Posted on 04/24/2009 5:21:24 AM PDT by SJackson
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1080695.html
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's candidate for Israeli ambassador to Washington, Dr. Michael Oren, supports a unilateral Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank and an evacuation of most of the settlements.
Oren, a visiting Georgetown University professor, said in a lecture there last month, "The only alternative for Israel to save itself as a Jewish state is by unilaterally withdrawing from the West Bank and evacuating most of the settlements."
Oren, a Middle East expert and senior researcher at Jerusalem's Shalem Center, gave a 90-minute lecture entitled "The Gaza Crisis from an Historical and Personal Perspective on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict."
Answering questions from attendees, Oren voiced his opinions about possible solutions to the conflict and the policy Israel should take. He emphasized that he does not represent the majority of Israelis.
"I may be the last of the standing unilateralists," he said. "The only thing that can save Israel as a Jewish state is by unilaterally withdrawing our settlements from the West Bank," and waiting for a new Palestinian leadership.
Oren said he does not believe that a solution to the conflict could be achieved at this stage. Instead we should find ways to "better manage the conflict, to relieve tensions and ameliorate the conditions under which people live to ensure against future flare ups."
If you’d like to be on or off, please FR mail me.
..................
Article is excerpted.
A unilateral withdrawl makes perfect sense. Establish borders and leave, they'll have two states, Gaza and the West Bank
And endlessly attack Israel from both of them.
Yep, thats the solution - give one of the most radical terrorist organizations in history a permanent state whose borders you cannot blockade by international law.. Yep.
A unilateral withdrawal makes perfect sense.
To your enemies...
Mindless.
How about driving the Arabs in the West Bank out of their homes instead of driving the Jews out of theirs?
ML/NJ
There’s no question Israel is going to withdraw from parts of the West Bank. There’s no question that Israel is going to engage in negotiations which will go nowhere. A unilateral withdrawl effectively ends the negotiations, until a peaceful palestinian regieme emerges, which could be decades. It does not necessarily mean the withdrawl of the IDF as in Gaza.
Don't tell the Americans anything you don't want to see in the newspapers. Which likely includes Bibi's plans for Iran.
Never happen, there's never been an Israeli government that ever suggested it.
ML/NJ
He is resolutely insistant that Israel cannot permit Iran to go nuclear.
I am shocked by this article. I never would have believed that he would advocate unilateral withdrawal, particularly in light of the horrible results of the Gaza withdrawal and the grant of autonomy to palestinian arabs.
However, he is a smart and decent man who served heroically in the IDF, as did his son
By ‘he’ are you referring to the ambassador or the prime minister?
There would be no worse result for Israel — both in terms of the direct threat to the security of its citizens and indirectly by destroying what remains of its international standing, than another surrender of land, unilateral or not.
In the Talmud (Baba Metzia) the rabbis discuss a case of two Jews who find a prayer shawl. One says he is sure it is his and the other says he is half sure it is his. The rabbis conclude that it should belong 25 percent to the man who isn’t sure and 75 percent to the man who is: the uncertain man already has surrendered all claim to half of it before the case ever began.
When Israel gives up land it demonstrates to the world that its land is not fundamental to its existence, and that in effect it is holding the land in escrow for the palestinian arabs to take it when they feel they can.
Sorry, I was referring to Michael Oren. He was a paratrooper in the IDF and his son was wounded in house-to-house raids to capture terrorists in Judea or Samaria.
Among his works is a book he wrote a few years ago about the history of the US’s relationship with Islam. He makes the case that among the earliest crises faced by this country in its earliest years was the capture of our ships and abduction of our sailors by Muslims who admitted that they had a duty to fight nonbelievers. It is very forthright and well-documented without being shrill.
He may believe in an appallingly-bad course of action in Judea and Samaria but he is not naïve about the lack of good faith on the part of the PA and the Islamic world in general.
One way or another it’s going to happen at some point, it’s Israeli policy to leave most of the West Bank, the alternative being a one state solution. The decisions on what to keep is best made unilaterally. Those tradeoffs, land Israel was going to transfer to the palestinians can wait for future negotiations, as can the removal of the IDF, but it would at least settle the limits of what Israel is willing to give, and put the decision off until there is a “partner”, which could be decades. I suspect this would have been Sharon’s next step. Bibi also has the right idea in focusing first on economic development in the West Bank and an end to incitement.
I wonder how harshly YHvH will punish thoseshalom b'SHEM Yah'shua HaMashiach
who would give YHvH's land to the Evil One.
I think Israel's biggest mistake was in not reacting immediately when subjected to rocket fire.
Michael Oren is part of the Shalem Center which is an Israeli right leaning think tank. Oren is also an expert on the Barbary Pirates and has written about how the US should handle the Somali pirates.
I think Oren is more centrist than Netanyahu is. Netanyahu opposed the Gaza withdrawal. Oren’s assumptions rely on the supposed demographic bomb the Muslims represent. They also rely on the situation remaining static. Both assumptions are questionable.
“it’s Israeli policy to leave most of the West Bank, the alternative being a one state solution”
Netanyahu has not endorsed the two state solution.
Why do you say Oren believes in Procaccia’s demographic time bomb? I’m not disagreeing with you but I never saw any article or speech in which he accepted it as reality, and I believe it has been generally discredited except among the most ideologically left wing circles (but I repeat myself).
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.