An interesting new development in all this:

PM heads to U.S. under threat of Palestinian statehood declaration

By Barak Ravid and Natasha Mozgovaya

Tags: Benjamin Netanyahu

Concerns are growing in Israel's government over the possibility of a unilateral Palestinian declaration of independence within the 1967 borders, a move which could potentially be recognized by the United Nations Security Council.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu recently asked the administration of U.S. President Barack Obama to veto any such proposal, after reports reached Jerusalem of support for such a declaration from major European Union countries, and apparently also certain U.S. officials.

The reports indicated that Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad has reached a secret understanding with the Obama administration over U.S. recognition of an independent Palestinian state. Such recognition would likely transform any Israeli presence across the Green Line, even in Jerusalem, into an illegal incursion to which the Palestinians would be entitled to engage in measures of self-defense.
Advertisement

In late August Fayyad presented the international community with a detailed plan for building up Palestinian Authority institutions and set a timetable of up to two years for its implementation. Senior Israeli officials said Fayyad's plan initially met with positive reaction in Jerusalem for its emphasis on institution-building and making security services more efficient.

But some Israeli officials told Haaretz that alongside the clauses reported in the media - which are similar to elements of Netanyahu's call for "economic peace" between Israel and the Palestinians - Fayyad's plan also contains a classified, unreleased portion stipulating a unilateral declaration of independence.

The plan specifies that at the end of a designated period for bolstering national institutions the PA, in conjunction with the Arab League, would file a "claim of sovereignty" to the UN Security Council and General Assembly over the borders of June 4, 1967 (before the outbreak of the Six-Day War, during which Israel took control of the West Bank and Gaza).

Fayyad is also seeking a new Security Council resolution to replace Resolutions 242 and 338 in the hope of winning the international community's support for the borders of a Palestinian state and applying stronger pressure on Israel to withdraw from the West Bank.

Several Israeli officials told Haaretz that Fayyad had spoken to them of positive responses he had received over the plan from prominent EU member states, including the United Kingdom, France, Spain and Sweden. Fayyad added that he presented the proposal to the U.S. administration and did not receive any signal of opposition in response.

Netanyahu's "kitchen cabinet" has held a number of meetings on the matter in recent months. "It's a very dangerous move," said a senior Israeli foreign-policy official. "More and more cabinet ministers understand that diplomatic inaction on Israel's part is likely to bring international support for the Fayyad program."

Israeli sources said Netanyahu discussed the proposal in meetings with U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and special Mideast envoy George Mitchell and requested that the U.S. tell Fayyad that it would not support his proposal and would veto it in the Security Council. Netanyahu has yet to receive a clear response from Washington on its stance on Fayyad's plan.

Netanyahu is to arrive in Washington today for a brief visit. He is scheduled to address the United Jewish Communities General Assembly, preceded by Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

On Tuesday Netanyahu is to fly to Paris, where he is scheduled to meet with President Nicolas Sarkozy on Wednesday. The prime minister's Paris visit comes just two days before that of Syrian President Bashar Assad, who will also meet with Sarkozy. Netanyahu has not signaled interest in renewing negotiations with Damascus, but stagnation in talks with the Palestinians may force him to do so.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu, a mediator between Israel and Syria during Ehud Olmert's term as prime minister, said Friday in Paris that Turkey seeks to resume its role as an intermediary between the two countries, and that his government can be an "honest broker" in such talks.

Netanyahu has expressed reluctance over Turkish mediation due to ongoing diplomatic tension between Ankara and Jerusalem.

Wow! No there's an idea

As a Palestinian I'd love to have Israel/Palestine become one country.
I can imagine one day walking down a street in Tel Aviv and spotting someone like, say, Steven Spielberg.
I'd run up to him and literally rub my elbow against his and I'd be like, "Hi, there, fellow citizen. How's your day going?"
He'd probably be disgusted by my behavior but, oh, who cares?!
Or how about Barbra Streisand? Seinfeld? Billy Crystal?
Goodness, the possibilities are endless!

It's a singular irony that the very success of Zionism might well spell the end of Israel as a "Jewish State." Israeli policy in the occupied territories has rendered the two state solution an impossible dream. The labyrinth of "jewish roads" and Jewish settlements has destroyed the prospect of a viable Palestinian state. The only solution for the Israelis is a genocidal forced expulsion of Palestinian peoples ("ethnic cleansing") or an accomodation that admits all, jews & arabs, into a secular state. Because the first option is so horrendous, one hopes that Israeli leaders will come to their senses and finally embrace the second option, which is the only real road to "peace in the Middle East."

The only thing which justifies Israel in its present form as a "Jewish state" is the spurious logic of Zionism, an outmoded 19th doctrine of ethnic nationalism. If "Jews" have a right to an exclusivist state, then, by the same logic Germans, Croatians and every other "ethnic group" must be similarly entitled. Indeed, by the same logic Palestinians would enjoy exclusive rights to Palestine. It's obvious that exclusivist ethnic claims, to land and civil rights, can only lead to bloodshed. Let's hope that the Israelis will finally understand this truth which has been confronting them since 1948.

The day is coming when there will be one Israeli state of jews & Arabs & anyone else who happens to reside in the country. And this will be a very good thing...

The myth of a two-state solution must be exposed. The world cannot afford to have "Jewish" states or "Muslim" states or "Christian" states. Religious states are inherently anti-democratic and militaristic, as Israel’s experiment demonstrates. Furthermore, Israel is hiding behind the "Jewish" state in order to brand its critics as anti-semites whenever they criticize Israel's policies. If Israel were simply a sectarian state, any criticism of it would be simply that--criticism of a state. Just as we criticize China, the US, or Russia, we should also be able to criticize Israel without the anti-semitism smoke screen. Israel gets a lot of mileage out of its Jewish statehood, and then uses it to perpetuate war crimes around the world. A one-state solution, with all religions equally respected and all ethnicities having equal rights, will be the only hope for peace and justice in the Middle East.

At the start of President Obama's "talking to Israel" I wrote that Mr. Netanyahu would make mincemeat of our new President because Obama is no match for that wily old fox. That has now come to pass. The apparent decision of Mr. Abbas not to talk with Israel and not to run again is the first foreign policy initiative of Obama which has crashed and lies there in shambles. I believe it has failed irretrievably as long as President Obama sticks to the promises he made in his speeches to AIPAC.

When the U.S.S. America sinks, rises into Revolution, Palestine will ascend from it's grave and live again.

Zionism is a cancer, a curse, whose victims are Arab and Jew alike.

We are edging closer to a civilizational/religious war; With Love, From Israel.

The last thing Israel would want is a single state that combines the populations of Israel with those of Palestine (which would include Israel itself, the Occupied Territories, and the members of the diaspora); such an arrangement would put Palestinians in the majority!
I believe that there are already a number of well-known Palestinians and others who see the one-state solution as the only solution because the settlements have shredded the West Bank into remnants and pieces that can't be sewn back into a Palestinian whole again. Such is the belief of Saree Makdisi, sometimes called the 'new' Edward Said, and author of the excellent book "Palestine, Inside Out". I recommend the book highly.

EQUAL RIGHTS FOR SERIAL KILLERS, AND THEIR VICTIMIS????

Can anyone see some ethical flaws with that?

http://poetryforpalestine.spaces.live.com/blog/cns!92AA638F9B6EA940!5195.entry

I have no authority to talk in the name of all Palestinians, but I have previously stated that I DO NOT wish the zionist murderers, those of whom who were directly or indirectly involved in massacres, theft of land, subjugation and oppression, to remain in Palestine after its liberation from the occupier, except of course for the very few good people amongst them -as no soul should carry the liability of another-

I reiterate, I do not wish the invader, occupier and criminal racists to stay in Palestine, the land that they have incessantly raped, destroyed and disfigured, nor do I desire them to be my neighbours

They have shown no respect, no appreciation, and no love to this land or to her people

They do not deserve to live there

Many of our supporters freak out upon hearing this declaration of mine, they think that I am becoming an uncaring person, or turning into a radical hardliner; and some curiously and attentively listen, then, timidly and modestly, try to understand

I will try here to elucidate by asking some simple questions, as to why I think it is unreasonable to make the premises of a JUST SOLUTION dependent upon our acceptance –as Palestinians, of giving the right of permanent residency and equal rights of citizenship to ALL zionist Jewish occupiers in our stolen land of Palestine

Here are my questions:

• Why do our supporters, progressives who advocate a one state solution, keep asking us –Palestinians- to share our land with those who ACQUIRED IT BY THEFT, MILITARY FORCE, AND MURDER?

• Would you SHARE your home with the ARMED ROBBER who came to STEAL from you?

• Should a THIEF get to enjoy the SAME RIGHTS of OWNERSHIP to materials and assets that he acquired by ARMED ROBBERY, as the person whom he robbed?

• Should a colonialist imperialist occupier regime, who keeps hold of countries by terrorizing the indigenous population and perpetrating endless scores of bloodshed, not be severely sanctioned as legislated wisely by International Law ?

• Should USA decided to move a few dozens of millions of its citizens to Iraq or Afghanistan, confiscate Iraqi lands, give it to those colonizers, then demands that those citizens have equal rights with Iraqis or Afghanis; should we support the equal rights of those colonizers?

• Should the Algerians have waited for the French occupiers to be magnanimous enough to give them "equal rights”?

• Would Algeria be to the Algerians today, had they not fought for the liberation of their country against colonial France?

• Under International Law; is an occupying entity entitled to ANY RIGHTS whatsoever?

• Why defend the “RIGHT” of the BARBARIC OCCUPIER -who has been engaged in ethnic cleansing and genocide for over six decades, TO STAY IN PALESTINE after its liberation , and this WHILE KEEPING LAND and houses, villages, archaeological treasures, churches and mosques, libraries, they’ve FORCIBLY STOLEN AT GUN-POINT?

• Why imagine that it is UNREALISTIC to return the stolen land and property to its legitimate owners while ignoring its MODE of ACQUISITION by zionists?

• Why instead of defending the right Palestinians to get ALL their country back; including: homes, orchards and land, supporters ask the victims to keep on giving, by the supposition that returning back stolen property creates "another injustice" to the OCCUPIER?

• Why are we –Palestinians- continuously pressed to accept this scurrilous logic, by our supporters?

• Are people so naïve that they don't realize that doing so, invariably corresponds in fact to... a full SUPPORT -quasi unconditional, of the ZIONIST thieves and their IDEOLOGICAL CORE which deems colonising Palestine as a “DIVINE AND HISTORICAL RIGHT” for the JEWISH PEOPLE ?

• What does the notion of JUSTICE, social responsibility, fair dealing mean if we are to equate CRIMINALS with VICTIMS in terms of RIGHT TO OWNERSHIP of STOLEN PROPERTY?

My logic is simple:

Supporting "equal rights" in which the OCCUPIER gets the privilege of staying in the land they’ve looted and destroyed, while keep holding of the estate of absentees, would mean grave violation of the fundamentals of ethical foundations of human social interaction

The message it gives: bullies, criminals, thieves are allowed to get away with MURDER…. literally !

It is a carte blanche for bullies to do what they like, steal, kill, colonize, rape, oppress, torture...

Advocating "equal rights" between the CRIMINAL and VICTIM, in which the CRIMINAL ESCAPES PUNISHMENT for his crimes, gets to KEEP STOLEN LANDS, while being rewarded by enjoying the fruits of his aggression in terms of TOTAL PARTICIPATION IN DECISION AND LAW MAKING in the land he abused, is an ASSASSINATION of the concept of JUSTICE, on which peaceful Civilization is built and needs to prosper

Furthermore, I reiterate; any future decision on the status of ILLEGAL COLONIZERS in Palestine should be a PALESTINIAN DECISION; they, and ONLY they, can choose whether to allow their tormentors to stay or not

.

Sure, and the one state is Palestine. There is no such thing as "Israel" anyway - a political and historical fiction. My old globe from when I was a kid shows Palestine at the east end of the Mediterranean, and Palestine it is. I recognize Palestine.