Alex Christoforou
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
Left-wing congresswoman Ilhan Omar tweeted: “This is not a peace plan. It is theft. It is erasure.”
Immediately following Trump’s unveiling details of his ‘deal of the century’ Mideast peace plan alongside Israeli PM Netanyahu at the White House, Netanyahu announced that Israel will move forward to vote Sunday to annex some 30% of all West Bank territory.
Netanyahu said that “Israel will apply its laws to the Jordan Valley and to the Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria.” This means a million or so Palestinian residents could come under Israeli rule, which sparked a fierce backlash both internationally and among some members of US Congress.
“This is not a peace plan. It is theft. It is erasure,” Left-wing congresswoman Ilhan Omar tweeted following Trump and Netanyahu’s midday remarks.
It was immediately seen by many pundits as setting up Israeli hardliners for a big land grab which concedes all to Israel without even consulting the Palestinian side on the ‘deal’, per The Washington Post:
The package is expected to propose a redrawn border between Israel and the West Bank that would formalize Israeli control over large Jewish settlements. It would give U.S. blessing to some forms of Israeli security control over the territory Israel seized in 1967 and has occupied since, according to two people familiar with the plan who spoke on the condition of anonymity before the plan’s release.
Another Democrat, Michigan representative Andy Levin, slammed the plan for not in reality being a “two-state solution” – instead he noted it’s “in name only”.
“Don’t be fooled,” Rep. Levin wrote on Twitter. The proposed plan not is not promising “a lasting peace that will protect Israel’s future as a democratic homeland for the Jewish people or fulfill Palestinians’ aspirations for self-determination,” he said.
Aside from Hamas and the Palestinian Authority under Abbas immediately rejecting the plan to which they were not privy, nor had any negotiating role (after already declaring it would be dead on arrival), Turkey was among the first internationally to condemn it.
The Turkish Foreign Ministry called it “still-born” and further described it as “an annexation plan aiming to destroy the two-state solution and seize Palestinian territories.”
“The people and land of Palestine cannot be bought off,” the foreign ministry statement added.
It also appears there won’t be much support at the UN for the new plan: “U.N. Secretary-General Antonio Guterres says the United Nations remains committed to supporting Palestinians and Israelis in resolving their conflict on the basis of U.N. resolutions, international law and bilateral agreements,” the AP reports.
Referencing the the pre-1967 borders, UN spokesman Stephane Dujarric said, “The position of the United Nations on the two-State solution has been defined, throughout the years, by relevant Security Council and General Assembly resolutions by which the Secretariat is bound.”
The statements, views and opinions expressed in this column are solely those of the author and do not necessarily represent those of this site. This site does not give financial, investment or medical advice.
A deal it is not. It is a demand of surrender under a flag of peace. It is a subjugation and a pretty bad one at that. If Palestinians were daft enough to accept (or be forced), Israel won’t be long in writing Palestine out of history, off the map and a people out of existence. All Israel would do is declare every Palestinian an Israeli citizen and raise what has been an international issue as a domestic one and tell NATO where to go. This leaves Palestinians effectively pests to be contained and destroyed by Israel. Israel must have… Read more »
No, no, you’re quite wrong, C., it’s an incredibly generous deal. The Palestinians would be mad to reject it. They will get their own little Bantustan on a patch of desert the Jews don’t want, with a scruffy little village as its capital. Their borders, their air space, their roads, their foreign policy will all be taken care of for them. Provided, of course, that the Jews decide they have been sufficiently obedient and submissive and compliant to deserve all these riches in a few years time. All they have to do then is learn to like the Occupation, disband… Read more »
Of course. Just ask the Shawnee what it’s like to live in the USA.
Here is a fascinating look at how Israel controls the Palestinian narrative:
https://viableopposition.blogspot.com/2019/12/how-israel-controls-palestinian.html
By attacking and otherwise threatening Palestinian journalists, Israel can, to some degree, impact the media coverage of its aggressive actions against the residents of the West Bank and Gaza.
This was made possible because for decades the US Congress, US presidents, and European leaders have kow-towed to every demand from Israel, and turned a blind eye to the obscene human rights violations of the Jewish state. Western indifference to human rights has emboldened a charlatan like Trump to hand over Palestine to the Jews right before our eyes. Trump knew what he was doing, and knew he could get away with it because of the corruption and lack of integrity of the world’s leaders. Just whisper the word “anti-semitic” and they run for cover; mention the holocaust and the… Read more »
We are seeing the obscenities of Europes guilt for what was done to innocent Jews and other minorities being played large by devils in Israel. We see the same manefest destiny the US swore under wilson (who got it from looking to the UK and Europe) and here we are repeating history.
“Israeli security control over the territory Israel seized in 1967 “” Israél did NOT seize any land. It was ATTACKED by the usual “loving”arabs( syrian in this case) Syrians, like we in Europe have seen coming in with their rapes and absence of norms, or it must have been those of pedophile, murderer and raping role model mohammed. Israel has every right to be in control of a piece of land (highland) that costed may lives during Syrian attack. A strategic highland from which the low plain of Israel could be controlled as Syrian military thought it would be. That… Read more »
Israel was established on siezed land back in 1948. All land it occupies is siezed and always will be.
P.S Israel want the Golan for mineral rights not for any strategic need short of invading other lands.