Posted on 01/16/2008 5:15:55 AM PST by SJackson
A key right-wing partner in Israel's coalition government announced his withdrawal over peace negotiations with the Palestinians.
Avigdor Lieberman said Wednesday he was taking his Yisrael Beiteinu faction out of the government in light of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's decision to negotiate with the Palestinian Authority on "core" peacemaking issues such as the future status of Jerusalem and West Bank land handovers.
Yisrael Beiteinu argues that the Jewish state should annex West Bank settlement blocs while ceding Israeli Arab communities to the jurisdiction of a future Palestine. To do otherwise, Lieberman said, would be to encourage pro-Palestinian irredentism within Israel.
"It's not that we're against the solution of 'two states for two peoples'," Lieberman, who has served as Olmert's strategic affairs minister, told reporters. "On the contrary, we support it - two states for two peoples, not a state and a half for one people and half a state for the other."
Lieberman's walkout, which takes effect Friday, will not immediately topple the government since Olmert's coalition will still command 67 of the Knesset's 120 seats.
But it might precipitate similar action by Shas, another right-wing party. That would potentially force Olmert to look to left-wing replacements at a time when he needs to persuade Israeli hard-liners that he is tough enough to deal with Palestinian security threats.
Olmert responded to Lieberman's decision to step down by thanking him for his service in government.
"The prime minister is determined to continue with the diplomatic negotiations out of recognition that they contain the only real chance of ensuring the peace and security of Israel's citizens," Olmert's office said in a statement.
High Volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. or WOT [War on Terror]
----------------------------
"Show me just what Mohammed brought that was new, and there you will find things only evil and inhuman, such as his command to spread by the sword the faith he preached." - Manuel II Palelologus
Hallelujah!
:))))))))))
Please, please, please, oh pretty please with sugar and cinnamon on top, let this be the pin pulled out that makes Olmerde and his crew fall like the humpty dumpties they are and let a real Israeli finally, finally take the help. Bibi or the Israeli version of John Bolton will be just fine.
Secular and not-so-secular praying - ping!
Olmert is heading for collapse.
There may be new elections soon.
25 Quassams were fired this morning from Gaza.
But after any new elections the new government will have Geroge W. Bush looking for them to join the “peace process”
and make concessions, sad to say.
And with Israel dependent on American aid, the new government will feel the heat to give in.
ACHLA!
I hope Shas will follow soon.
Warning! This is a high-volume ping list.
it’s ‘bout time
Avigdor Lieberman said Wednesday he was taking his Yisrael Beiteinu faction out of the government... Yisrael Beiteinu argues that the Jewish state should annex West Bank settlement blocs while ceding Israeli Arab communities to the jurisdiction of a future Palestine. To do otherwise, Lieberman said, would be to encourage pro-Palestinian irredentism within Israel. "It's not that we're against the solution of 'two states for two peoples'," Lieberman, who has served as Olmert's strategic affairs minister, told reporters. "On the contrary, we support it - two states for two peoples, not a state and a half for one people and half a state for the other."Thanks C from E, but I don't think that's exactly what you've got in mind.
Well....I can dream, can’t I?
it might precipitate similar action by Shas...
8-)
That’d be cool. ;’) Then a Kadima gov’t even more beholden to Labor will continue to run things and negotiate things until new elections could be called, assuming of course that the loss of Shas will precipitate a loss of enough seats in the ruling coalition to bring down the gov’t. And I don’t think it will. It would however result in a cabinet reshuffle, with Labor demanding and getting more say-so in key areas; meanwhile, no new elections, no “no-confidence” vote, no derailing of the current negotiations... but at least some tiny minority parties can say, as the next bogus agreement goes into effect, that they voted what passes for their consciences.
“right-wing” “hard-line” “conservative” “hawk”
Lest we don’t know the correct way of viewing this, the above words are coming up again and again in the MSM’s assessment of Avigdor Lieberman’s breakaway from Olmert’s coalition. This is the the most informative treatment on this latest development I’ve found:
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1200475894906&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FPrinter
Apparently what makes one a “hawk” or “hard-line” is not only refusing a division of the Jewish State with those who in word and deed are dedicated to destroy it. Much worse, it is the recognition that the Palestinians have a zero track record of adhering to any agreements. Zero.
Let us remember that Islamic courts have repeatedly ruled that it is not only permissible, but a Blessed Duty to lie to the infidel if that’s what it takes.
Why Bush is so obsessed with emulating Neville Chamberlain in hoisting a worthless treaty fluttering in the wind is unfathomable.
The true “hard-liners” are the ones who will not abide living in peace with Israel — and that is the vast majority of the entire Islamic world.
Forgive me for being so impolite as to point that out explicitly.
HA HA because Ohlmet is a loser
..."On October 27, 2007, a month before the Annapolis Conference, we published our red lines for staying in the government. We were absolutely clear about what it would take to keep our party in the government.
"I met with the prime minister two days before he left for the conference, and 10 days ago I reiterated our red lines yet again: If the government opens negotiations on core issues with the Palestinian Authority, we would leave the government," he said.
...
Land-for-Peace Equals Failure
Lieberman said the land-for-peace formula that has governed Israeli negotiations for nearly 20 years has been a dramatic failure, and stressed that Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria have nothing to do with the Arab world's ongoing rejection of Israel as a Jewish country. "There was terrorism, there was also a conflict before 1967 [when Israel liberated Judea and Samaria], and before 1948 [the establishment of the State of Israel]. Anyone who chooses to ignore that fact brings destruction to the Jewish state," he said.
He said Israel must discard the land-for-peace formula in favor of population exchange with the Palestinian Authority, and said that 55 percent of Israelis support the idea.
In addition, Lieberman warned that demography is working against a Jewish majority in Israel and challenged left-wing politicians about their vision of peace:
"Pursue Yossi Beilin's idea and retreat to the 1967 border. Then what? Then there will be peace? Then there won't be any more terrorism? Anyone who says [Israel's conflict] with the Arabs is about territory, settlements or outposts is deceiving himself and others.""The day after we retreat to the 1967 borders, Israeli Arabs will ask for Palestinian citizenship while continuing to receive National Insurance payments from the State of Israel. It's not a secret – the Israeli Arab Monitoring Committee is open about it. Read the committee's vision statement: 'We demand independence [from Israel] for the Galilee and the Negev. We will never recognize the State of Israel as a Jewish country.' They say it openly; there is no need for interpretation."
Territorial, Population Transfer
Instead of land-for-peace, Lieberman repeated his call for territorial and population transfer between Israel and a future Palestinian state, based on a two-state solution. But he also said the current negotiations were leading towards something radically different.
"Our guiding principle must be population and territorial transfer," he said. "We want two states for two peoples, not a state-and-a-half for one nation and half-a-country for the other. We cannot accept the asymmetry of a Jew-free Palestinian state and a bi-national Israel with 20 percent-plus minorities."
Lieberman added that failure to "deal" with this asymmetry would lead Arab citizens of Israel to destroy the country.
I don’t agree with a two state solution either. The equally valid alternate lifestyle of being Arab, Muslim and Jew-hating is not in danger of becoming extinct if there is no Palestine. There are plenty of other places for them to live.
World Jewry is in danger of becoming extinct if there is no Israel. That was why she was founded in the first place. And for the record, I’m not Jewish.
Israel should have annexed Gaza, Golan and the West Bank in 1967. It would have spared Jew and Arab alike a great deal of suffering that have ensued ever since.
It is quite simple. Any Arab who through word and deed are willing to live in peace with Israel may do so as Israeli citizens after these territories are annexed. The rest can leave voluntarily or be forcibly ejected.
Those who commit or foment violence should be punished accordingly.
“Israel should have annexed Gaza, Golan and the West Bank in 1967. It would have spared Jew and Arab alike a great deal of suffering that have ensued ever since.”
Yes, agree, with one caveat - annexed after pushing the population out to the Jordan and Egypt (with or without monetary compensation - that was a war after all). Annexing with all the Arab population is a suicide for Jewish state. The same way as Israel should not had begged Arabs to stay during the War of Independence. They issued proclamations asking Arabs not to leave as they were directed by advancing Arab armies.
But now its too late. The problem that exists is demographic. Same as a “right of return” of Arabs into the Israel proper is essentially the end to Israel as Jewish state, a growing Arab-Israeli population can achieve the same. Add to the fact that they are propagandized into increasing disloyalty. The population exchange proposal removes a large pocket of Arabs living in Israeli proper and gets a large pocket of Jews living in the Judea. A population exchange worked well (at least better than an alternative bloodshed) for Greeks and Turks, India and Pakistan.
If you are a purist of Israel from sea to the Jordan river, I’ll have to disagree. Its not attainable now, there is no political will for it. Israel should choose the border she is ready to defend (unilaterally), build the wall and stop having responsibility for Arabs well being in the territories. Shelling over the fence should have a consequence of Israel moving the fence out. Loss of land is more understandable to Arabs than loss of life, despite otherwise huge landmasses in their possession. It Arabs business then to declare or not declare a state, join the Jordan and/or Egypt or whatever.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.