Lets get some mis-statements I see by some of you here straight once and for all (I hope).
---------------------------------
Misstatement: Israel is not prepared to make meaningful compromises to achieve peace with the Palestinians.
Response:
Israel is fully committed to pursuing negotiated agreements with her Arab neighbors so that it may finally live in peace and security. Peace has proven difficult only for want of peace partners willing to recognize Israel's right to exist. Israel was able to reach historic peace agreements with Egypt (1979) and Jordan (1994) in which both sides made serious compromises for the sake of normalized relations.
Public opinion polls in Israel since the start of the Oslo process in 1993 consistently show that the vast majority of Israelis are supportive of negotiations with the Palestinians and support making extremely difficult compromises on territory, settlements, Jerusalem and other contentious matters. Recognizing this great support for peace, every candidate for Prime Minister of Israel since 1993 has pledged to continue negotiations albeit with different approaches. However, Israelis cannot be expected to support concessions that will compromise Israel's basic security, nor can they be expected to submit to violence and terrorism wielded as a tool to exact further concessions.
In contrast, the Palestinians have demonstrated that they are not willing or able to make the serious decisions necessary for peace. At Camp David, Chairman Arafat and his Palestinian negotiating team rebuffed significant Israeli concessions on major issues, and clinging to maximalist positions on these issues, did not offer counter proposals to Israel to further the negotiations. Since September, Palestinians have rejected negotiations and used violence and terrorism.
--------------------------
Misstatement: The Palestinians were justified in rejecting the Israeli proposals at Camp David.
Response:
At the Camp David Summit in July 2000, Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered the Palestinians a final status agreement with concessions that went far beyond what the U.S., Palestinians, and even most Israelis ever expected. Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasir Arafat failed to demonstrate any flexibility or willingness to compromise and clung to maximalist positions on the contentious issues under negotiation. After rejecting the Israeli offer which included extensive concessions on sharing Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount, establishing an independent Palestinian state in 100 percent of the Gaza Strip and as much as 95 percent of the West Bank, uprooting isolated settlements the Palestinian negotiating team did not offer a counter proposal or use the Israeli concessions as the basis for further negotiations. Instead they walked away from negotiations.
After the Summit, President Clinton openly acknowledged Israel's tremendous offer and stated that Prime Minister Barak "showed particular courage and vision and an understanding of the historical importance of the moment." On his return to Israel, Prime Minister Barak declared: "Today I return from Camp David, and can look into the millions of eyes and say with regret: We have not yet succeeded. We did not succeed because we did not find a partner prepared to make decisions on all issues. We did not succeed because our Palestinian neighbors have not yet internalized the fact that in order to achieve peace, each side has to give up some of their dreams; to give, not only to demand."
A year after Camp David, Palestinians publicly declared that the failure of Camp David was due to lack of preparation by the Americans, personality differences between Barak and Arafat, and by Barak's "take-it-or-leave-it" negotiating posture. Nevertheless, Camp David demonstrated that Arafat and the Palestinian leadership had unrealistic expectations that they could force Israel to concede to their maximalist demands without making important compromises of their own. With the Palestinian behavior at Camp David and their turn to violence, the Israeli populace has understandably begun to doubt the Palestinian commitment to peace. While there were additional negotiating sessions in October and December, they were conducted through unceasing Palestinian violence, making further Israeli concessions impossible.
------------------------------
Misstatement: Israeli settlements are a provocation, and their existence is the ongoing cause of Palestinian violence.
Response:
Palestinians first claimed the current violence was provoked by Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount, and then claimed that it was provoked by Israeli settlement activity, declaring that if only settlement activity ended, the violence could cease. As part of the coalition agreement, Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has declared that no new settlements will be built. Current construction in settlements is for purposes of natural growth only. Further determinations on settlement activity can only be made through negotiations on a final status agreement, and will not be determined by ongoing Palestinian violence.
Indeed, at Camp David the Palestinians were offered the uprooting of settlements from the entire Gaza Strip and much of the West Bank. At the Summit, then-Prime Minister Barak offered to redeploy and uproot settlements from up to 95 percent of the West Bank and 100 percent of the Gaza Strip. Settlements in the remaining 5 percent of the West Bank where the majority of the settler population lives would be annexed to Israel. The Palestinians refused and turned to violence. Since the start of Palestinian violence in September, the Palestinian Authority has authorized the daily targeting of Israeli settlers by snipers and terrorists, leading to many deaths and injuries.
--------------------------------
Misstatement: Settlements are a violation of international law.
Response:
Settlements, Jewish communities that were established in the West Bank and Gaza Strip after the territories were acquired in the 1967 War, do not violate international law.
Jews have lived in the West Bank and Gaza Strip throughout recorded history, until 1948, when they were forced to flee the invading Arab armies. Indeed, several of the current settlement communities existed prior to 1948, when they where overrun by invading Arab armies. Kfar Etzion and other villages in the Jerusalem-Bethlehem corridor, for example, fell to Arab forces in May 1948 and those captured were massacred. Sons and daughters of those who lived there until 1948 were the first to return after the 1967 war.
Israel's administration of the territory in 1967 replaced Jordan's control of the West Bank and Egypt's of the Gaza Strip. Egypt and Jordan gained control of these areas during the 1948 War with the newly established Israel, which according to the 1947 UN Partition Plan, were to be part of the independent Arab state to be established alongside an independent Jewish state. Neither Jordan nor Egypt had legal sovereignty over these areas. Israel maintains that these areas can thus not be considered "occupied territories" under international law, since Israel did not "occupy" them from another sovereign nation, but are "disputed territories" over which there are competing claims, and whose future must be determined through negotiations. Since 1967, Israeli governments have maintained a willingness to withdraw from areas of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in a peace agreement with the Arabs.
Critics of Israel frequently cite Article 49 of the Fourth Geneva Convention, which prohibits the forcible transfer of segments of a population of a state to the territory of another state which it has occupied through the use of armed force, as proof of the illegality of settlements. However, Israel maintains that the Geneva Convention, drafted after World War II, was intended to protect local populations from displacement, such as the forced population transfers experienced before and during the war in Czechoslovakia, Poland and Hungary. The situation in the West Bank and Gaza Strip is clearly different. Israel has not forcibly transferred Israelis to these areas. Rather, Israeli settlers voluntarily reside in areas where Jews have historically dwelled.
------------------------
Misstatement: Settlements violate Israeli-Palestinian Agreements.
Response:
None of the signed agreements between Israel and the Palestinians restrict the building or expansion of settlements. Indeed, the issue of settlements is specifically noted as an issue that will only be discussed during final status negotiations, the final stage of the peace process. The only prohibition in these agreements is that neither side take steps to change the status of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, such as unilateral declarations of statehood or annexation, prior to final status negotiations. The Israeli Government has voluntarily frozen the building of new settlements, but recognizes the needs of existing settlements to meet the changing needs of their residents, such as the expansion of existing homes to accommodate growing families.
Since 1967, Israeli governments have maintained a willingness to withdraw from areas of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in a peace agreement with the Arabs. In such a case, it was commonly expected that at least some of the settlements would have to be uprooted, just as the Israeli town of Yamit was dismantled following Israel's peace agreement with Egypt. At Camp David in July 2000, Ehud Barak reportedly offered to uproot all Israeli settlements in the Gaza Strip and the isolated settlements on up to 95 percent of the territory of the West Bank, as part of a final status agreement. The Palestinians rejected this offer.
--------------------------------
Misstatement: Palestinians were systematically expelled from their land by Israel in 1948.
Response:
As many as 700,000 Palestinians abandoned their homes in the newly created State of Israel when five Arab armies invaded the newly-declared state on May 15, 1948. During the chaotic and volatile war, many of the Palestinians who left did so voluntarily to avoid the ongoing war or at the urging of Arab leaders who promised that all who left would return after a quick Arab victory over the new Jewish state. Some recent historical studies have revealed that in some regrettable cases, Palestinians were forced to flee by individuals or groups fighting for Israel. There was no official, deliberate or systemic Israeli policy of expelling Palestinians. Palestinians that stayed were made full citizens of the new State of Israel. During the June 1967 War, an estimated 250,000 Palestinians fled from the West Bank and Gaza Strip of their own volition.
----------------------------------------
Misstatement: Israel treats Arabs as second-class citizens
Response:
Israel makes no distinction between its Arab and Jewish citizens. Israeli Arab citizens enjoy the same rights as their Jewish neighbors. They are also free to practice their religion without discrimination, in accordance with Israel's commitment to democracy and freedom. There are a number of Israeli Arab parties represented in the Israeli Knesset (parliament), and Arab members of Knesset are extremely vocal in promoting their issues and opinions. Recently, disappointed by the scarcity of Arab ministers in high governmental positions, the Israeli courts instituted a policy of affirmative action for Arabs in the higher echelons of the government.
As in every country, much more needs to be done to promote greater educational and employment opportunities for minorities, particularly for Israeli Arabs. The Israeli government has committed to investing in the necessary infrastructure and assistance for these communities.
It is important to note that Palestinian Arabs living in the West Bank and Gaza Strip are not citizens of Israel. After gaining territory in the 1967 War, Israel found itself with a million Palestinian Arabs under its administration. Israel hoped its authority over the Palestinian in these areas would be short-lived and would be exchanged for peace with its Arab neighbors. As a result, Israel did not annex or incorporate the West Bank and Gaza Strip into Israel proper, and thus did not apply the same laws that govern Israeli civilian life. Today, 99 percent of the Palestinian population lives under the jurisdiction of the Palestinian Authority.
---------------------------
Misstatement: Jews are interlopers in the Middle East. The European Jews that immigrated to Palestine, beginning in the late 19th century, had no connection with the land which was populated solely by indigenous Palestinians.
Response:
The Land of Israel the historical birthplace of the Jewish people, the land promised to Abraham, the site of the holy Temple and David's Kingdom has been the cornerstone of Jewish religious life since the Jewish exile from the land two thousand years ago, and is embedded in Jewish prayer, ritual, literature and culture. A small number of Jews lived continuously in the Land of Israel after their exile in the year 70, through Byzantine, Muslim and Crusader rule. At the time of the Ottoman conquest in 1517, Jews lived in Jerusalem, Nablus, Hebron, Safad and in Galilean villages. Hundreds of hasidic Jews immigrated in 1700 from Eastern Europe, along with Jews fleeing pogroms in the Ukraine. Many pious Jews left Eastern Europe in the late 18th and early 19th century in order to pray and die in the four sacred cities of the Holy Land: Jerusalem, Safed, Tiberias and Hebron. There had been a continuous presence of Jewish residents of Jerusalem from King David's time (except for periods when Jews were barred from living in the city), and by 1844, Jews were the largest single religious community in Jerusalem. By 1856, the Jewish population in Palestine was over 17,000. Organized Jewish immigration began in 1880 with the emergence of the modern Zionist movement.
The number of Palestinian Arabs living in the area when Jews began arriving en masse in the late 19th century remains the subject of dispute among historians. The early Zionist pioneers saw the Arab population as small, apolitical, and without a nationalist element and they therefore believed that there would not be friction between the two communities. They also thought that development of the country would benefit both peoples and they would thus secure Arab support and cooperation. Indeed, many Arabs migrated to Palestine in the wake of economic growth stimulated by Jewish immigration, attracted by new employment opportunities, higher wages and better living conditions.
