So I looked into this and must say you make a fair point. I hadn't realized that 45% of the Jewish state was going to be Arab. This means that the 2/3 of the population that was Arab was going to get 2/3 of the land. Now, many would have lived as a minority in a Jewish state, which is beat, but I'm not sure UNSCOP had much of a choice. And it might be a fair point that so many Arabs lived near Jews for economic reasons. Now this point gets exaggerated where propagandists will say that the land had no Arabs before the Jews came and the Arabs only came for economic reasons. And that is false. There were 1/2 million here. But there could be some truth to elements of the economics point.
So maybe one could say the Arabs should have accepted either the Peel proposal or the partition plan. Obviously, they should have in the sense that what we have now is far worse, but also from the point that those proposals may not have been unreasonable, at least not ridiculously so.
Benny Morris and Ilan Pappé disagree on this. Morris says the Arabs were hostile from the beginning and Pappe says the Arabs were hospitable until the 1920s when the Zionists started indicating they wanted to take the whole country.
As for your question, the P. were never offered 100% of what they wanted. This is complete myth that is intended to say that the P want nothing but death. It's just false. The Camp David II offer was 73% of the land to start with minimal right of return and limited control over EJ. Taba was revoked by Sharon. The Barak offer in 2008 was done without a map.
The better question is would the Tibetans have accepted an offer of 3/4 of what they wanted. And they might have. I'm not saying the P have acted sensibly here. They are hard nuts as are the Israelis. Both are way too proud and macho.
So maybe one could say the Arabs should have accepted either the Peel proposal or the partition plan. Obviously, they should have in the sense that what we have now is far worse, but also from the point that those proposals may not have been unreasonable, at least not ridiculously so.
Benny Morris and Ilan Pappé disagree on this. Morris says the Arabs were hostile from the beginning and Pappe says the Arabs were hospitable until the 1920s when the Zionists started indicating they wanted to take the whole country.
As for your question, the P. were never offered 100% of what they wanted. This is complete myth that is intended to say that the P want nothing but death. It's just false. The Camp David II offer was 73% of the land to start with minimal right of return and limited control over EJ. Taba was revoked by Sharon. The Barak offer in 2008 was done without a map.
The better question is would the Tibetans have accepted an offer of 3/4 of what they wanted. And they might have. I'm not saying the P have acted sensibly here. They are hard nuts as are the Israelis. Both are way too proud and macho.
Comments
Post a Comment