Zipple - The Jewish Supersite






Events Calendar













Joke of the Week
Recipe of the Week
Quote of the Week
Tip of the Week




 





w.w.w. Zipple  

Click Here to Visit Artscroll.com!







Email Forwards


Home > Email Forwards > Details of Camp David negotiations...



Subject: Details of Camp David negotiations...
Source: MEMRI
Date Sent to Zipple:

>Abu Mazen discusses Jerusalem and the Refugees
> >In an article published by the London-based pan-Arabic daily Al-Hayat, >Secretary-General of the PLO Executive Committee, Mahmoud Abbas, aka >Abu >Mazen revealed some details of the Camp David negotiations over >Jerusalem >and the refugees. Following are excerpts from the article:

> >Jerusalem

> >"...In Camp David... the Israelis and Americans were releasing >test-balloons >regarding solutions to the Jerusalem issues…."

> >"In all of their proposals, they spoke of annexing more than one >quarter >within the walls; they focused on the Armenian quarter, assuming that >[the >annexation to Israel of] the Jewish quarter was a given."

> >"We categorically rejected all of these proposals, and so they dropped, >the >bomb of their demand for sovereignty over the Al-Haram [the Temple >Mount], >claiming that the remains of Solomon's Temple are in its square or >directly >underneath the Al-Haram Al-Sharif itself. They also demanded praying >privileges in the Al-Haram for a set number of people per day or per >week."

> >"We rejected this as well, but we agreed that they could pray next to >the >[Wailing] Wall, without acknowledging any Israeli sovereignty over it. >We >relied on the resolution of Britain's 1929 Shaw Commission. The >Commission >acknowledged that the Wall belongs to the Muslim Waqf, while the Jews >are >allowed to pray by it as long as they do not use a Shofar." (1)

> >"After the summit they demanded, through mediators, to establish a >small >synagogue in Al-Haram's square and said that they would be satisfied >with >that. When their proposal was rejected, they proposed that a Muslim >state >establish an installation on Temple Mount, part of which would be used >by >the Jews as a synagogue. However, we rejected this proposal as well."

> >"Afterwards, they proposed that the sovereignty [over the Temple Mount] >be >[given] to God and that neither side demand proprietorship. We rejected >this >proposal because God is sovereign of the Universe in its entirety; why, > >then, should His sovereignty be established specifically in this case? >In >fact, they wanted to establish it specifically in this case so that the > >sovereignty would return to them, since they, in their view, are the >closest >to God out of all the world's nations [i.e. 'the Chosen People']."

> >"Israel operates in such a way in order to indicate to its adversary or > >enemy that any demands of it are futile... it tries to cause its enemy >or >adversary to doubt his own rights and his ability to achieve them..."

> >"Some believed that erasing the [Israeli] 'redline' or 'taboo' on the >issue >of Jerusalem is a victory for us... the truth is that Israel has no >objection to opening up taboo issues in order to feel the other side's >pulse. Thus, they create an impression that it is Israel that makes >concessions and demonstrates flexibility, so that the other side is >expected >to answer in kind and begin the process of compromising..."

> >"Therefore, whatever achievements we may gain [by the erasing Israeli >taboos], we will end up the losers, because it is merely a negotiating >maneuver which cannot be perceived as a [Palestinian] victory or >achievement..."

> >"Our position on the issue of Jerusalem is simple: Jerusalem is part of >the >territories occupied in 1967 and, hence, Resolution 242 applies to it. >Jerusalem must return to our sovereignty and we will establish our >capital >on it. We have no objection that East and West Jerusalem will be open >to one >another and cooperate in municipal activities."

> >The Refugee Problem

> >"The issue of the refugees was at least as important as the Jerusalem >issue, >and judging by the results, maybe even more important and difficult. We > >encountered, and will encounter in the future, fierce resistance on >this >subject from the Israeli government, because the bottom line is that >[the >return of refugees] means altering the demographic character [of >Israel] >that the Israelis hope to preserve. In addition, recognition by Israel >of >the existence of a refugee problem entails an acknowledgment of >Israel's >responsibility for this humanitarian tragedy."

> >"The refugee issue is an Israeli taboo and Barak's foremost redline. >This >is the most prominent issue on which there is an Israeli consensus: >left, >right and center, religious and secular, new immigrants and old. >Therefore, >all the doors to this difficult problem are locked… [In Israel's view] >the >Refugee Problem is an Arab and international affair in which Israel >does not >have the slightest interest. This is the Israeli rhetoric as we see, >hear, >and read in all their media and in their leaders' statements."

> >"…The Israelis say how the Palestinians left their homeland of their >own >volition and after a call [to leave] by Arab and Palestinian leaders, >who >wanted to annihilate Israel."

> >"If compensation is needed, Israel will be delighted to put up an >international fund. It is even ready to participate in this fund in >order to >settle the refugees - outside of Israeli territory, of course - but >Israel >also states that there is a tragedy that is parallel to that of the >Palestinian refugees: the tragedy of the Jewish [immigrants] from Arab >countries. Israel claims that the international compensation should >include >these people and that the money should be divided equally between the >Palestinians and the Jews…"

> >"We, on the other hand, claim the following: paragraph 2b. of >Resolution 242 >says that 'achieving a just settlement for the refugee problem' is >necessary. There is no UN resolution dealing with the Refugee Problem >other >than General Assembly Resolution 194 from 1949 that states >'compensation >should be paid [...] for those who choose not to return.' The right of > >return has priority and whoever does not wish it, may demand >compensation. >It is noteworthy that the US kept bringing this resolution up each year > >until it was nicknamed the "American baby resolution."

> >"Testimony by Israeli new historians prove that the main reason for the > >exile of the refugees was the premeditated massacres committed by the >Zionist organizations in order to empty the land of its inhabitants..."

> >"Compensation should be paid by the Absentee's Property Fund that was >founded by Israel in 1949 in order to invest the money of the Arab >absentees >whose property was stolen. Therefore, compensation should go to those >who >wish to return as well: compensation for the use of their lands and for > >their suffering for fifty years and more. Naturally, this compensation >should also go to the refugee-hosting states: Jordan, Syria, Lebanon, >Egypt, >Iraq, and the PA."

> >When we entered the details of the number of refugees, the Israeli side > >claimed that no more than 150 thousand refugees left their homes. >However, >we confronted them with official international, and even Israeli, data.

> >According to UN figures, the number of refugees who left their homes >[in >1948] was 950 thousand, while official Israeli circles set the number >at 750 >thousand. Whatever the real number may be is irrelevant, since the >question >relates to the principle and the right.

> >It is noteworthy in this matter, and this is also what we clarified to >the >Israelis, that the Right of Return means a return to Israel and not to >the >Palestinian State… When we talk about the Right of Return, we talk >about >the return of refugees to Israel, because Israel was the one who >deported >them and it is in Israel that their property is found…" (2)

> >Endnotes:

> >(1) Although the violence erupted in August 1929, the Shaw Commission >submitted its report in March 1930, and recommended an International >Commission of Inquiry, which in its turn submitted its own report in >December 1930. This report declared the Muslim Waqf as the proprietor >of >the Wailing Wall and stated that Jewish prayer arrangements should be >in >accordance with the status quo. The Ottoman status quo prohibited the >use >of the Shofar by the Jews.

> >(2) Al-Hayat (London-Beirut), November 23, 2000 part I, November 24, >2000 >part II.













Israel

People & Cultures










About Zipple | Legal Stuff | Link to Us | Add Your URL | Advertising | Feedback | Contact Us