Will Israel ever pull back to 1967 borders?

[andyandy]

This seems to me to be the only pertinent question with regards to the question of there ever being peace in the middle east. Of course, it's perfectly possible that even with a withdrawal to 1967 borders that there will be continued violence and conflict, but without such a withdrawal it seems that there is approximately 0 chance of any long-lasting peaceful settlement.

So, what would a withdrawal to 1967 borders actually entail? How many Israeli settlements are built on occupied territory? How big is the area relative to the rest of Israel?

In terms of economic cost, the international community would I am sure be willing to stump up a blank cheque if there was a genuine chance of peace. In terms of political will, there is a pan Arabic agreement to spearhead any peace agreement based on 1967 borders. So, is there any chance of it ever happening? For those who say that the cost to Israel is too great, is it greater than another 40 years of perpetual conflict and uneasy truce?

(Any novel solutions also welcomed: how about a massive reclaimation of land from the sea similar to the artificial island construct in Dubai? Seeing as how the fundamental problem is too many people wanting to live on too small a strip of land, how about creating some more? )

 

[BenBurch]

Some day, there will be no Israel. Not making a prediction of incipient doom, just noticing that even Rome fell.

So, given that all things change I would not ever rule out there some day being an entity called Israel conforming more-or-less to those borders. But that government would have about as much to do with the present entity called Israel as the government of Egypt has with Ptolemy II.

 

[Thunder]

Yes...with a 5-7 % adjustment and land swapping with Palestine.

 

[gtc]

You may as well ask if Germany and Poland will ever return to their 1914 borders

Yes...with a 5-7 % adjustment and land swapping with Palestine.

I think so too.

There is nothing magical about the 1967 borders - they are not necessarily the practical border.

 

[Thunder]

Will Israel ever leave the Sinai and their settlements there?

Oh, wait, they already did.

 

[geni]

There are some very large settlements so no but something close could probably be sorted out with regards to the west bank. Golan heights and syria are more problematical.

 

[Thunder]

Yes. The Golan Heights are very problematic. There are pretty mountains and ski slopes and green hills. Israelis love the Golan Heights.

This is a problem.........but not for people who want peace.

 

[geni]

Yes. The Golan Heights are very problematic. There are pretty mountains and ski slopes and green hills. Israelis love the Golan Heights.

This is a problem.........but not for people who want peace.

No the problem is "people who want peace" does not appear likely to include Syria any time soon.

 

[Thunder]

They could have said the same thing about Egypt in 1979.

The Arab League, which includes Syria, offered full peace for full withdrawal (minor adjustments allowed).

Israelis and right-wing Zionists need to stop reaching for excuses to not make peace.

 

[Toke]

Yes. The Golan Heights are very problematic. There are pretty mountains and ski slopes and green hills. Israelis love the Golan Heights.

I throught there were nice bunkers too, like in defensible border.

Israel was a lousy idea, but now the world is stuck with it.
I find it more likely that there will be another 50-100 years of fighting before the palestinensians are cleared out.

The people on both sides might prefer peace and a quert life, but not the leaders.

 

[gtc]

In theory, the state of Palestine is no more unsustainable than the state of Singapore. Unfortunately, there is not yet the will to see it succeed.

 

[Ziggurat]

This seems to me to be the only pertinent question with regards to the question of there ever being peace in the middle east.

Then you are a fool. Whether or not Israel should withdraw to its 1967 borders, and whether or not doing so would help, there is simply no reason to believe that this would actually stop the violence, and lots of reasons to believe it would not. The idea that if only one party would do this one thing then there would be peace is a delusion. It is not unique to this conflict, but this particular manifestation has been particularly persistent.

 

[andyandy]

Then you are a fool. Whether or not Israel should withdraw to its 1967 borders, and whether or not doing so would help, there is simply no reason to believe that this would actually stop the violence, and lots of reasons to believe it would not. The idea that if only one party would do this one thing then there would be peace is a delusion. It is not unique to this conflict, but this particular manifestation has been particularly persistent.

perhaps you couldn't be bothered to scroll down through the minimal number of lines posted before shooting off the usual insults that sadly normally accompany any attempt to discuss this topic.

Here is what I actually said:

This seems to me to be the only pertinent question with regards to the question of there ever being peace in the middle east. Of course, it's perfectly possible that even with a withdrawal to 1967 borders that there will be continued violence and conflict, but without such a withdrawal it seems that there is approximately 0 chance of any long-lasting peaceful settlement.

I'm perfectly willing to allow for the fact that violence may continue even if Israel withdrew to 1967 borders, but I am simply arguing that no long-lasting peaceful settlement will be possible without such a move. If you think that Israel pulling back to 1967 borders will have absolutely no impact whatsoever on the probability of a long-lasting peaceful settlement, then please explain why, preferably without the insults, I would be interested to see your argument.

 

[Ziggurat]

perhaps you couldn't be bothered to scroll down

I could and I did.

I'm perfectly willing to allow for the fact that violence may continue even if Israel withdrew to 1967 borders,

In other words, it wouldn't bring peace.

but I am simply arguing that no long-lasting peaceful settlement will be possible without such a move.

Actually, you are not arguing that. You are simply declaring that. You have not presented any arguments for why withdrawl to those borders (rather than even earlier borders, or even adjusted but similar borders) is required. And furthermore, it is NOT all you said. Let me repeat, once again with emphasis, what you originally said:
"This seems to me to be the only pertinent question with regards to the question of there ever being peace in the middle east."
Even if one accepts that an Israeli withdrawl to 1967 borders is a necessary condition, to think that this is the "only pertinent question" (your words) is simply folly. That was my point, and it is a point you are studiously avoiding. Your response seems to basically be that I should ignore one thing you wrote because you wrote other stuff too.

If you think that Israel pulling back to 1967 borders will have absolutely no impact whatsoever on the probability of a long-lasting peaceful settlement,

I rather explicitly did not predicate my response on the answer to that question, so it is irrelevant to my response.

then please explain why, preferably without the insults, I would be interested to see your argument.

Hamas is intent on the destruction of Israel. Peace is not possible as long as they hold to such a goal. An Israeli withdrawl will not change their minds about that. In fact, it is likely to solidify their decision to pursue violence, because it will be seen as vindication of the violence that they have pursued so far. Look at what has happened with the Gaza withdrawl if you want a blueprint of what is likely to happen.

 

[andyandy]

edit

 

[andyandy]

Leaving to one side the somewhat tortuous semantics over the context of " only pertinent" and whether this can be used for a cornerstone necessary condition or whether it can only be used for a necessary and sufficient condition, I'm not sure how much we actually disagree. Would you agree that a withdrawal to 1967 borders was a necessary condition for any long-lasting peace settlement? If you do not believe it is, what do you think the necessary conditions are?

With regards to the current situation in Gaza, Israel maintains an effective occupation of the territory through complete air, sea, and border control, which has reduced the strip to an effective prison camp from which movement out of is severely curtailed, and the movement of goods in is strongly regulated and restricted. It is hardly a " free" region from which conclusions can be drawn over extremist popularity were Israel to withdraw to 1967 boundaries.

 

[Ziggurat]

Would you agree that a withdrawal to 1967 borders was a necessary condition for any long-lasting peace settlement?

No, I would not, for reasons I already mentioned above. Hamas wants Israel destroyed. This has been their raison d'etre from the beginning. Peace will not arrive until they give that up, and if they're willing to give that up, they'll be willing to negotiate on the final border.

If you do not believe it is, what do you think the necessary conditions are?

For Palestinians to renounce terrorism. I do not expect that to happen any time soon. In fact, I expect it will take more violence and bloodshed than the Israelis are willing to inflict. I hope I am wrong, but I see absolutely no signs that I am. And I will not choose to believe something merely because it is comforting to believe it.

With regards to the current situation in Gaza, Israel maintains an effective occupation of the territory through complete air, sea, and border control

Gee, wonder why that might be? Hamas stepped up attacks after Israel withdrew settlements. And they'd do the exact same thing anywhere else. You can make all the excuses in the world about how mistreated the Palestinians are, but the fact remains, Hamas has chosen war every time they've had an opportunity. Their only ceasefires are hudnas.

It is hardly a " free" region from which conclusions can be drawn over extremist popularity were Israel to withdraw to 1967 boundaries.

Do you really understand so little about terrorism? It doesn't matter if an Israeli withdrawl makes Hamas unpopular (but don't count on it), the populace will remain cowed before them. It will be easier, not harder, for terrorists to wield power over the Palestinian populace in the absence of any Israeli pressence.

 

[RandFan]

This seems to me to be the only pertinent question with regards to the question of there ever being peace in the middle east. Of course, it's perfectly possible that even with a withdrawal to 1967 borders that there will be continued violence and conflict, but without such a withdrawal it seems that there is approximately 0 chance of any long-lasting peaceful settlement.

Nonsense. Many say that so long as there is an Israel there is 0 chance of any long-lasting peaceful settlement.

I reject the premise. Peace will require compromise and willingness to work for peace from both sides. That is the only real requirement. Preconditions are only a roadblock. It might be that Israel is willing to withdraw to the 1967 borders but starting out saying that it is the only hope for peace is the best way to ensure there never is peace.

I should note that the 1967 borders should not be taken off the table either.

 

[kallsop]

This seems to me to be the only pertinent question with regards to the question of there ever being peace in the middle east.

How far would Hamas rockets be able to reach inside Israel from the 1967 border? I really doubt that's a solution that makes sense for Israel, unless they are way more masochistic than most. More like a step towards the "final solution".

 

[Plagiarius]

What might be fair to say is that this recent spate of attacks by both sides will set the peace process back substantially especially regarding the radicalisation of war-torn Palestinians, some of whom have lost all their members of their family. It is circumstances such as these which spawn the next generation of suicide bombers and militants. Thus even if Israel do pull back to it's 1967 borders, would this really stop individuals with hatred for Israel and all jews (that is the extent) carrying out attacks on Israeli civilians etc?