Olmert Talks of ’67 Borders and Sharing Jerusalem, Sort Of « Tikun Olam-תיקון עולם: Make the World a Better Place

Olmert Talks of ’67 Borders and Sharing Jerusalem, Sort Of

You are currently browsing comments. If you would like to return to the full story, you can read the full entry here: “Olmert Talks of ’67 Borders and Sharing Jerusalem, Sort Of”.

Tags: 1967-borders, ehud-olmert, right-of-return

This entry was posted on Wednesday, January 2nd, 2008 at 11:26 PM and is filed under Mideast Peace, Politics & Society. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.

8 Responses to “Olmert Talks of ’67 Borders and Sharing Jerusalem, Sort Of”

Joachim Martillo says:

January 3, 2008 at 12:30 AM

I discuss the history of Jewish attitudes to Jerusalem in Gary Rosenblatt: Noah Feldman and the Confrontation of American with Jewish or Zionist Values.

Reply
DP says:

January 3, 2008 at 5:59 AM

I’m guessing that Olmert may be getting pressure from some pockets of the American Jewish community that are fed up with Israel dragging its feet on a viable two-state solution. Any indications of this from your sources?

Reply
MH says:

January 3, 2008 at 7:39 AM

Israel is not only opening up to a two-state resolution, it is also interested in peace talks with other Muslim countries….

“Following a softening of the Bush administration’s opposition to Israeli-Syrian contacts, the Israeli government is actively exploring the possibility of reopening negotiations with Syria, according to Israeli sources and a senior Republican lawmaker who visited Damascus last week……”

Reply
MH says:

January 3, 2008 at 7:41 AM

Sorry, forgot to post the source of the Israeli-Syrian peace talk article:

http://www.forward.com/articles/12392/

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

January 3, 2008 at 12:34 PM

DP: Gee, I don’t know about American Jewish leaders pressuring Olmert. If anyone’s pressuring him it’s Condi. The only American Jews who would pressure him in a positive way would be the peace forces like Israel Policy Forum, etc. & I doubt they can muster much in the way of pressure. But it would be nice to think that some of the mainstream leaders WERE fed up & clamoring for change in Israeli policy. Would that it were so (& maybe it is–who knows).

Reply
bar_kochba132 says:

January 3, 2008 at 12:42 PM

Richard, you are quite right to say that Abbas will not give up the “right of return”. However, in an earlier thread, you stated that you want a “partial” or “limited” return ( I don’t recall which term you used). The Palestinians can rightfully ask you “who are you to determine which Palestinians can return and which can’t if they ALL have an inherent right to return”. Either such a right exists or it doesn’t exist. Allowing only 100,000 or 500,000 is not going to assuage them. You know that. And once Israel agrees to recognize ANY form of “right of return”, then Israeli itself is admitting that its creation is a historic crime, as Abbas said on last Naqba Day (“the creation of the state of Israel is the greatest crime in the history of mankind”). I think you are the one who is not being realistic and it is patronizing for you or any other non-Palestinian to dictate terms to them, if you believe they are right.

Reply
bar_kochba132 says:

January 3, 2008 at 12:50 PM

I forgot to add that the article says Olmert talks about “dividing’ Jerusalem, not using the euphemism “sharing” which you and others have taken to using in order to make tearing the city apart sound more palatable. I don’t know what language the interview was in, but I do know NO ONE in Israel talks about “sharing” Jerusalem, they all say “halukat Yerushalayim” which means division, and “division” everyone knows means going back to the barbed wire, minefields, anti-sniper walls that existed before the Six-Day War. As late at 1999, both Labor and MERETZ officially opposed dividing the city, but Oslo has managed to convince at least part of the population that it is worth having terror, rocket attacks and violence directed the civilian population so long as this gives Israel the coveted title of “victim” which the Palestinians currently are monopolizing in “progressive” discourse.

Reply
Richard Silverstein says:

January 3, 2008 at 1:05 PM

Either such a right exists or it doesn’t exist. Allowing only 100,000 or 500,000 is not going to assuage them. You know that.

I “know” no such thing. History is full of examples of intractable conflicts between sides who felt they had absolute non-negotiable rights which they later compromised over in order to resolve the conflict. That’s what will happen here. Sure, some Palestinians & their extreme supporters will never give up on an absolute Right of Return just as some settlers & Israeli nationalists will never give up on their maximalist demands. But they won’t block a resolution of the conflict.

And of course it is not patronizing for Israel to play a role in determining how many & who will return since the returnees will be returning to Israel & living under Israeli sovereignty. But the process will have to be mutual with both sides playing roles in outlining the process.

and “division” everyone knows means going back to the barbed wire, minefields, anti-sniper walls that existed before the Six-Day War.

I do so enjoy those grand, sweeping presumptuous phrases like “everyone knows” when you really mean “I believe.” Barbed wire & minefields are YOUR vision, not mine. The real future when it comes will not look the way you paint it. Maybe it will not be a bed of roses or Gan Eden, but it will be considerably different. And within a number of years of a settlement there will be normal relations bet. Israel & the Palestinians & those features you note will be all but forgotten by everyone but the old timers like you & me.

Reply