The trial balloon floated in the NY Times (the Haaretz of America) of Obama's "Peace Plan" is totally unacceptable. Why?
1. It postulates the 1949 Armistice Lines (called the 1967 lines) as the borders, which the armistice agreements absolutely negated.
2. Jerusalem is to be the capital of both states.
3. No return of Arab "refugees" to Israel, which they never expected anyway, but no limit to their return to "Palestine".
4. As an afterthought, unspecified security arrangements.
This is not a plan for peace. It is a plan for Israeli suicide. Why?
A. It would leave 500,000 to 600,000 Jewish Israelis behind the border. If you want an idea of what they will face, just look at what Christians are facing now in Egypt, Iraq, Pakestan and Syria.
B. It mentions nothing about a demilitarized "Palestine". It would put rockets, mortars, Kassams and Grad missiles inches away from Jewish population centers in Jerusalem, Kfar Saba, Tel Aviv and Ben Gurion Airport. Even if Abu Mazen will not shoot them himself, how would he stop terrorists? The way they stop them in Gaza?
C. It would leave the eastern border from the Jordan valley down to Akaba-Eilat open to massive smuggling of weapons into "Palestine", just the way it is happening in Gaza.
D. As soon as democratic elections are held in "Palestine" Hamas will win them, as they did in Gaza.
E. How long will it take for the Sovereign State of Palestine to demand that all Israeli soldiers leave its territory? A day?
F. How long will it take for Palestine to demand that Israeli military and civilian airplanes stop overflying its airspace? a week? And then to ask friendly nations to send their airforces to enforce no fly zones? If someone tries that, what do you think will happen when they meet the Israeli airforce, the best in the world? (Not as a prediction, but as a history lesson, in the War of Independence the British sent their warplanes to help the Egyptians. The fledgling Israel airforce shot down 6 Spitfires in one battle, and the British didn't try again.)
G. How long will it take Palestine to cut off Israel's water supplies?
H. Would international forces prevent any of the above? Just look at UNIFIL in Lebanon. While Hezbollah has amassed 60,000 missiles and emplaced them all over southern Lebanon, UNIFIL hasn't located even one. But it protests every Israeli overflight to gather intelligence as a violation of sovereign Lebanese airspace. An international force would not prevent terrorist attacks, but would only make it more difficult for Israel to defend itself.
Thus, if Obama comes up with such a proposal, the answer must be an immediate NO, which the Prime Minister can thereafter explain when he speaks to the joint session of Congress. There must be no delay in saying NO, without any ambiguity.
We are told that Israel must come up with concessions to avoid UN recognition of a Palestine State. The answer to that is that no conceivable Israeli concession or compromise will prevent the UN General Assembly from voting by an overwhelming majority to recognize "Palestine". So we may as well start from our strongest position and not weaken our opening position in any eventual negotiations.
Rashi's commentary on the first words of the Bible foresaw just such a contretemps. He asked: Since the first positive commandment in the Bible is in the Book of Exodua, why does the Bible start with Genesis? It is so that when the nations of the world accuse the Jews of stealing the land of others, we can reply, The earth belongs to the Lord, the Creator. He gave portions of it to various nations and He gave the Land of Israel to us."