When you read this article in Ha’aretz, if your reaction isn’t “Israel signed WHAT?!?”, then you probably shouldn’t be reading this blog.
The Israeli government has promised in writing not to prevent cargo from entering and leaving the Gaza Strip, regardless of the security situation inside Israel, according to a paper prepared by the World Bank for a conference of donor nations that will take place in London on Wednesday.
The paper states that during negotiations with James Wolfensohn, the Quartet’s envoy for the disengagement, Israel submitted a non-paper in which it stated that the Karni Checkpoint, which is the principal cargo terminal between Israel and Gaza, “shall operate in an uninterrupted manner in order to facilitate the transit of cargo and goods. The crossing will not be shut down completely unless situations arise which pose a security threat to the crossing, to people in its area, or when it is suspected it may be used as a passage for security threats.”
In the non-paper, Israel also promised never to close the Erez and Karni Checkpoints at the same time unless there is a simultaneous security threat to both checkpoints, or there is reason to believe that both checkpoints may be used as a passage for security threats simultaneously. Erez is the main crossing for people moving between Gaza and Israel.
Tell me why, again, I should vote Republican in the next election? Truly, I’m not seeing a difference between Bush’s Israel policy and Clinton’s. Right now, the Bushies are coming down hard on Israel to keep the crossings open regardless of whether or not there are massive terror attacksin Israel, and to open up those West Bank-Gaza convoys, in spite of evidence of terrorists moving into and out of the territories.
All of these agreements are unbelievable to me, both that the Bush Administration pushed them, and the Sharon Administration signed them. This is not a peace agreement. It is a recipe for terror attacks. And it gets worse:
Both the World Bank’s paper and an American working paper drafted for the London conference demand that if Israel does need to close Karni for some reason, it must allow cargo to be sent through Erez instead, so as to avoid a situation in which Gaza is completely cut off. Similarly, the papers demand that Israel allow people to move through Karni if it needs to close Erez for any reason.
The American paper proposes similar back-up arrangements for the crossings between Israel and the West Bank (Jalameh, Tarqumiya and Tul Karm): If one of the crossings has to be closed for security reasons, another will be opened in its place. The paper also proposes that neither side be able to close the crossings because of a holiday more than 10 days per year.
The American paper suggests that every terminal have both an Israeli and a Palestinian liaison officer, as well as an ombudsman to deal with complaints about the terminal’s operation.
These are not the agreements that protect a state from terrorist attacks. These are the agreements that two states at peace make, knowing full well that there are no risks from either state.
I cannot believe that Israel signed these documents. What kind of moron was in charge here? What kind of threats did Condi Rice use to get this done?
I simply don’t understand how the Bush Administration can think that this will not result in dead Jews. It will. Right now, the operative question is: How many?
Condi in 2008? Shyeah. Over my dead and buried bones, I’d vote for her.
Truly difficult to understand why either the US or Israel would agree to these arrangements. Hopefully, they know something that we don’t know. On the other hand maybe, as you point out, it is simply suicide.
Dry Bones
Israel’s political comic strip since 1973
I, too, hope there is an understanding that when “Palestine” crosses some unpublicized line in the sand, the U.S. will, finally, stand back and let Israel defend herself.
Washington: Rice pudding
Obviously congressmen can be as ignorant about affairs they meddle in as their constituents who only read about them.
Perhaps the operative words are the ones that I marked in bold. Since the Palis have already acted in such a manner as to cause us to suspect it is being used as a passage for security threats, the terminal can now be closed down at any time.
While I agree with you that the Bushies are pressing Israel into these dangerous agreements do you think it would be any better with say John Kerry running the show? While I am pissed at how Bush as been acting towards Israel this second term, I would think it would be worse for Israel if someone like Kerry or a Howard Dean was running the show. Basically Israel always gets the short end of the stick no matter who is living in the white house. It is just that some are worse than others.
I don’t believe any of this.
More reason not to believe this. Akiva Eldar the “reporter” is an anti Zionist polemic who works at Haaretz. He is never right on anythihng.
Meryl, I’m not sure if you saw this, but I thought it’s something you might find interesting:
http://www.eyeontheun.org/view.asp?l=21&p=142#01
Condi had an Op-Ed in the Washington Post positing that the greatest danger to US national security is weak and failing states. So what does the US do? Push as hard as possible for the creation of ANOTHER weak, failing state. What is WRONG with these people?
How bad are things in the PA today? Khaled Abu Toameh reports in the Jerusalem Post that Christians in Bethlehem are asking HAMAS to protect them against a rumored Christmas attack by Zarqawi; Bethlehem’s mayor is trying to discredit the rumors by attributing them to “collaborators” with Israel.
Sabba Hillel–
The Israeli position reported in the Ha’aretz article isn’t so bad, for the reason that you state. The real problem is the reported positions of the US and the World Bank–that, no matter what the security situation, at least one crossing must always be kept open.
My sense is that Sharon usually blinks in these stare-downs with the Bush Administration. It will be interesting to see whether, with elections in the offing, he stays true to form.
I have to say that this “news item” wasnt repeated in any other newspaper.
Any Jew who votes Democratic is an idiot….pure and simple. Think its bad now…if you had a Dhimmicrat in office Israel would be in serious jeopardy with the likes of ANSWER, ISM, MOVEON.org Dhimmis running the Party of Surrender oh I mean Democrats.
Well Robert that means 76% of American Jews are idiots. That’s the percentage who voted Dem last year.
Not that I disagree with you. The penchant of Jews to continue voting liberal and left in this day and age seems to me a contradiction of our reputation for high average intelligence. I wish they would notice that FDR is no longer on the Democratic ticket.
Let me make it quite clear: I don’t want to see words like “Dhimmicrat” on my blog.
I don’t give a damn if you don’t like the Democrats. I don’t care if you don’t like the “Rethuglicans.” Neither term is welcome here. It’s breaking the no-flaming rule. The one that’s in every comment box.
Listen Meryl, you’re getting unnecessarily out of shape on this. The key word in this Paper is “Unless”. This stipulation word has always worked for Israel in the past, because it’s always up to Israel and Israel only, to determine when “Unless” qualifies. Reread it again, this time taking note where it appears.
We’ve got some pretty clever Joo Shysters over here. The smart part of negotiation is always to make your opponent feel big, while you shtump them…
Hag Sameach.
Israel blinks.