formed) actually used Nazi race "science" to claim that Jews were a superior race and should exterminate the Arabs who lived in the area. The Stern Gang actually tried to field troops in support of the Nazis in Europe. They tried repeatedly until 1942. The Nazis said no.
Fun fact; Netanyahu's political party formed in the 1980s, as a fusion of two other right-wing parties. The first part leader and Netanyahu's mentor was a former member of Lehi, and as prime minister gave all surviving terrorists medals "for their service in creating the State of Israel".
The other two paramilitary organizations that folded into the IDF were also full of terrorists.
I don't see why they continue to give weapons to Israel. Just cut them off.
Many US voters see Israel as the way to get to the end times, Judgement Day. Not doing whatever Israel wants is political suicide.
That we allow religion to hold such massive sway is such a point of shame for our species, and out countries.
Not only that, it’s also a complete crazy pants interpretation of the Christian Bible. US politics is held captive by lunatics.
I mean, the Bible is the one with the Book of Revelations. Mainstream Christianity, despite saying "don't read that book!" still seems intent on keeping it in the New Testament.
That and the US military use Israel to test weapons in combat operations. The same idea is why they are so willing to aid Ukraine.
huh?
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/oct/30/us-evangelical-christians-israel-hamas-war
Perhaps I'm ignorant on that demographic, but aren't the vast majority of those peoples voting Republican anyway?
A quick Google turned up these polls. It's only 14% that voted for Biden, but since the US election is decided on single percentage points sometimes, that can make all of the difference.
$$$
This shit has to stop. Israël under Likoud has turned into a rogue state, fighting a ruthless war on Palistian people, justifying the war for its own corrupt leaders. US and European governments must realize that Israel is not their ally anymore. It has become a liability and will not do anything for them
Always has been.
Both are true. It has always been the case, and yet Likud and the country at large have both definitely shifted hard to the right in the last 10 years.
The really tragic thing is that this is a unique opportunity to establish a Palestinian state with the kind of global support and Arab investment that it would need to succeed.
Most Israelis want nothing to do with an extended stay in Gaza. Another leader in Israel would be able to make it happen, along with ANY serious leadership from Palestine. Abbas is useless, and Haniyeh is delighted to send wave after wave of martyrs at Israel while cashing the aid checks.
Yeah but this kind of "opportunity" has presented itself many times over the history of Palestine and the "Arab world" has left them high and dry for their own benefit every time..
The US invasion of Afghanistan post 9/11 was a unique opportunity to establish democracy in Afghanistan. That didn't exactly work out.
There's the crux of the problem. There have been opportunities for a Palestinian state in the past. It failed because there isn't any good leadership among Palestinians. So I'm not sure how this is actually an opportunity for Palestinian statehood.
I think there's a lot of wishful thinking going on here. I wish this was a non-violent resistance movement lead by someone that believed in peace and democracy. Then a Palestinian state would be a no-brainer. But unfortunately that's just not the scenario. Palestinian leaders are corrupt and if a Palestinian state were declared it would likely be a failed state.
Afghanistan returning back to what it was before isn't as big a deal to Americans because it's not on the border of the US. A Palestinian failed state (which is basically what Gaza has been for the last decade and a half) would be on the border of Israel, within rocket range of any terrorist groups that can be supplied by Iran.
A lot of people don't know this, but they tried this in 2018. It was called the Great March of Return. Gazaans tried protesting non violently for weeks, and faced a fierce violent response, but it was largely ignored by international news.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2018%E2%80%932019_Gaza_border_protests
The existence of people willing to protest peacefully doesn't make the violence of Hamas no longer exist. Especially when the peaceful protests turn a blind eye to the violence of Hamas. You can't claim it's a peaceful movement while there's a violent movement happening concurrent to it.
And are you really claiming Israel didn't have good reason to be nervous about Palestinians crossing the border into Israel after what happened on October 7? What happened on that day proved that building a fence and blockading Gaza were justified. We've seen what Hamas does when given the opportunity to enter into Israel, so why are you still upset that a peaceful movement that would have allowed Hamas to enter Israel in among them wasn't allowed to proceed? Are you really so in denial about what happened on October 7, what Hamas did, that you can't retire the talking points you're used to repeating for the last five years? Hamas proved that Israel was correct to defend it's border with force.
I'm not really sure what point you're arguing. I think you might be reading things into my observation that aren't there.
My point was that it's unfortunate that non-violence civil disobedience appears to have been found to be highly infective under the conditions within Gaza at least circa 2018-19.
I think it's weird when someone says "Oct. 7 is proof that Israel was right to ______." Because while much is up for debate, I think the one thing we can agree is that Oct. 7 showed the overall security arrangement was a failure.
One can argue for any security strategy they like, but I don't think anyone should point to Oct. 7 to justify any policy that led up to Oct. 7.
Exactly how Netanyahu wants it. He and his Israeli government were instrumental in the growth of Hamas and the failure of more moderate Palestinian leadership.
This isn't even some wack conspiracy theory. It's his own words.
The west bank is a good example of non-violent resistance. Last news the killed afew people in a village who were sheep herders.
Israel history have a long list of massacres of peaceful people, pretending that Israel having a moment of far right crazy people is just misleading. It is like saying Nazism was caused by Hitler and not the people who supported him and still support him and believes in Nazi agendas.
Israel want to control the great kingdom of Israel. Evangelical want Israel to establish the great kingdom of Israel. Alot of wealthy Zainoist want the great kingdom of Israel.
Pretending this is not the case make people believe in false hope like two states solutions.
The previous attempts also failed because the offer of Palestinian statehood was not actually sovereign statehood. Israel continually insists that they alone will be in charge of security matters for a Palestinian state.
How many countries have been chomping at the bit to be in charge of security in Gaza?
If the US going to be putting boots on the ground in Gaza? Is anyone?
I'm talking about the long term and not just of Gaza but of an independent Palestinian state. Ultimately the Palestinian people will have to be in charge of the security of that state. Otherwise it is not a sovereign state but dependent on the whims of the Israeli government.
Yes, long term I want a Palestinian state, peace and harmony for all humankind, disbanding all militaries, destruction of all nuclear weapons and we can all hold hands and sing "Imagine all the people..."
But the question is, how do we get there from here?
How so? There was Yasser Arafat until 2004.
We had that and it failed. The result is the West Bank.
Are you actually claiming Arafat was "good leadership"?
Ok for you and others learning about this from Wikipedia, Arafat siphoned off a lot of aid money. Much of it went to his own personal bank account, with a large chunk going towards buying weapons to use against Israel. He never wanted peace, he was just playing everyone for money.
Then what were the Oslo accords? What about Camp David (which, contrary to popular knowledge, he did try to make work)? Dismissing everything Arafat did and claiming he "never wanted peace" is very disingenuous. Also what was the PLO doing with weapons post 1993 when they denounced violence?
Also making it sound like poor Israel tried so hard to get Palestinians a state but because they didn't have leadership it didn't work out makes me question how much you're committed to faithful discussion of the topic.
They publicly denounced violence while secretly arming for the next round of violence.
See sometimes people lie. If all you know about the situation is based solely on official statements, then you aren't really even trying to understand what's going on.
Negotiating with Palestinian leaders was pointless because there was no leadership that could but trusted to honor a deal. So Ariel Sharon tried removing all settlements and ending the occupation of a part of a Palestine as a show of goodwill to the Palestinian people. Guess which part of Palestine that was?
After the occupation of Gaza ended, Palestinians voted for Hamas. I suppose thy felt like they were winning and should fight harder? I don't know, but after the last occupation of Gaza ended the Palestinian people chose violence, not peace.
See Palestinians had Gaza, free of occupation, a place with access to the ocean and therefore access to trade. There was a lot of optimism for the future then. Gaza has nice beaches and could be a tourist destination. They could trade and develop industries separate from Israel. The could be prosperity there and when people are prosperous they generally don't want violence over some land that a history book says they should have.
But then they voted for Hamas.
A lot of people felt disappointed by that. The Palestinian people broke our hearts.
But some people just pretended it didn't happen. Couldn't accept that Palestine went fascist. Made excuses. Pretended it wasn't that bad. Pretended that Hamas wasn't building rockets to fire rockets at Israel so a blockade was outrageous. Pretended the rockets fired at Israel didn't exist. Pretended that Hamas wouldn't try to send gunmen across the border if Israel allowed protesters to cross. Pretended October 7 didn't happen, and if it did it was somehow justified. When called out for these statements they pretend they didn't mean it.
And this is why there's no good leadership for Palestine. Too much pretending, too much looking the other way. No one ever wants to hold Palestinian leadership accountable because hatred of Israel allows for the rationalization of lies, corruption, and even the genocide committed on October 7. People are desperately trying to "both sides" actual genocide by claiming that a war started by the genocide committed by Hamas is also genocide. Whatever rationalization needed to try to keep Hamas in power because admitting that Hamas needs to be destroyed would be admitting that there's something seriously wrong with Palestinian leadership.
Palestine will never have good leadership so long as the leadership is never held accountable. By constantly making excuses, it's just perpetuating the status quo. Oh well, maybe the next generation of Palestinians will understand it's no benefit to them to have leaders that either billionaires living in Qatar or at the very least hiding underground while leaving them to the mercy of the people they're been indoctrinated into believing are genocidal monsters. Who's the real monsters in all of this?
I was gonna say cry me a river, but unfortunately people like you can vote, so I'll just lose faith in humanity in silence.
This "failed state" Palestine would be the most free they have been in the better part of a century. Having a right of return, protections from illegal settlers, representation in the UN etc. The last free election in Gaza was also a narrow win for Hamas, and stability of statehood would be quite deradicalizing
Hell, even just control over their own electric, water, and internet access would be a game changer for Gaza.
Right of return is dead. Hamas killed it.
Israelis aren't just going to allow Palestinians to come into Israel whenever they please after October 7. What are you smoking?
Sure maybe after a generation or two, if Palestinians can stop hating Israelis. But by then there will be no Palestinian old enough to have ever lived in Israel.
Are you making unrealistic demands knowing they aren't feasible because you want this conflict to go on forever?
Palestinians won't be de-radicalized until people the world over stop egging them on with their blood and soil justifications. A Palestinian state will only be possible a generation after the last person says "From the River to the Sea" and they give up on their fascist ideas of restoring the ethnic makeup of geographic areas to the way they were in a history book.
Some of the things Palestinians want could have been valid at a negotiating table. But when you choose violence the only thing that matters is which side has more capability of executing violence. And after you choose violence and lose, you aren't going to get as much at a negotiating table as you would have had you not chosen violence. You can't have people getting everything they want after using violence because it would be non-stop war and terrorism everywhere in the world.
So yeah, forget about right of return. 30 years ago that may have been possible, but Palestinians chose Hamas over right of return.
This has to be the most myopic statement I have ever read.
Nevermind
Jesus fucking christ, how do you think you have the moral high-ground when in the process of exhibiting your smug, superiority complex you are criticizing the Palestinians for trying to do the exact fucking thing that the Israeli's already did. Don't answer that because I know whatever you are going to say is going to be precisely the kind of sick, demented justification that has allowed this conflict to continue for as long as it has in the first place.
probably because the good up-and-coming leaders either got shot by IDF or recruited by Hamas, since there's not much job prospects inside Palestine and Hamas smuggles supplies in
Palestinians put Hamas in power. Therefore it was the responsibility of Palestinians to remove them from power.
They didn't do that, so now the IDF has to do it. But now we want a ceasefire before the job is done because we want to keep Hamas in power?
What choice do you think Palestinians have when Hamas smuggles weapons in.
What do Palestinians use to go against Hamas? Harsh words?
Yes.
Palestinians could denounce Hamas. When Hamas calls for protest, don't go to those ones, only go to the ones that are called for by groups that denounce Hamas. Refrain from cosplaying as Hamas terrorists when attending protests. Refrain from using genocidal dog whistles like "from the river to the sea". Refrain from shooting at synagogues. Protest at Israeli consulates not in Jewish communities. Refrain from trying to burn down Jewish businesses.
Ya' know, they could do something anything at all to at least try to ostracize Hamas from their movement. Like anything? Like something to indicate that Hamas isn't the driving force of their movement? Like throw me a fucking bone here, I want to some day not be disappointed by the actions of Palestinians. Because all I'm seeing is hatred and the belief that their hatred is justified and their hatred makes any horrific act they do is permissible. The only explanation I have for the behavior I'm seeing is that Palestine is a fascist society. It's the only thing that fits. I've yet to hear anything from anyone Pro-Palestine that didn't sound like it came out out the Goebbels playbook. Constantly pounding the victimization narrative, blood and soil (from the river to the sea!) narrative, the antisemitic narrative, the historical humiliation narrative. The constant violent fervor, Is there anything else going on?
What is the Palestinian plan to achieve statehood? Fire rockets at Israel and spew propaganda on the internet? Then continue with the victimization, humilation, blood and soil rhetoric when Israel responds to their attacks and the continue losing (while their billionaire leaders live large in Qatar) until they have nothing left?
Hatred is a funny thing, it can make people feel strong while it destroys them.
And people back then (me included) tried to get through to the Seppos that that's exactly what's going to happen. They said stuff like "It's going to be just like Germany", ignoring the social conditions that made, and still makes, Afghanistan quite distinct from Germany.
...just as you're doing right now: Palestine is not Afghanistan. If you subtract the conflict from all the polling numbers they're actually quite a bit more sensible than Floridians.
Sure it's different, but how does a lack of leadership and a willingness for countries like Iran to fund terrorist groups there make it likely to succeed as an independent state?
Seems like a lot of wishful thinking going on.
It's not about leadership it's about civil society. Palestine actually has one, Afghanistan doesn't, Palestine has home-grown secular democrats, Afghanistan very much didn't.
I'm willing to at least consider a genocide of Florida.
Darn. now surely Biden is going to do something about it. Any second now...
Of course he will! He's going to send more weapons any day now
Strong finger wagging and stern "bad boy" warning, followed by a wink and a nod.
Like what?
You overestimate what one person (even the leader of a powerful country) can legitimately do to force another country to bow to his will.
Maybe he will try to up the aid package to 16 bil
The US when Israel openly does bad stuff: "We've done nothing and we're all out of ideas!"
Are we still doing this narrative that the US wants Israel to stop? They have literally given them billions since they've started bombing. Any bullshit about hoping for palestinians is just trying to save face.
Yes? There's a huge amount of inertia in US-Israeli relations but it's very clear at this point that Biden is yanking the leash and trying to reel Netanyahu into a path towards peace. They aren't going to stop supplying weapons any time soon (if ever), the first step would be explicit restrictions on what the weapons could be used for, and we're still a very long ways from that being considered publicly.
Israel doesn't give a shit what anyone else wants them to do. They're going to continue slaughtering the Palestinians and taking their land until someone physically prevents them.
How is Biden yanking the chain?
He hasn't done anything to stop the funding and the sales of weapons.
How is Biden not yanking the chain? You are commenting on an article about Netanyahu bitching about Biden telling him he must allow a Palestinian state. Diplomacy and international relations and all of that mostly moves kind of slowly for a bunch of reasons, it's not like the movies, but there's a very obvious and public rupture between Netanyahu and Biden at this point. Stopping funding is way down on the list of responses, and it's very unlikely to escalate to that even being threatened in public.
Telling him anythin is not yanking the chain. As long as the US keeps supplying him with weapons and money he knows he can keep doing what he wants.
Biden is attempting to look compassionate for Leftist voters who are willing to abstain in November. The agenda is still to have a foothold in the middle east by supporting Israel. There's sizeable oil shipments that will be coming through Gaza soon, hence why Israel had to clear out all of the Palestinians from their homes to make way for the new pipeline installation.
I think the obscene amount of money we give them is more to do with our nation's whole 'military industrial complex' grift. Gotta keep those bombs blowing to keep the money flowing. As they say. I assume.
The MIC didn't require sending money or weapons to Israel. We could spend they money on military equipment for ourselves just as easily.
What country are they going to give to Palestinians after this Holocaust is over? Germany would be the ultimate irony.
Technically, it would be the British.
The United States had a large hand in it too :(, after the British gave up.
Palestinians should get the British land for keeps and give the US land back to Indigenous populations.
Fuck off hitler
The Israeli flag is a hate symbol.
Netanyahu knows perfectly well that the US Administration are complete total bullshit masters that talk the talk whilst not walking the walk and that they're "relaxed about Genocide" as long as it's commited against non-whites (and for them nowadays Jews are whites).
It wasn't that long ago that in her speech in COP28 Kamala Harris said the US was putting pressure on Israel and then less than a week later the US vetoed in the UN Security Council a resolution for a Ceasefire in Gaza which would otherwise have passed.
(Also, I'm pretty sure that had Russia invaded a Post-Soviet state like Kazakhstan instead of a "white" one like Ukraine, the reaction from the Whitehouse would've been barelly audible).
Isreal putting big target on state
Isfake meanwhile seems unaffected
No space? You live in the fucking desert, man.
This is the best summary I could come up with:
Defiant Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu doubled down on opposition to Palestinian statehood, deepening the divide with Israel’s closest international allies, as cracks in his wartime “unity” government became increasingly evident.
On Saturday, protesters gathered in Tel Aviv, Jerusalem, Caesarea and Kfar Saba, some calling for bolder action to secure the release of hostages, and others demanding the prime minister step down.
Over the weekend, Netanyahu sparred publicly – if indirectly – with US President Joe Biden, who for months has offered Israel almost unconditional support for its war in Gaza, at considerable political cost to his own administration, both in America and beyond.
Netanyahu’s spokesman claimed that in a phone call with Biden, the Israeli leader told the US president that his country’s security needs left no space for a sovereign Palestinian state.
Critics said the dispute proved a useful distraction from growing domestic tension about the limited achievements of Israel’s campaign in Gaza over three months into the war, the suffering of more than 100 Israelis still held hostage by Hamas, and the lack of a long-term plan for governing the enclave.
Critics include a member of Netanyahu’s own war cabinet, Gadi Eisenkot, a former chief of the Israeli military whose views carry particular moral authority because his 25-year-old son was killed fighting in Gaza.
The original article contains 1,091 words, the summary contains 217 words. Saved 80%. I'm a bot and I'm open source!
Netanyahu isn’t going to live forever and it is Israel that has an expiration date on it. It has become evidently clear that it cannot stand on its own without political, financial and military aid from western countries.
Yea maybe because over the course of the last many decades you've slowly stolen more and more land making a practical two state solution impossible without handing back land which we know they won't do.
Single state solution with equal representation for all is I think the outcome of all this BUT only if the current government is ousted.
Too true, netanyahu, I know you love your living space, just like your role model.
TLDR; Hamas massacre was a wrong move that delays the establishment of a Palestinian state.
Netanyahu is doing the right move by putting his country's security above all.
A Palestinian sovereignty cannot be established because by all means it's a threat to Israel's security.
As an example, Hamas 07/10 massacre launched from a Palestinian sovereignty, called Gaza (Gaza received it's sovereignty just 18 years ago).
The quest for a Palestinian state is by all means not peaceful. It's brutal full of bloodshed from both sides.
Palestinians don't look for peace, and as a consequence of this war, Israel is also don't.
The Palestinians only look for undoing the what so called "Nakba", a thing that will never happen, as long as Israel exists.
And Israel is looking for a security, by all means.
Palestinian sovereign living alongside Israel = Israel is NOT safe and NOT secure.
As I wrote earlier, the Palestinians are not looking for peace.
Palestinian state is NOT the only path to Israel's long-term security.
This is a clue for this article bias, as they didn't separated the number of Hamas militant casualties from Palestinian civilians casualties.
It seems like the state of Israel is threatening the security of the whole region. Better to get rid of Israel for the security of her region.
I don't agree. Especially when your comment isn't article post based nor sources based.
And Israel is an established independent country, you can't just "rid of" a country.
But it would be doing the right thing by placing the security of the Palestinians and neighboring countries above all else.
Neighboring Jordan and Egypt are secured, so your comment is false. Why they are secured you asked? Because they want peace and accept it, in contrast to the ones who don't want it.
Even though your comment is false, let give it a try.
In Israel there are 21% Arabs with Palestinian origin, do you want to get rid of them as well? If not let me know your sophisticated "getting rid of" partition (hint: antisemitism will be reported).
All of the Palestinian economy and Arabs living in Israel are based on the Israeli economy and currency (New Israeli Shekel), getting rid of Israel meaning destroying these people economy (which will only lead to more crime and terror, see Syria as an example).
So "getting rid of Israel" will be required to win also the US army. Source: https://www.state.gov/u-s-security-cooperation-with-israel/
Oh, and Israel has a nuke, so the ones that will try to "get rid of it" will be nuked immediately as a last resort solution, which is a loose-loose situation.
You seem to be missing their entire point so I'll state it in plane language to you.
You are advocating demolishing Palestine being justifiable because it places the security of Israel above all. The above poster is flipping your logic on you and saying demolishing Israel is justifiable as it places the security of Palestine above all.
Thanks for the explanation.
Let me rephrase my comment:
Netanyahu is doing the right move by putting his country’s security above all by delaying the establishment of Palestinian state or sovereignty.
I didn't advocate for Palestinian demolish.
This is why I didn't agree with the above post sophisticated "flipped logic" comment.
I'll state again: Palestinians don't look for peace nor a state. They look to undo the what so called "Nakba", a thing that will happen as long as Israel exists.
You know, I'm not actually taking your nonsensical take seriously, but lemme just say a few things:
Israel will never give Palestinians a state willingly; they'll need to be forced by either Palestinians themselves, the Arab world or the international community. This became obvious in 1996.
Gaza is still considered occupied by the UN.
Israel has never looked for peace. Again see 1996.
Stop shilling for Zionists.
It didn't work for 75 years, and only causes bloodshed from both sides, and the delay of a Palestinian state.
Unfortunately I don't understand the 1996 reference.
Per by this comment, here is a list of peace offers which would grant the Palestinians a country of their own, they refused all of them (total of 22 offers):
1937 - Peel commission, rejected
1947 - Partition resolution, rejected
2000 - Camp David, rejected
2001 - Taba, rejected. Arafat starts the second intifada and a year later changes his mind.
2008 - Olmert offer, rejected
Hamas have tried to agree to boundaries Despite media attempts to portray it as a new Hamas charter, it is not. The new ‘policy document’ accepts the creation of a Palestinian state in 1967 borders, but still rejects Israel and claims its territory. https://www.bbc.com/news/world-middle-east-39775103
Here are some other noteworthy peace meeting or proposals from Israel to the rest if the Arab world, which were rejected
1919: Arabs of Palestine refused nominate representatives to the Paris Peace Conference.
1920: San Remo conference decisions, rejected.
1922: League of Nations decisions, rejected.
1937: Peel Commission partition proposal, rejected.
1938: Woodhead partition proposal, rejected
1947: UN General Assembly partition proposal (UNGAR 181), rejected.
1949: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNGAR 194), rejected.
1967: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNSCR 242), rejected.
1978: Begin/Sa’adat peace proposal, rejected (except for Egypt).
1994: Rabin/Hussein peace agreement, rejected by the rest of the Arab League (except for Egypt).
1995: Rabin’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
2000: Barak/Clinton peace offer, rejected.
2001: Barak’s offer at Taba, rejected.
2005: Sharon’s peace gesture, withdrawal from Gaza, rejected.
2008: Olmert/Bush peace offer, rejected.
2009 to 2021: Netanyahu’s repeated invitations to peace talks, rejected.
2014: Kerry’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
Not gonna link Trump’s imbecilic peace plan as an example.
Here is a list of peace offers the Palestinians offered to Israel -
None
"Delay" you're speaking like Palestinians were promised a state at any time after 1948.
When Netanyahu just decided to ignore the Oslo accords after Rabin was assassinated.
I wonder why Palestinians didn't want their land to be stolen and used to build an Apartheid state.
Okay this is just a bad faith take. These two are extensions of the same negotiations, and let's see what Israel's then foreign affairs minister had to say about them:
TL;DR: Israel's Camp David terms were so horrible that as long as they didn't budge on them (which they didn't; the idea that Arafat didn't compromise is Israeli propaganda) no sane Palestinian would accept them.
Since the offer went on behind the scenes, nobody actually knows what happened, so I won't comment on it.
1919: Arabs of Palestine refused nominate representatives to the Paris Peace Conference.
1920: San Remo conference decisions, rejected.
1922: League of Nations decisions, rejected.
1937: Peel Commission partition proposal, rejected.
1938: Woodhead partition proposal, rejected
1947: UN General Assembly partition proposal (UNGAR 181), rejected.
1949: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNGAR 194), rejected.
1967: Israel’s outstretched hand for peace (UNSCR 242), rejected.
1978: Begin/Sa’adat peace proposal, rejected (except for Egypt).
1994: Rabin/Hussein peace agreement, rejected by the rest of the Arab League (except for Egypt).
1995: Rabin’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
2000: Barak/Clinton peace offer, rejected.
2001: Barak’s offer at Taba, rejected.
2005: Sharon’s peace gesture, withdrawal from Gaza, rejected.
2008: Olmert/Bush peace offer, rejected.
2009 to 2021: Netanyahu’s repeated invitations to peace talks, rejected.
2014: Kerry’s Contour-for-Peace, rejected.
I know you copy pasted this, because I've sent his exact nonsense list before, and lemme just say this: Check what you copy before you copy it. Two of these are UN resolutions that Israel refuses to follow, and the 2014 offer is one where Netanyahu wasn't even trying. According to the American Envoy he was unquestionably at fault.
First, thank you for the detailed response, which I'll response to as such.
At that time, Shimon Peres was the prime minister of Israel, so Netanyahu's stand wasn't even relevant. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_prime_ministers_of_Israel)
Anyway,
("Oslo II" created the Areas A, B and C in the West Bank, Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_II_Accord. However, these areas still have Palestinian terror acts)
Palestinians, at that time, didn't had ownership over the area of Palestine. because it was an official Mandate of the United Kingdom. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Mandatory_Palestine)
How's Israel an apartheid state when it has 21% Arabs citizens from the Palestinian origin?
The "1937 - Peel commission" is an Investigation of the causes of the 1936 Arab revolt in Palestine, which in short was an uprising by Palestinian Arabs in Mandatory Palestine against the British demanding Arab independence and the end of the policy of open-ended Jewish immigration.
The Arabs of that time didn't have any stand of the Jewish immigration, as it was under the British auspices.
Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/1936%E2%80%931939_Arab_revolt_in_Palestine
Same argument is relevant for "1947 - Partition resolution".
In 2000 Camp David Summit, "The Palestinian negotiators indicated they wanted full Palestinian sovereignty over the entire West Bank and the Gaza Strip". (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/2000_Camp_David_Summit)
The Palestinians received sovereignty over Gaza strip at 5 years later in 2005. (Source: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_disengagement_from_Gaza).
Guess what happened just 18 years later, from that Palestinian sovereignty? You guessed right, Hamas 07/10 massacre.
OK.
You didn't reply on the rest of the peace rejection, so I'll consider them to be agreed otherwise stated.
This sentence, and the list you provided, strengthening and supporting what I wrote on my comment above:
Palestinians don’t look for peace.
They only look for undoing the what so called “Nakba”, a thing that will never happen, as long as Israel exists.