World, Writing, Wealth discussion

10 views
Wealth & Economics > Palestine - resolution at last?

Comments Showing 1-6 of 6 (6 new)    post a comment »
dateDown arrow    newest »

message 1: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 9273 comments Bibi claims he will be the next Prime Minister, and he has campaigned on annexing the settlements and linking roads, etc, which is effectively annexing the West Bank. Will he, or is this just talk? If he does, what happens next to the Palestinians? Will the Arabs go along with this, or do they hate Iran more? What does your crystal ball predict?


message 2: by Nik (last edited Sep 18, 2019 01:25AM) (new)

Nik Krasno | 13129 comments The vote count of the yesterday's elections continues and so far there is a draw between Bibi's Likud & a left-center party. Under any calculation (even b4 the final results), the only option will be the national unity government of both big parties & maybe some smaller ones to join. Bibi himself faces charges and will have a hearing b4 attorney general in a couple of weeks. As it looks now, we might see Bibi finishing his tenure quite soon. Or maybe not.
Trump is supposed to announce the political part of his "Deal of the century" soon after the elections. The economic part unveiled by Kushner in Bahrain envisages 50 billion USD investment in Palestinian projects & infrastructure. Abu Mazen flatly rejected it.
As it looks now - everyone's more or less comfortable with the situ and maybe only Americans can push something forward, leveraging lots of credit they have with Bibi.
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/2...
Abu Mazen - rejects anything and feels quite comfy as it is. Even reconciliation btw Palestinians: Fatah, Abu Mazen, West Bank vs Gaza, Hamas is not exactly achievable or working to start with.
Having a common enemy in the face of Iran is a good tailwind for strengthening relations btw Israel and the Arab world, which can intervene to enforce any deal on Palestinians above the heads of their leadership.
As of possible annexation of parts of the West Bank - if ultra rights are out of the government, it would lose a lot of its proponent force. The US will probably not back it too.
It should be remembered that regarding the West Bank: most of Palestinian population is in Area A (full Palestinian control) & B (joint) under Oslo accords, while Area C encompasses Israeli settlers, small Palestinian population and unpopulated areas. Annexing towns with Israeli population in Area C will not change factual situ anyway and the correction can be done later through swaps. Gaza is completely vacated by Israel unilaterally, however the move didn't prove itself, as Israel faces occasional missile barrages from there.
My own opinion - is that being complacent about Palestinian issue is not in Israel's best interest and it's better to be proactive rather than reactive.. Keeping it unresolved is a big burden, however you still need two for tango. There is currently no partner for negotiations on a Palestinian side, but Abu Mazen is already 83 years old and it's unclear for how long he can keep functioning...
Hopefully, this issue will be resolved amicably sometime soon.


message 3: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 9273 comments I don't know what the contents of the deal were that Abu Mazen rejected, but if he is rejecting deals without good reason he is not doing the Palestinians any favours. On the other hand, a bad deal is not one to accept - the size of the money is beside the point if it is of no end benefit to the Palestinians. If Abu Mazen is that old, is there an obvious successor?

After writing that first post, I saw another item on TV that said that the other big winner was prepared to join the Likud, but only if Bibi was gone. Bibi does not strike me as someone who will go quietly so maybe this situ will be unclear for some time?


message 4: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 13129 comments Ian wrote: "....If Abu Mazen is that old, is there an obvious successor?"

An obvious - not, as far as I know..

Ian wrote: "....the other big winner was prepared to join the Likud, but only if Bibi was gone. Bibi does not strike me as someone who will go quietly so maybe this situ will be unclear for some time?"

These are reelection after the previous round failed to result in a majority coalition. There are seem to be not many choices and two big parties would need to form a unity government. Somebody would need to blink first - either Netanyahu party or the other one. Strangely, the inability to form a coalition ensued from grandstanding btw secular & religious, rather than left & right


message 5: by Ian (new)

Ian Miller | 9273 comments As far as I can gather, Bibi had a lot of minority party support from the harder line religious - is that correct? If so, that might explain the grandstanding. I gather that one of the statements from Gantz was, "No Bibi". That leaves a problem if he sticks with it.


message 6: by Nik (new)

Nik Krasno | 13129 comments Ian wrote: "As far as I can gather, Bibi had a lot of minority party support from the harder line religious - is that correct? If so, that might explain the grandstanding. I gather that one of the statements f..."

Bibi also has support from the secular right Lieberman, who said he won't enter a coalition with religious parties (unless of course they accept a bunch of secular bills), so on paper Bibi can have a right majority in the parliament, but religious/secular antagonism would require another composition.
I hope that if Attorney General files the indictment after the hearing in a few days, Bibi will step down, like Rabin and Olmert did before him when suspected in criminal wrongdoing, but what do I know - the political culture (barbarianism) changed since


back to top