Who will succeed Netanyahu as Israel's Prime Minister, and when?

[SATW]

I follow it very closely.

The short answer to both questions is that nobody really knows. Bibi is a master politician and has proven to be difficult to defeat. He's only lost two elections his long career (1999 elections and 2006 elections).

I say he will eventually retire from office. If the current term last all four years than I can see him retiring. That would be in 2019 (if this is the case, he will outlast Israel's Founder, David Ben-Gurion, as longest serving PM).

If a snap election is called before 2019, I say odds are he likely runs again (of course, this depends on the situation leading up to a snap election).

IF Bibi retires...than his party, the Likud, will likely have a clown car primary for leadership. Jerusalem Mayor Nir Barkat, Former Likud Cabinet Member Gideon Sa'ar, current Likud #2/Veteran Cabinet Member Gilad Erdan, and potentially others, would be potential candidates.

IF Bibi doesn't retire...I can see the veteran PM moving primary elections early (as he has always done) to avoid a challenge from someone like Sa'ar or even former Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon. Both men are former Bibi allies who now dislike him.

If Bibi runs...his main opposition will come from the Zionist Union (Labor + Hatnuah; Center-Left party) and Yesh Atid (Centrist).

The ZU is mainly made up of Labor, the center-left party, but since the beginning of the 21st century we have seen a big decline in the Israeli mainstream left's cohesiveness. The ZU leaders, Isaac Herzog and Tzipi Livni (charlie crist of israel) are both not very well liked within the alliance and Herzog has made some big gaffes and errors that may cost him the leadership soon. If he goes down than the ZU will collapse and Labor will run on it's own again.

Amir Peretz and Shelly Yachimovich are the two names I always see floated as potential people who would challenge Herzog. Both are failed Labor party leaders. They are mentor and protege, essentially, but Yachimovich has run and beaten Peretz in the past: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Israeli_Labor_Party_leadership_election,_2011

Erel Margalit, a Labor Member of Knesset, is someone I think may also potentially challenge Herzog but this is all just speculation until a leadership election happens. One of our Israeli posters would know more about that, though.

Yair Lapid, leader of Yesh Atid, is in solid position to jump the ZU for the second place slot. I personally think that Yesh Atid would lead a coalition that would topple Bibi's Likud. Yesh Atid is center to center-left but recently it's been drifting to the pure center or even slightly center-right.


Other parties include Kulanu (Center to center-right), Yisrael Beiteinu (secular nationalist right), The Jewish Home (Religious Zionism; Right-Wing), the Joint List (Arab interests; Anti-Israel/Anti-Zionism), Meretz (left-wing)and the religious bloc parties (Shas, United Torah Judaism, Yachad).

I think I explained things decently, but I'm an American Jew who follows it. I think one of our Israeli posters, Hnv1 and Danny, would bring excellent contributions to your questions. Both usually post in the Israel Maps/elections thread.


I'm a Bibi loyalist and a strong supporter of Likud and if/when Bibi retires...I want Nir Barkat to become the next PM.

[SATW]

https://knessetjeremy.com/

Also, this is a great blog to get some info on Israeli politics. The latest post is from 23 July and it shows the latest poll for the Knesset.

[SATW]

Yes, Bibi's potential corruption issues could prove to be problematic but at this time it is just speculation until a recommendation or indictment is made. I think he will be vindicated but that may be just wishful thinking (as I said, I'm a Bibi loyalist).



In response to your comments, Californiadreaming:

- I'm not sure if Bibi is actively trying to break the record but certainly I think he would like to.
- I'm not sure who would win because there are so many variables to look at. It will depend on how Bibi leaves (retirement, resignation, etc...etc...) as it completely changes the situation.
- Part of Bibi's cunning political reputation has to do with the fact that he kills off potential political opponents before they can threaten him. He's done this to many people already and Sa'ar is one of them. I don't know the exact specifics of the feud between them but both have certainly antagonized each other.
- Yes, Israeli public got tired of failed peace talks and increased terrorist attacks during the early 2000's.
- Labor's membership hates the alliance with Livni, so I don't it'll survive under a different leader. Livni is seen as insincere in her views. She was a major proponent of right-wing privatization in the 1990's, who than became a moderate in the 2000's and now is trying to be center-left lol.

I support Likud because I believe in a strong national security state. I believe Israel has exhausted many of it's diplomatic options and that peace cannot be made until corruption and extremism is ruled out of the Palestinian Authority. I certainly believe in peace and want a long-term peace solution but I don't think it's possible atm.  But, ideology is Israel is complicated and I'm certainly not Likud on every set of issues.
 

- I'm a strong Likudnik on foreign policy, counter-terrorism and national security.
- The Jewish Home and I agree more on settlements and justice issues.
- Yisrael Beiteinu's party is actually designed for people like me (Post-USSR Jews, who are either secular or just traditional but are ultra-nationalists) but I prefer Likud anyways.
- I'm closer to Kulanu/Yesh Atid on some religious issues and closer to Likud on others. (I'm somewhere in between, tbh).
- On some social issues, such as LGBT rights and marijuana legalization, I am closer to the Zionist Union and even Meretz.
- On the economy, I prefer Netanyahu's  Thatcher-esque policies (however, some members of Likud are not right-wing on economics). Kulanu's economics are ok as well.

Also, I just really like Netanyahu as a leader. He speaks the same style of language as American Jewish right-wing Zionists. He makes firm decisions, without coming off as a populist nut, and, imo, has done a good job of sticking up for Israel's interests. My family are mostly loyalists for him as well and that plays a role as well.

[SATW]

Hnv1, I'm curious, which party do you support (I'm assuming somewhere on the left lol).

[SATW]

I support a two-state solution, technically, but here are my requirements for one I would support: (It'd likely never happen, but I can dream).

What the PA would need to do:

- Fatah purges itself of any extremist elements
- Fatah recognizes Israel as a Jewish State AND denounces all forms of extremism towards Israel and its people.
- Fatah or another party (preferably a more moderate one) leads the PA (I actually would like to see Salam Fayyad be the PM of the PA, but this is never going to happen, sadly)
- The PA must prove that it would hold elections immediately after agreeing to a peace agreement. *
- Israel is allowed to keep limited security forces operating within a Palestinian state for 5 years to ensure radical islamic/Hamas influence is permanently purged. Also, only once this period ends can the PA have its own functional military (it can have a police force, to protect its citizen before/during/after that period, of course).
- Fatah needs to formally, officially, publicly etc... denounce/label Hamas as a terrorist organization and end it's "unity government" with it (which, unless I am mistaken, is still a thing...).
- The PA must reach trade agreements/similar arrangements with Israel, Jordan and/or Egypt for basic economic needs (water, energy etc...); I am sure this is something that the PA would want anyways.
- The PA/Fatah must end calls for a B.S. "right to return" for Palestinians within Israel.
- The PA/Fatah must end any attempt to divide Jerusalem; Jerusalem must remain the undivided capital of Israel.
- The PA/Fatah needs to stop giving financial welfare/alimony/support to the families of terrorists who have killed Israeli citizens.
- Ensure the protection and human rights of any minority populations (mainly christian minorities) within the border of a Palestinian State.
- The borders that are negotiated will be final. No swaps, no complaints, no more talks. This would be final.

* The only exception would be if Hamas is likely to take over the west bank's PA-controlled areas if an election was called. In fact, if this was the case I'd oppose ANY peace talks until Hamas' grip here is purged.

Some requirements for my map:
- Israel keeps ALL of Jerusalem and settlements near by (Mu'ale Adumim, Har Homa etc...)
- Israel keeps major settlements with big populations (Modiin Illit, Ariel, Gush Etzion, Givat Ze’ev, Kiryat Arba, Beitar Illit  etc...)
- Palestinian capital would be Ramallah and Israel dismantles any settlement that is considered to be close to Ramallah in geography (with the exception of Talmon and possibly Psagot)
- The following cities would, along with Ramallah, be apart of a Palestinian state with 100% certainty: Jenin, Jericho, Al-Bireh, Nablus, Tulkarm, Kalkliya and Bethlehem.
- Hebron must be negotiated, with a potential split occurring. Settlers' presence have increased way too much here for it to be entirely given away and the Palestinian presence here is too big to be entirely given to Israel.
- Settlements bordering Israel will be kept in Israeli hands.
- Settlements that are east of Jericho and near the border of Jordan will be given away to the Palestinians. The settlers that are forced to relocate will be compensated $500,000 NIS per family. ($300,000 NIS for households with only one resident) and will be offered housing units in settlements kept by Israel of equal value of their old homes
- Settlements that are close to Kalkliya and Tulkarm may or may not be dismantled depending on final borders, but like the settlements east of Jericho, the settlers will be compensated with the same figures listed above.
- Everything else will be negotiated and discussed.


I do like another plan more, it is called the Palestinian emirates plan and was made by Dr. Mordechai Kedar. http://www.palestinianemirates.com/

I think this plan is better for Israel and also for Palestinians but it will never happen, imo.


Of course, none of this would even be a conversation for me if the PA doesn't meet most of my demands listed above.

[SATW]

Response to your other comments:

- Livni just has a very bad reputation among most partisans in Israel now. The Yachimovich/Peretz wing of Labor don't like her due to her past as a prominent person in Bibi's 1996-1999 gov't. During her tenure here, she pushed a lot of privatization plans for the economy. Yachimovich and Peretz are more left-wing on the economy and want those issues addressed more.
- Olmert's party switch was different. His wife and kids are left-wing, so a shift to the middle by him makes a bit more sense. Though, he was still pretty right-wing as Mayor of Jerusalem. Also, he, along with many MKs who joined Kadima claimed loyalty for Ariel Sharon as part of why they moved to the center. Livni did this as well, but remember she was Likud, than Kadima, than Hatnuah and now Zionist Union. More less consistent than others who left Likud in 2005-2006.
- In regards to my agreement with The Jewish home...I strongly support the new NGO Law that Ayelet Shaked created. I also think she's done a great job as Justice Minister and that this ministry is in better hands with her than with Likud.
- My family lived in Russia, but not in European Russia.
- Olmert's plan was rejected by Abbas, iirc (http://www.timesofisrael.com/abbas-admits-he-rejected-2008-peace-offer-from-olmert/)

EDIT: Forgot about your Peretz comment. Yea, he was damaged from that and from the years afterwards but he left politics a few years ago and somehow found a way to be liked again lol.

[SATW]

I have no problem with keeping the Arabs in Jerusalem as apart of Israel. Having a strong minority population isn't a bad thing, imo, and keeping Jerusalem united is much more symbolic for me on a religious level, so that's my biggest reason to want it united.

East Jerusalem has important parts of the Old City and that cannot be allowed to be controlled by the Palestinians. look how limited access Jews have at the Temple Mount, for example, and that's within Israeli-controlled territory. Anyone can go to the Western Wall...Jewish, christian, muslim etc... but only muslims can pray without interruption at Temple Mount.

Also, most Israeli-Arabs, in general, want to stay in Israel. Arabs in Jerusalem are split on the question (which is good news for Israel and bad news for the PA). http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/would-east-jerusalem-arabs-rather-be-citizens-of-israel-or-palestine-1.336758 ("only 30 percent chose Palestinian citizenship – as compared to 35 percent that chose Israeli citizenship")

the democracy-requirement I have for the PA isn't really as binding as my other demands but I think its important that the PA is held responsible for its own promises. Abbas was supposed to retire in 2010 and has not had elections since 2005.

 I do agree that elections shouldn't happen if Hamas is likely to take over again but if that is the case than it is the job of the PA, whose corruption has allowed Hamas to creep back in, to restore order and confidence to its population.

Also, Abbas is indeed Fatah but he'll be forced out/retire eventually, I think. He's almost 80. Fayyad is very committed to coexistence and peace. But, Fayyad is hated by Palestinian nationalists for being so liberal so he'll never become leader.

I don't really care if the PA let's Jews live in their country or not. That's not my business. Settlers are overtly right-wing and religious so most of them wouldn't even want to live there, I think (unless we give up religious Jewish holy sites in Hebron and Jerusalem, which would infuriate secular/ somewhat traditional Jews like me as well). More likely, left-wing, secular Jewish, human rights activists would want to have some sort of citizenship in with the PA.

Speaking of Hebron, the problem is that settlers have made it their goal to try and take back this holy city and I don't think they will budge and forcing them out would be a political disaster for any Israeli government. But, I'm biased. I have a lot of friends involved in this movement, so that makes it hard for me to think objectively on Hebron.

[SATW]

Hnv1, I'm curious, which party do you support (I'm assuming somewhere on the left lol).

I was and still am a Meretz member for years but I don't quite the direction the party is heading but will probably still vote them next cycle.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

worthy to note that usually that after losing leadership it take's the right a whole cycle to get back on it's feet. Erdan is nowhere near qualified enough in general public eyes. Sa'ar is touted by Yediot but I doubt the traction this glass snake actually has. Ashkenazi has no platform to run as number 1. Yechimovic and Peretz could win a labour election but not carry a GE.
If Bennett and Lieberman want to be PMs (more likely in the case of the first) they need to merge with Likud

Interesting. It's certainly not easy to be left-leaning in Israel, with both Meretz and Labor having some big flaws, speaking from an objective standpoint.

[SATW]

I do like another plan more, it is called the Palestinian emirates plan and was made by Dr. Mordechai Kedar. http://www.palestinianemirates.com/

Holy apartheid, Batman! And this wouldn't be Bantustans on steroids because of what exactly? Because he gave them the more palatable-sounding term "emirates" instead? At least the original Bantustans were mostly larger than mere cities.

If people are really this deluded to think the plans mentioned here count as either "peaceful" or even realistic, then it's more likely a future Prime Minister of Israel will end up being called Marwan Barghouti (cf. once again South Africa).

I mean, it could be a starting point and certainly I always reserve the position to not agree with everything in certain opinions or plans.

I should've been more clear in my previous post: This plan, by Kedar, would serve as a good talking point for peace talks. It labels the major cities that would be in a Palestinian State.

The only issue I foresee is Gaza, which is going to be a problem when discussing a Palestinian state anyways due its geographic isolation from the rest of Palestinian-controlled areas and due to its radicalized/terrorist leadership.

My my version of the two-state plan, which I posted above this plan by Dr. Kedar, still stands.

[SATW]

Response to your other comments:

- Livni just has a very bad reputation among most partisans in Israel now. The Yachimovich/Peretz wing of Labor don't like her due to her past as a prominent person in Bibi's 1996-1999 gov't.

OK.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

You mean back in 1996-1999?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OK. Also, though, what about Isaac Herzog?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OK.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

To be fair, though, Livni only left Kadima after Mofaz defeated her in the 2012 Kadima leadership election.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why exactly do you support this law, though?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Can you please elaborate on this part?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OK.

Also, if you don't mind me asking, did they live in Siberia?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Yes, but it also states this:

"Abbas said he supported the idea of territorial swaps, but that Olmert pressed him into agreeing to the plan without allowing him to study the proposed map.

“He showed me a map. He didn’t give me a map,” Abbas said. “He told me, ‘This is the map’ and took it away. I respected his point of view, but how can I sign on something that I didn’t receive?”

Olmert confirmed that he pressed Abbas to initial the offer that day.

Abbas said he also felt Olmert’s offer to accept a symbolic number of Palestinian refugees into Israel did not resolve the issue — because descendants of Palestinian refugees now number in the millions, many scattered across the region.

Abbas said negotiations continued, but broke down as Olmert’s legal problems worsened. Olmert has since been convicted on bribery and corruption charges and sentenced to more than six years in prison. He is currently free while he appeals.

Nonetheless, the Palestinian leader described the talks as the most serious negotiations since an interim peace accord was reached in 1993 under then-Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin. Two years later, Rabin was assassinated by a Jewish ultranationalist opposed to his peace moves.

“I feel he [Olmert] was assassinated politically as Rabin was assassinated materially. I feel if we had continued four to five months, we could have concluded the issues,” he said."

Indeed, how exactly is one is supposed to agree to a peace deal where one isn't even allowed to study the relevant map?

Also, though, I would like to point out that, if I were a Palestinian leader, while I would certainly agree to use Olmert's proposal as a basis for future negotiations, I would have likewise rejected it if it was presented to me on a take-it-or-leave-it basis. After all, I would have been concerned by the excessively large and excessively invasive Israeli annexations of West Bank territory in this plan (especially in and around Ariel):



Indeed, I would have certainly refused to accept a peace deal that would have allowed Israel to annex the two "fingers" of West Bank territory in and around Ariel.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

How did Peretz manage to make himself liked again, though?

1. Yea, the 1996-1999 term is what I was referring too. She privatized a lot of things that social democrats and socialists within Labor are not fond of. She is also the daughter of Eitan Livni, a former Likud MK who fought for Irgun. She has always had a right-wing brackground/upbringing and career. She just doesn't fit in with the center-left ideals.

2. Honestly, putting my Likud loyalties aside, I think Labor needs to differentiate itself from Likud and it can do this by adopting the Yachimovich ideology of domestically left-wing (social and economic) and a hawkish foreign policy. Essentially, what I would like to see from Labor is the return of the old Mapai/Alignment/Labor movements, which were hawkish on foreign policy and progressive on domestic issues. Of course, Yachimovich has been tried (and failed) as leader, so they would need someone else, likely, to lead the party but the Herzog approach is a joke.

like Ehud Barak, I have a lot of respect, personally, for Herzog (military service for Barak, Police service and father's legacy for Herzog), but they are both joke politicians and need to go away. Mushy moderates who flop like fish on almost every issue.

3. I mean, yea, that's true, but she lost because of her own faults not because of Mofaz. She was not a good leader for Kadima. Her leaving the party destroyed it, and along with it her new-found centrist ideology.

4. I support the NGO law because I think that is extremely problematic that European countries and private organizations think they can meddle in Israel's democracy without being traced. All it does is force the NGO's to tell Israel where its money comes from. I also support a law that would force right-wing NGOs to tell us where their money comes from as well (Livni actually had a bill that addressed this but it never passed). The difference is that European governments (sometimes unknowingly) are mainly giving money to left-wing NGOs, that in many cases, spew out anti-Israel propaganda. right-wing NGOs mainly get support from private donors like Sheldon Adelson.

I also like the terrorism law that Shaked got passed (which opposition people like Livni supported).  (http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Ayelet-Shaked-Israel-is-the-tip-of-the-spear-in-war-on-terror-455432)

Also, as much as I like Likud, there are quite a few corrupt people in the party that I was worried about getting their hands on the Justice Ministry. This is why I'm glad The Jewish Home got it instead.

5. Yea, as if Abbas really needed a real excuse to reject peace. We can agree on a lot of things, but I think we might disagree on Abbas. Abbas, imo, is a snake and a terrorist-enabler, just like Yasser Arafat was.

Also, this line makes me laugh: “I feel he [Olmert] was assassinated politically as Rabin was assassinated materially. I feel if we had continued four to five months, we could have concluded the issues,” he said."

Olmert, like Abbas, is a crook there was no "political assassination" or conspiracy by Israel to stifle peace talks. Leave it to another crook to defend him. Also, if Abbas and his ilk were so committed to peace after Rabin's assassination (which, I agree, was one of the worst days in Israeli history) why did nothing ever get accomplished? Arafat and some on the Israeli left can claim how Barak's 2000 peace talks weren't in good faith or whatever but it was the most expansive and left-wing peace plan proposed by Israel, with parts of Jerusalem being up for grabs.

Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak, Amir Peretz (who all led Labor at different points) were all foreign policy pragmatists/doves and all would've sold the house for peace. Yet, terrorist attacks persisted and the corruption in Palestinian leadership continued to grow.

Also, in regard to this apparent see and sign plan trick that Olmert allegedly did...lol, it was later said in this source (http://www.thetower.org/2580-breaking-abbas-admits-for-the-first-time-that-he-turned-down-peace-offer-in-2008/) that Abbas tried to draw it from recollection. So, clearly, Mr. Abbas had a good idea of what it was. Also, both Olmert and Abbas seemed to be on the same page...roughly 92% of the west bank would've became a palestinian state.

The issue for Abbas, just like Arafat, was on the issue of Palestinian "refugees." They will never drop this ridiculous request. You are about to get your own country...why would you continue to press for the "right of return"? the only explanation is that he, like Arafat, wants all of Israel, not just the west bank.

On Olmert's part, like I said, he was hardly a model person or politician to be leading peace talks but there are multiple reasons to not give Abbas a map.

1) The idea that the Palestinian leadership, as a whole, was willing to make any concessions is a gravely mistaken one. I can't see them accepting this sort of plan because many in Fatah, to this day, cheer on the deaths of Israeli citizens, which leads me to believe they don't want peace, they want all or nothing.

2) When you have peace talks you would certainly need all players to sign on, no? But, of course, part of why Olmert even thing any of this was because of his legal and political troubles. Abbas, clearly, had enough time to analyze and look at this map to try and re-draw it later. His statement in the TOI pretty much implied that Olmert just flashed it in his face and walked away, which is false.

[SATW]

Also, my family lived near the Caucasus region of Russia. I can message you if you want specific location.

EDIT: In regard to Peretz, not sure why they like him again. I guess because he's more left-wing than Herzog and because hes' been out of office for a bit but im not sure.   

[SATW]

Lol for some reason I thought I put a response for it last night but I did not, my b.

It looks like a decent, short-term plan form what I see. I'd make my own minor edits in a few spots, but its decent.

[SATW]

Lol for some reason I thought I put a response for it last night but I did not, my b.

It looks like a decent, short-term plan form what I see. I'd make my own minor edits in a few spots, but its decent.

Where exactly would you make minor edits to this plan, though?

I'll just draw a map of the type of plan I'd easily get behind and I'll either post it here or message it to you

[SATW]

ok, will do

[SATW]

I'm not expecting a lot of people here to like my plan, or agree with it, but this is generally what I like (idealistically), but there are some areas I'm willing to budge on.

Something to note, however:

- Ganim, Kadim, Sa-Nur are all no longer Israeli settlements (this map is a bit old, so it may be missing some new settlements).

Onto what I consider must-keeps for Israel and what I consider negotiable:
- All of Jerusalem, Ma'ale Adumim, Ariel, Giv'at Ze'ev and most of Gush Etzion are nonnegotiable for me.
- areas around Ramallah that are in Israeli territory in this map are negotiable (specifically talking about Psagot, which I included in Israel in this map and Talmon, which I gave up in this map).
- Near Otniel and Negohot, I'm willing to give up a good amount of more land, including Negohot, but not Otniel.
- I'm proposing a split in Hebron.


There's other stuff, but I'll wait for critiques.

[SATW]

1. Yea, the 1996-1999 term is what I was referring too. She privatized a lot of things that social democrats and socialists within Labor are not fond of. She is also the daughter of Eitan Livni, a former Likud MK who fought for Irgun. She has always had a right-wing brackground/upbringing and career. She just doesn't fit in with the center-left ideals.

2. Honestly, putting my Likud loyalties aside, I think Labor needs to differentiate itself from Likud and it can do this by adopting the Yachimovich ideology of domestically left-wing (social and economic) and a hawkish foreign policy. Essentially, what I would like to see from Labor is the return of the old Mapai/Alignment/Labor movements, which were hawkish on foreign policy and progressive on domestic issues. Of course, Yachimovich has been tried (and failed) as leader, so they would need someone else, likely, to lead the party but the Herzog approach is a joke.

like Ehud Barak, I have a lot of respect, personally, for Herzog (military service for Barak, Police service and father's legacy for Herzog), but they are both joke politicians and need to go away. Mushy moderates who flop like fish on almost every issue.

3. I mean, yea, that's true, but she lost because of her own faults not because of Mofaz. She was not a good leader for Kadima. Her leaving the party destroyed it, and along with it her new-found centrist ideology.


4. I support the NGO law because I think that is extremely problematic that European countries and private organizations think they can meddle in Israel's democracy without being traced. All it does is force the NGO's to tell Israel where its money comes from. I also support a law that would force right-wing NGOs to tell us where their money comes from as well (Livni actually had a bill that addressed this but it never passed). The difference is that European governments (sometimes unknowingly) are mainly giving money to left-wing NGOs, that in many cases, spew out anti-Israel propaganda. right-wing NGOs mainly get support from private donors like Sheldon Adelson.

I also like the terrorism law that Shaked got passed (which opposition people like Livni supported).  (http://www.jpost.com/Israel-News/Politics-And-Diplomacy/Ayelet-Shaked-Israel-is-the-tip-of-the-spear-in-war-on-terror-455432)

Also, as much as I like Likud, there are quite a few corrupt people in the party that I was worried about getting their hands on the Justice Ministry. This is why I'm glad The Jewish Home got it instead.

5. Yea, as if Abbas really needed a real excuse to reject peace. We can agree on a lot of things, but I think we might disagree on Abbas. Abbas, imo, is a snake and a terrorist-enabler, just like Yasser Arafat was.

5A. Also, this line makes me laugh: “I feel he [Olmert] was assassinated politically as Rabin was assassinated materially. I feel if we had continued four to five months, we could have concluded the issues,” he said."

Olmert, like Abbas, is a crook there was no "political assassination" or conspiracy by Israel to stifle peace talks. Leave it to another crook to defend him. Also, if Abbas and his ilk were so committed to peace after Rabin's assassination (which, I agree, was one of the worst days in Israeli history) why did nothing ever get accomplished? Arafat and some on the Israeli left can claim how Barak's 2000 peace talks weren't in good faith or whatever but it was the most expansive and left-wing peace plan proposed by Israel, with parts of Jerusalem being up for grabs.

Shimon Peres, Ehud Barak, Amir Peretz (who all led Labor at different points) were all foreign policy pragmatists/doves and all would've sold the house for peace. Yet, terrorist attacks persisted and the corruption in Palestinian leadership continued to grow.

Also, in regard to this apparent see and sign plan trick that Olmert allegedly did...lol, it was later said in this source (http://www.thetower.org/2580-breaking-abbas-admits-for-the-first-time-that-he-turned-down-peace-offer-in-2008/) that Abbas tried to draw it from recollection. So, clearly, Mr. Abbas had a good idea of what it was. Also, both Olmert and Abbas seemed to be on the same page...roughly 92% of the west bank would've became a palestinian state.

The issue for Abbas, just like Arafat, was on the issue of Palestinian "refugees." They will never drop this ridiculous request. You are about to get your own country...why would you continue to press for the "right of return"? the only explanation is that he, like Arafat, wants all of Israel, not just the west bank.

5B. On Olmert's part, like I said, he was hardly a model person or politician to be leading peace talks but there are multiple reasons to not give Abbas a map.

1) The idea that the Palestinian leadership, as a whole, was willing to make any concessions is a gravely mistaken one. I can't see them accepting this sort of plan because many in Fatah, to this day, cheer on the deaths of Israeli citizens, which leads me to believe they don't want peace, they want all or nothing.

2) When you have peace talks you would certainly need all players to sign on, no? But, of course, part of why Olmert even thing any of this was because of his legal and political troubles. Abbas, clearly, had enough time to analyze and look at this map to try and re-draw it later. His statement in the TOI pretty much implied that Olmert just flashed it in his face and walked away, which is false.

1. The center-left appears to have energetically supported Livni back in 2009, though.

2. OK.

Also, out of curiosity--do you think that Erel Margalit would make a good leader of Labor? In addition to this, what about other Labor politicians such as Hillik Bar?

3. Fair enough, I suppose. Indeed, from the perspective of Livni's best interests, she should have been more willing to compromise with the ultra-Orthodox parties back in late 2008. Indeed, had Mofaz beat Livni back in September 2008, I strongly suspect that Mofaz would have been more conciliatory to the ultra-Orthodox parties and thus, unlike Livni, would have actually been able to form a coalition and to become Israel's Prime Minister in late 2008.

4. Thank you very much for sharing all of this information!

5. Eh ... I'm not so sure about that. After all, unlike Arafat, wasn't Abbas never directly involved in terrorism?

Also, though, if you want to actually test Abbas's commitment to peace, then have Israel agree to the Palestinian proposal for a multilateral forum for Israeli-Palestinian peace talks and then have everyone see whether or not the Palestinians are peace-makers or rejectionists.

In addition to this, though, I want to point out that, unlike Arafat, Abbas actually appears to have continuously maintained relative calm in the territories that he controls. Indeed, this certainly makes me willing to believe that, unlike Arafat, Abbas might actually be a good peace partner for Israel.

5A. Actually, I certainly agree with you that Olmert been a less corrupt politician, he would have been able to continue his peace talks with Abbas until either 2010 or even later than that. Indeed, as you said, Olmert was brought down by his own corruption.

Also, in regards to the map recollection, recollections certainly aren't exact and precise. Indeed, when it comes to something as major as a final Israeli-Palestinian peace treaty, all of the details need to be known about beforehand.

In addition to this, in regards to Abbas, it appears that Abbas wanted 98%, rather than 92%, of the West Bank:

http://www.timesofisrael.com/hand-drawn-map-shows-what-olmert-offered-for-peace/

"The Palestinians have been reported to have countered with a proposal for a far smaller, 1.9% land swap. Abbas told the Washington Post in 2009 that Olmert’s offer was insufficient. “The gaps were wide,” he said."

Indeed, based on my own previous research, if I was a Palestinian leader, I would likewise demand around 96-97% of the West Bank for a Palestinian state.

Also, in regards to the right of return, have Israel explicitly ask Abbas what number of refugees he wants to have Israel absorb and then see if Israel is actually willing to accept that number of refugees. Indeed, my own personal uppermost limit would probably be 100,000 (a little more than 1% of Israel's total population) if I were an Israeli leader. Of course, the Israeli people themselves might not be willing to accept that many Palestinian refugees!

Finally,  I would like to point out that there haven't been very many peace talks (2000-01, 2007-08, 2014-15) over the last 20 years. Thus, I don't think that it's completely fair to blame Abbas for the lack of progress in peace talks.

5B.

1. This still doesn't mean that they shouldn't be entitled to a map of Israel's peace proposal, though.

2. If one redraws a map later, though, then one might already forget some of the details on this map. Indeed, a final peace treaty needs to be known right up to the last detail by the people who are signing and ratifying it.

1. eh, the party was center-left but Kadima itself seemed to be made up of vaguely centrist people, for the most part. But, she was much more popular in '09, for sure.
2. I do like Erel Margalit, he seems like a good politician mold for the type of change needed in Labor, even if he's a bit...brash in rhetoric. Bar would be a guy who would be very useful to Margalit in a successful Labor leadership campaign.
3. You may be right, would've been vert interesting, for sure.
4. No problem, anytime
5. Abbas is definitely better than Arafat but, to me, that doesn't say much. Abbas got a PhD in denying big parts of the holocaust and allegedly had a role in the Munich Olympic terrorist attacks, but again, those are definitely less worse than Arafat's crap.
5B. Fair enough, I  still see why Olmert did what he did. committing on the stop would still mean that they'd have to sit down and negotiate official terms, during which things can still change, but you make a fair point on having a map.

[SATW]

I'm not expecting a lot of people here to like my plan, or agree with it, but this is generally what I like (idealistically), but there are some areas I'm willing to budge on.

In my honest opinion, your map here is way too pro-Israel.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OK.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

1. What about if a majority of the Arab population of East Jerusalem wants to join Palestine instead?
2. Would you like it if there was a Palestinian "finger" sticking through Israel? After all, this appears to be what annexing Ariel would result in (but in reverse, obviously)!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

OK.

You must be logged in to read this quote.

Why not Otniel, though?

You must be logged in to read this quote.

That would result in an Israeli "finger" through Palestine, though!

You must be logged in to read this quote.

What exactly is the other stuff?

Well, I am a right-winger My map is pretty  compromising for someone on the right.

On Jerusalem, I'm not willing to compromise. 21% of Israel is of Arab descent (Muslim, Christian or otherwise) and I don't see a legitimate reason to split the city in any shape or form.

In response to the comments on Ariel and Hebron: Ariel is a major settlement in infrastructure and population, I don't want to give it up but I'll cave on Hebron and Otniel as well.

But, Jerusalem, its near by settlements, and Ariel, and its neighboring settlements, I won't give in on.

[SATW]

Old Map:

New Map

[SATW]

We'll have to agree to disagree on this issue then

[SATW]

Hopefully Yair Lapid.

If I had to choose a non-Likud PM successor to Bibi, I'd choose Moshe Kahlon, with Yesh Atid and Likud playing big roles in that type of government.

Of course, Kulanu will likely never get to the Premiership