Doc's Talk: Mitchell to hand Assad Netanyahu's proposed Golan withdrawal map

Thursday, September 16, 2010

Mitchell to hand Assad Netanyahu's proposed Golan withdrawal map

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report September 16, 2010

Following the two-day Israeli-Palestinian face-to-face supervised by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, US Middle East envoy George Mitchell prepared for a major US diplomatic breakthrough during his visit to Damascus Thursday: The possible revival of Syrian-Israeli peace talks. He carries with him for Syrian president Bashar Assad a detailed map drawn up by Binyamin Netanyahu to represent Israel's proposed withdrawal from much of the Golan. This map is a DEBKA-Net-Weekly Exclusive. The Israeli prime minister refused to go into borders between Israel and the future Palestinian state at the talks he held with Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas at Sharm el-Sheikh Tuesday, Sept 14. First he wanted to dispose of other issues such as security.

His tactics for Syria are quite different. Three months ago, Netanyahu showed President Barack Obama detailed maps of the Golan showing how far he was willing to pull Israel forces back, provided Assad followed in the footsteps of the late Egyptian president Anwar Sadat who visited Jerusalem in November 1977 and was rewarded with a full peace accord with Israel and the recovery of the entire Sinai Peninsula and its demilitarization.

Two conditions for Syria
A second Israeli condition for negotiating a peace-plus-withdrawal pact is the severance of the Assad regime's strategic and military ties with Iran and termination of its backing for Hizballah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad and a host of Palestinian terrorist organizations enjoying Syrian sanctuary and hospitality.

When he last visited the White House on July 6, Netanyahu presented this plan to Obama as his ultimate objective. However, debkafile's sources in Washington report that the US President, Hillary Clinton and George Mitchell have adopted it as giving them enough leeway to tempt Assad into peace diplomacy
with an active American hands-on.

Our sources report that France has been brought aboard the initiative.

When French President Nicolas Sarkozy saw the Netanyahu map, he appointed the eminent diplomat Jean-Claude Cousseran as special envoy for promoting an Israeli-Syrian peace accord. Cousseran was in Damascus on Monday, September 13, and spoke privately with Assad. Right after that conversation, the Elysee told the White House and Hillary Clinton that the door was open for Mitchell to present Netanyahu's proposals and map.

This week the Obama administration has embarked on two major Middle East diplomatic projects in the hope that by striking gold on at least one, its mediators can stimulate a second.

debkafile's Jerusalem sources note that while the US and French presidents have been made privy to Netanyahu's peace initiatives and maps (shown exclusively here on debkafile), the prime minister has never shown them to his own government, his security cabinet or his inner Forum of Seven - excepting only for Defense Minister Ehud Barak.

debkafile's Exclusive Map represents Netanyahu's proposed lines of withdrawal

In territorial terms, Israel and the IDF would pull back to what is known as the Ridge Line, thereby ceding to Syria the entire Golan plateau together with most of the communities living there. In military terms, Israel would be left with the comfortable option of quickly regaining control of the territory if the peace accords break down.

Geographically, Golan plateau is 1,800 square kilometers in area. Syria commands a third and Israel roughly 1,200 square kilometers. Netanyahu's proposed withdrawal line (see attached map) is located 2.5 kilometers from the Jordan River. It is the last high-altitude area before the land on the western face of Golan drops steeply down to the Jordan River, the Hula Valley and Sea of Galilee.
Even after the bulk of the territory is restored to Syria, the Ridge Line offers Israel two major advantages compared with a total withdrawal up to the Jordan River.

1. Israel would retain control of the western and eastern banks of the Jordan River, a major source of its water supply. A troop presence on the two banks would make it easier to transfer military forces back to Golan in the event of war.

2. The Ridge Line is a natural barrier to passage in and out of the Golan. It would give the population centers of the Hula and Sea of Galilee valleys below with an Israeli military firewall against the Syrian shooting attacks plaguing them before the 1967 war and place an obstacle in the path of Syrian tanks trying to break from Golan to the lowlands of northeastern Israel.

According to our sources, Netanyahu has been trying for three months to convince Obama to place the Syrian peace track ahead of the fairly hopeless Palestinian process. He has shown the president how far Israel is prepared to go in ceding territory for drawing Assad to the negotiating table.

The prime minister also argued that, barring minor differences, his plan was very similar to one put forward by Frederic Hoff, the Syrian expert on Mitchell's team, which proposes a two-stage Israeli withdrawal to the Ridge Line.

Stage One: After pulling back to central Golan, Israel would still retain its early warning stations and surveillance posts on Mt. Hermon and so command the vista from Golan to Damascus 40 kilometers away. Israel would also control both eastern and western banks of the River Jordan, making it easier to redeploy troops on the Golan in the event of a war.
Stage Two: Israel would also continue to hold the rim of the sheer rocky southern slopes dropping down to the Jordan and Yarmouk Rivers which are impassable to armored units. This would act as a firewall against the Syrian shooting attacks which plagued Israel from 1948 until the Golan was seized in 1967 and a barrier against Syrian tanks breaking through to Israel's northeastern lowlands.

Israelwould not have to withdraw west of the Jordan for a number of years - until Syria's commitment to peace is proven.
According to our sources, Netanyahu is ready to buy into the Hof plan with the necessary adjustments.

Hof, our sources note, is the high-ranking American diplomat dispatched recently to Assad with a warning of serious consequences if he gave Hizballah and Palestinian terrorist organizations like Hamas for major free rein for terrorist attacks against Israeli targets with the aim of torpedoing the direct Israeli-Palestinian talks.

This same diplomat was also sent to Beirut last month with Washington's warning that a repetition of the firefight provoked by Lebanese troops with an Israeli border unit on Aug. 3 would result in the IDF wiping out the Lebanese army in the space of four hours.

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk