Jordan King: Peace Now or War Next Year
King Abdullah of Jordan warned Israel and the United States that if Israel would not agree to a peace deal with the Palestinians, war between Arabs and the Jewish nation-state would inevitably follow 12-18 months from now.
Although the London Times calls Abdullah’s words an “ultimatum,” I believe he simply meant to point out reality (perhaps I am misinterpreting his words, but that is how it strikes me reading the Times article). It is very likely that if the two sides do not agree to a deal fast, war will indeed follow. History has taught us that.
The deal Jordan wants Israel to agree to consists out of the following elements:
1. the settlements have to be broken down
2. Israel has to accept Palestinian statehood
3. Palestinians have to accept and recognize Israel(’s right to exist)
4. Israel will withdraw from lands it occupied during the war of 1967
5. The Arab world will recognize Israel
6. The right for El Al, the Israeli airline, to fly over Arab air space, visas for Israeli tourists to Arab states, and other incentives
Will this be suffice for Israel? Can Israel to such a deal? Well, in principe you would say ‘yes.’ The only problem is that Israel has to be 100% sure that Arabs and especially Palestinians will respect the deal and cease using terrorism against the Jewish nation-state. Can Israel be sure of that? I think not. Not now, at least. Not until Hamas does indeed break with terrorism and rewrite its charter.
This website uses IntenseDebate comments, but they are not currently loaded because either your browser doesn't support JavaScript, or they didn't load fast enough.
Comments are closed.
PoliGazette Comments Policy
PoliGazette encourages comments from all viewpoints, especially those that disagree.
Comments submitted must, however, adhere to the following standards. Comments that violate
these standards may be edited or deleted without notice at the sole discretion of the editors.
Commenters who repeatedly or egregiously violate these standards or who attempt to argue
publicly with editors regarding the comments policy may be banned from commenting further.
(1) Comments should address the substantive content of the post. Comments that repeatedly
or blatantly misrepresent the content of the post or of others' comments are not welcome. Comments that
respond to something other than which the contributor or commenter may have said are irrelevant and should
not be posted.
(2) Comments should avoid vulgarity as well as racial, ethnic, religious, or sexual bigotry.
(3) Comments should not personally attack the character, personal integrity, or professional
reputation of any PoliGazette contributor or of other commenters.
(4) Comments should reflect the contributions of the commenters themselves and should not
include extensive cut-and-paste reproductions of others' words except insofar as necessary to supplement
the commenter's own arguments. Link spam, trackback spam, and propaganda spam will be instantly deleted.
(5) Public figures are considered open to all substantive criticism of their policies and statements.
Comments that present objectively false factual information about public figures (i.e. "Obama is a Muslim") or
that attack public figures by attacking their families are not welcome. Comments that merely repeat
slogans for or against a candidate without engaging in substantive comment are not welcome.
Questions or challenges to these policies or their application should be directed to the editors
by email only.
If the world can convince Palestinians that there are real, quantifiable and irreversible benefits for completely swearing of the option of violence, they might listen to reason and tell Hamas to play ball or take a hike.