Evelyn Gordon
Contentions/Commentary
28 January '10
When Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told foreign journalists last week that under any peace agreement, Israel would insist on maintaining a presence along the Palestinian-Jordanian border to thwart arms smuggling, he provoked some predictably negative responses. Writing in the Jerusalem Post this week, for instance, Ben-Gurion University Professor David Newman termed this “a return to a way of thinking … thought to have disappeared over a decade ago.” Claiming that “most generals” no longer consider this necessary, he accused Netanyahu of simply trying “to hammer the nails even more strongly into the coffin of peace.”
In fact, Newman is almost entirely wrong but through no fault of his own — because the one thing he’s right about is that Netanyahu’s statement “reinserted the defensible border concept into public discourse,” whence it had virtually disappeared. And since Israeli premiers stopped talking about it more than a decade ago, how was anyone to know that every prime minister, and the defense establishment, continued to insist on defensible borders in practice?
(Read full post)
.
Posts
Here, we can talk about a new public discourse, but its brand a new paradigma, which give in signals of a new thinking towards the territories. Its important that all good forces on this planet support this, so real history can be replaced. The shortcuts taken in the Oslo Accords (eckoed from Fatah's Phase Plan of 1974) and its appendix giving Gaza - and in the end - Jerusalem away, is a process that should be brought to freeze. One word take the other, its like the Global Warming. We may have to study the methodes of Goebbels to understand whats really going on when a new 'political correct' setting tells that Jews are occuping - their own land!
ReplyDeleteMamamia, the entire Norway has to be given to the Lapps immidatly.
Roy