New Palestine - An idea for Middle East peace
A peace plan that Israel could carry out unilaterally:
1. Carve out a chunk of northern Israel such that any reasonable person would say it is a fair swap for the West Bank and Gaza. A line drawn west from somewhere on the Israeli-Jordanian border to the sea.
2. Declare that in 10 years, this land will be New Palestine and the West Bank and Gaza will become part of Israel.
3. Slowly begin evacuating Israeli citizens from New Palestine while at the same time offering inducements (free house, land, cash, etc.) to encourage Palestinians to voluntarily move to New Palestine, starting with the Palestinians living in Jerusalem and northern Gaza.
4. After a few years, take over Jerusalem and northern Gaza. Allow any remaining Palestinians in these areas who want to stay a chance to, deport any troublemakers to the "old" Palestine.
5. Repeat step (4) with the rest of Gaza and the West Bank over and over until Israel has taken over the entire West Bank and Gaza.
6. All the while, maintain peace and services as best as possible in New Palestine with some combination of Israeli, U.S., NATO, U.N. or even New Palestinian troops (Iraq occupation done right). Provide a stipend for residents of New Palestine to live comfortably on while getting established.
7. At the end of 10 years, allow the residents the option to vote out the peacekeepers/service providers or have them stay on.
Advantages:
1. Israel is a much more defensible country with only three neighbors.
2. The Palestinians have one contiguous country.
3. No more Israel-Lebanon border. Hezbollah is now bordering on New Palestine.
4. No more Israel-Syria border. Assad, meet your new neighbors.
5. No more problems from Gaza.
6. No endless negotiations, Israel could do this on its own (with financial aid from the U.S./U.N. for resettlement costs and inducements).
7. No need to evacuate Israeli settlers now living in the West Bank.
8. PEACE AT LAST (or at least a better chance for it).
Disadvantages:
1. Loss of nothern Israel obviously, along with its infrastructure and cities like Haifa (The Palestinians gain, though).
2. Disgruntled Palestinians who didn't want to move out of the West Bank and Gaza or live under Israeli rule (hopefully only a few hundred thousand if sufficient inducements were offered).
3. Disgruntled Israelis who liked living in northern Israel (can be offered their choice of land in reclaimed Gaza or West bank plus some cash to ease their pain).
That's my idea in response to a challenge to come up with one...what's yours?
1. Carve out a chunk of northern Israel such that any reasonable person would say it is a fair swap for the West Bank and Gaza. A line drawn west from somewhere on the Israeli-Jordanian border to the sea.
2. Declare that in 10 years, this land will be New Palestine and the West Bank and Gaza will become part of Israel.
3. Slowly begin evacuating Israeli citizens from New Palestine while at the same time offering inducements (free house, land, cash, etc.) to encourage Palestinians to voluntarily move to New Palestine, starting with the Palestinians living in Jerusalem and northern Gaza.
4. After a few years, take over Jerusalem and northern Gaza. Allow any remaining Palestinians in these areas who want to stay a chance to, deport any troublemakers to the "old" Palestine.
5. Repeat step (4) with the rest of Gaza and the West Bank over and over until Israel has taken over the entire West Bank and Gaza.
6. All the while, maintain peace and services as best as possible in New Palestine with some combination of Israeli, U.S., NATO, U.N. or even New Palestinian troops (Iraq occupation done right). Provide a stipend for residents of New Palestine to live comfortably on while getting established.
7. At the end of 10 years, allow the residents the option to vote out the peacekeepers/service providers or have them stay on.
Advantages:
1. Israel is a much more defensible country with only three neighbors.
2. The Palestinians have one contiguous country.
3. No more Israel-Lebanon border. Hezbollah is now bordering on New Palestine.
4. No more Israel-Syria border. Assad, meet your new neighbors.
5. No more problems from Gaza.
6. No endless negotiations, Israel could do this on its own (with financial aid from the U.S./U.N. for resettlement costs and inducements).
7. No need to evacuate Israeli settlers now living in the West Bank.
8. PEACE AT LAST (or at least a better chance for it).
Disadvantages:
1. Loss of nothern Israel obviously, along with its infrastructure and cities like Haifa (The Palestinians gain, though).
2. Disgruntled Palestinians who didn't want to move out of the West Bank and Gaza or live under Israeli rule (hopefully only a few hundred thousand if sufficient inducements were offered).
3. Disgruntled Israelis who liked living in northern Israel (can be offered their choice of land in reclaimed Gaza or West bank plus some cash to ease their pain).
That's my idea in response to a challenge to come up with one...what's yours?
posted by alphie at 3:45 AM
2 Comments:
Guess where Israelis get their water...from the north. Flawed plan from the getgo if Palestinians would determine how much water Israelis are allowed to use.
Re: Your question at MJT
"Do the Palestinian refugees get to vote in Lebanese elections?
Wikipedia is not a good source for information but under http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_refugee
you will see a few answers regarding Palestinian citizenship/ voting rights in some countries.
Call Palestinians 'refugees', then sign up for and collect humanitarian aide from the UN; or call Palestians citizens with some civil and human rights and the host state, especially if a small democratic state, may become the hostage of radical beliefs. Hamas is playing the Palestinian game in Lebanon.
It's hard to block water from flowing to a well-armed country, anon.
Dams are easily destroyed these days.
Israel "depends" on Syria and Hezbollah for its water as it is. I doubt the Palestinians who moved north voluntarily would be worse stewards of the Levant's water supply.
Post a Comment
<< Home