Doc's Talk: The Secrecy of the Oslo Accords and the PLO Phased Plan

Wednesday, January 25, 2012

The Secrecy of the Oslo Accords and the PLO Phased Plan

Nurit Greenger

The PLO Phased Plan - https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N1N77BKCKE4&feature=player_embedded

History consistently reminds us that indifference in the face of an merciless enemy invariably leads to disaster. Further, more often than not, our enemies tell us exactly what they intend to do before they do it. Acting on their warning requires our personal courage, collective insight, and national will.

Prelude

on January 20, 1993 the Israeli Knesset voted to lift a ban on contacts with the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO), legalizing meetings with members of the group. Israeli Lawmakers voted 39 to 20 to repeal a 1986 law prohibiting Israelis from meeting the PLO members. The change was supported by legislators from the governing coalition led by the Labor Party, although the Government continues to reject negotiations with the PLO, which Israel considered to be a terrorist group. The law banning contacts with the PLO was passed in the administration of a coalition Government of Labor and the right-wing Likud. It has been repeatedly defied by peace campaigners and leftist members of Parliament who have met PLO officials abroad. Several Israelis have been tried and two were jailed, including a veteran peace advocate, Abie Nathan.

Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin was conspicuously absent from the late-night vote, attended by less than half the 120-member Parliament. Mr. Rabin has consistently opposed PLO participation in the Middle East peace talks, and has expressed concern that the new legislation might invite moves by the United States to involve the PLO openly in the negotiations.

The PLO was banned from the talks in Madrid in October 1991. However, the Palestinian negotiators from the West Bank openly consulted with PLO leaders at its headquarters in Tunis, thus direct talks were rejected.

A month earlier, Israel expelled 415 Arab-Palestinians to Lebanon and left-wing Meretz Party cabinet ministers urged Mr. Rabin to meet a pro-PLO leaders in the West bank and to consider inclusion of the organization in later stages of the talks in Madrid.

These ministers argued that the expulsions, aimed at suspected Islamic militants opposed to the peace talks, should be balanced by overtures to the Palestinian leadership supporting the talks.

There were also growing support for talks with the PLO among Mr. Rabin's Labor Party. But Mr. Rabin has rejected direct talks with the PLO in the current discussions of interim self-rule arrangements in the occupied territories, arguing that those talks can only be held with Arab-Palestinians from the West Bank and Gaza Strip. But he has tolerated open consultations between Arab-Palestinian delegates and PLO leaders.

In December 1992, in the background of the official "Madrid negotiations" in London, Israeli vice-minister of foreign affairs Yossi Beilin and Norwegian researcher Terje Rød-Larson set up a secret meeting for PLO representative Ahmed Qurei and Israeli history professor Yair Hirschfeld. Qurei and Hirschfeld made a connection and decided to meet again in what was going to be a series of 14 meetings in Oslo. During the first few meetings, a concept of an accord was discussed and agreed upon. The Foreign Affairs of Israel, Shimon Peres, was interested and sent the highest-ranking non-political representative and a military lawyer to continue the negotiations. Unlike the Madrid negotiations, the Israeli and the Arab-"Palestinian" delegations in Norway were usually accommodated in the same residence, they had breakfast, lunch and dinner at the same table, resulting in mutual respect and close friendships. The Norwegian government covered the expenses, provided security and kept the meetings away from the public eye, using the research institute Fafo as a front.

Negotiations concerning the agreements were conducted secretly, without the knowledge of the entire Jewish Nation, in Oslo, Norway, hosted by the Fafo Institute, and completed on 20 August 1993. What made the Oslo Accord negotiations different however, was the government of Israel's decision, against its law that banned negotiating with the terror organization PLO, to hold direct, face-to-face negotiations with the Palestine Liberation Organization, as the representative of the Arabs a/k/a Palestinian people.

On the other hand, the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) realized the loss of its most important diplomatic patron, the Soviet Union, that started in 1989, and Arafat's failing relationship with Moscow. Another factor which pushed the PLO to the Accords was the fallout from the 1990-1991 Gulf War; because Arafat took a pro-Iraqi stand during the war, the Arab Gulf states cut off financial assistance to the PLO. The PLO was not invited to the 1991 Madrid Conference at which Israel discussed peace with Lebanon, Jordan and Syria and Palestinian groups that were not associated with the PLO, although the PLO, behind the scenes coordinated the Palestinian delegation at Madrid.

In August 1993, the delegations had reached an agreement which was signed in secrecy by Peres while visiting Oslo, who took the agreement to the United States to the surprise of US negotiator Dennis Ross. This was not yet the Arab-Palestinians and Israelis agreement on the wording of the Letter of Mutual Recognition, in which the PLO would acknowledge the state of Israel and pledge to reject violence, and Israel would recognize the (unelected) PLO as the official Palestinian Authority, allowing Yasser Arafat to return to the West Bank.

The Accords were subsequently officially signed at a public ceremony in Washington DC, in the White House Rose Garden, on 13 September 1993, in the presence of PLO chairman terrorist Yasser Arafat, the Prime Minister of Israel Yitzchak Rabin, and the United States President William Jefferson "Bill" Clinton. The documents themselves were signed by Mahmoud Abbas, Araft's right hand man for the PLO, the Foreign Minister of Israel, Shimon Peres for Israel, Secretary of State Warren Christopher for the United State and foreign minister Andrei Kozyrev for Russia.

The Oslo Accords, was a political attempt to resolve the ongoing Arab a/k/a Palestinians conflict with Israel. It was the first direct, face-to-face agreement between the Government of Israel and the terror organization Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO). The intent was to establish the framework for future negotiations and relations between the government of Israel and the Arabs, within which all outstanding "final status issues" between the two sides would be addressed and resolved.

The Oslo Accords provided for the creation of a Palestinian National Authority (PNA), now known as the Palestinian Authority - PA. The Palestinian Authority was delegated the responsibility for the administration of the territory it was allocated to control. The Accords granted the Arab-Palestinians right to self-government on the Gaza Strip and the city of Jericho and in certain areas in the West Bank, through the creation of the PA. Yasser Arafat was appointed head of the Palestinian Authority and a timetable for elections was laid out, which saw Arafat elected president in January 1996, 18 months behind schedule. Although the PLO and the PA are not formally linked, the PLO dominates the administration. The headquarters of the PLO were moved to Ramallah on the West Bank.

Additionally, it was agreed that there would be a transfer of authority from the Israel Defense Forces to the authorized Palestinians, concerning education and culture, health, social welfare, direct taxation, and tourism. The Council would establish a strong police force, while Israel would continue to carry the responsibility for defending against external threats.

On 9 September 1993, Arafat issued a press release stating that "the PLO recognizes the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security".

Both Yitzchak Rabin and Shimon Peres opposed the creation of a Palestinian state, before and after the Accord. At the same time, a significant portion of the Israeli public and some political leaders, including the current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, expressed doubt over whether a peaceful, coherent state can be founded by the PLO, and call for significant re-organization, including the elimination of all terrorism, before any talk about independence.

In Israel, a strong debate over the accords took place; the left wing supported them, while the right wing opposed them. After a two-day discussion in the Knesset, on 23 September 1993, a vote of confidence was held in which 61 Knesset members voted for the decision, 50 voted against and 8 abstained.

Palestinian reactions were also divided. Fatah, the group that represented the Palestinians in the negotiations, accepted the accords, Hamas, Palestinian Islamic Jihad and the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine objected to the accords because their own charters refuse to recognize Israel's right to exist in Palestine.

On both sides, there were fears of the other side's intentions. The Israeli government, the Israeli's trust in the accords was undermined by the fact that after the signing, the attacks against Israel intensified, which, some explained, was an attempt by certain Palestinian organizations to thwart the peace process. Others believed that the Palestinian Authority had no interest in stopping these attacks and was instead endorsing them, as they do to this day. As evidence showed, when violence flared up in September 1996, Palestinian police turned their guns on the Israelis in clashes which left 61 Palestinians and 15 Israeli soldiers dead.

Since the start of the second Intifada, known as the al-Aqsa Intifada, in 2000, the Oslo Accords are viewed with increasing disfavor by both the Arab-Palestinians and the Israeli public.

The Oslo Accords were secretly negotiated against Israeli Law prohibiting negotiating with the PLO, which Peres and Beilin blatantly violated. The Oslo Accords was conceived in violation of the Law and was therefore a criminal act, and it still is.

It is also publically known fact that in his book, Yitzchak Rabin identified Peres as an underhanded saboteur and they never really had a good relationship.

In summation, Shimon Peres does today what he has done for decades, which is to subterfuge and act underhandedly and secretive, all behind the back of the government of Israel. He conspired with his protégée Yossi Beilin right through the Oslo Accord. In fact, one can see the Oslo Accord as a process to destroy the Jewish State as was created by David Ben Gurion, Moshe Sharet, Abba Eban, Golda Meir and Menachem Begin and others.

In 2012, we can comfortably say that the Oslo Accords were a waste of time and a great loss of hope, blood and lives, mostly for the Israelis, who want peace, have adhered, as much as possible, and beyond, to the Agreement. To achieve her desired peace, Israel made irreversible, painful and regrettable concessions to people who had no intention to have peace with her, and they say it loud and clear.

Therefore, without exposing the Palestinian Authority (PA) as a whole, who all stand for inciting against Israel and her demise Israel has no chance of survival.

On September 23rd, 2011, Abbas Zaki the former representative of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) in Lebanon and a member of Fatah's central told Al Jazeera television that any negotiated “settlement” should be based on 1967 borders. Indefensible for Israel, true, but not an outrageous thing to say in public discourse, as President Obama has said the very same - http://www.theblaze.com/stories/obama-endorses-palestinian-border-demands. Further, Zaki then went on to say, “When we say that the settlement should be based upon these borders, President Abbas understands, we understand, and everybody knows that the greater goal cannot be accomplished in one go.” Code for: negotiate, get as much as you can, and then move the yardstick down the road saying that's not enough. He also said that Fatah is going to destroy Israel in stages but needs to be quiet about it.

The Oslo Accords weakened Israel. Just like Neville Chamberlain harmed Britain and all of Europe by playing pretend with Hitler, Obama also has weakened Israel and the entire world and strengthened Islamofascist groups like the Muslim Brotherhood.

The time is now for the table to turn: The PA must be considered a "terrorist", "apartheid", "imperialist", entity, not Israel. Only then we can get around to promote 'zot ha'haretz shelanu-This is Our Land, Israel's real history, and why even talking about dividing Jerusalem is immoral and against all Jewish belief. Only then we will be able to turn the anti-Israel tide.

----

References: http://www.nytimes.com/1993/01/20/world/israeli-parliament-lifts-a-ban-on-plo-contacts.html

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords

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