What if no Israeli disengagement from Gaza?

[wimp]

What if Israel did not disengage from Gaza in 2005?

[The Mikado]

I think the more interesting, related question is "what if Ariel Sharon had remained conscious a few more years" because Sharon's plan, which Gaza was sort of the testbed for, was a unilateral Israeli withdrawal from most of the West Bank while keeping the settlements it wanted to, which would effectively create a de facto Palestine without Palestine's input on what those borders would be. Sharon and Kadima had a lot of steam behind them in 2005-2006 before...you know...and before Sharon was replaced by the incredibly incompetent Ehud Olmert, and Sharon, a hard liners' hard liner, had "Nixon to China" cred on foreign policy (No one was going to accuse the architect of the Sabra and Shatila Massacre of being soft on Arabs).

Sharon skipping the negotiation and just handing the Palestinians a state all "Here's your borders, we're out, you run this show now" would probably not be accepted by most countries as legitimate, but I suspect it would've eventually turned into a facts on the ground solution that just freezes over time and Palestine would be eventually recognized as a "country" under those lines even while it complains about wanting its full borders.

I really don't want this construed as a defense of Ariel Sharon's career, but I DO believe that Israel just unilaterally leaving rather than a negotiated settlement was the only way an end to the occupation was ever going to actually happen.

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Ariel Sharon was on a path to peace agreement that was outlined by Ehud Barat, Arafat and Bill Clinton, but he had a stroke and thus Israelis started building more settlements

There were gonna give up some Israeli land for the settlements on the West Bank

[(no subject)]

Arafat chose intifada over a settlement that would have given the Palestinian Arabs 90% of the West Bank plus Gaza and East Jerusalem. Today some Palestinian activists are asking if a future Palestine can have the 2000-offered territory after all but it was a one time offer and when you choose intifada instead...

[Amenhotep Bakari-Sellers]

Of course it was a one that me offer, Sharon wanted to give it again to the Palestinian people again, that's why he disengaged from Gaza but he died and BB took over and took over more Palestinian land and built an iron dome instead of offering more land to Palestine.

Also, we went to remove Saddam Hussein and we thought Palestinian and Iraqis would offer and olive branch, they didn't, Iran to over Hussein role in the intifada

[The Mikado]

Arafat chose intifada over a settlement that would have given the Palestinian Arabs 90% of the West Bank plus Gaza and East Jerusalem. Today some Palestinian activists are asking if a future Palestine can have the 2000-offered territory after all but it was a one time offer and when you choose intifada instead...

The 1999-2000 offer did NOT include East Jerusalem. That was the objection!



The Palestinian Authority is fundamentally opposed to any peace plan that doesn't have East Jerusalem as Palestine's capital and that was something Barak wasn't budging on, even if the proposal gave the Palestinians nearly the entirety of the rest of the West Bank.

[(no subject)]

the problem with 'all or nothing' over 'take what we can get now and hope for more later' is that if you lose you get NOTHING.