Tuesday, May 31, 2011

The Meaning of 1967 Lines

Nadene Goldfoot
Caroline Glick makes it very clear that going back to 1967 lines is giving into a policy that means everything else will be determined by giving into the Palestinians.  Going back to the 1967 lines means abdicating Israel's Jerusalem.  Jews and Christians couldn't enter before 1967.  This is the heart and soul of Israel.  How can anyone expect Israel to do that?  Going back to 67 lines means abdicating the cities established for over 30 years in Judea and Samaria.  No, this is impossible. 

Netanyahu had said that he would make concessions, but these most likely were not what he had in mind.  It reminds me of shuk bargaining.  When you are in the open markets in Israel, the seller asks an extremely high price, knowing he will come down, and the buyer give an extremely low price.  If the buyer wants it bad enough, they soon come to an agreeable price and the deal is made.  This is the way of all open markets there.  Abbas and Netanyahu are used to bargaining with items found in a shuk.  I know that Netanyahu knows he has to make a deal, but he isn't about to give away the baby with the bathwater.  A fair deal has to be made.  I doubt if Obama has ever experienced such bartering.  One has to have the mindset for it. 

First of all, this union of Fatah and Hamas clearly now is a union of not recognizing Israel and by uniting Fatah is accepting their charter of destroying Israel.  Netanyahu was trying to sit down with the Abbas to make peace but he won't even come to the table without Israel giving into the 1967 lines first.  This is not acceptable.  Yet it looks like most of Europe is also demanding this condition that none of them would accept for themselves. 

Fatah has been very busy behind the scenes getting countries all lined up to recognize their state while they won't recognize the 63 year old Israel.  They must feel that they don't need a peace pact with Israel.  They're going to get their own way regardless. 

http://www.jewishworldreview.com/0511/glick053111.php3 Caroline Glick

No comments: