Israel Proposes Separation Wall As Border With West Bank, Jerusalem Under Israeli Jurisdiction

Separation Wall

Israeli negotiation team in Jordan told the Palestinian counterpart during the last round of negotiation that that the guiding principle for Israel in drawing the borders with the future Palestinian state is for the settlements in the West Bank to be part of the state of Israel, a principle the Palestinians rejected immediately.

It was the first time the government of Benyamin Netanyahu told the Palestinian Authority how it saw the resolution of this part of negotiations, the handling of the border issue. Netanyahu had exposed this vision however before the US Congress last May.

A Palestinian official, speaking under anonymity, said that the proposition Israel made was throwing away the international law and the frame within which the negotiations had been carried on for 20 years.

He compared the proposal with a dispute between the Palestinians and the Israelis on the territory of the West Bank, during which time the rest of the Israeli territory remains untouched.

A Jewish official defended the proposal, saying that the principle was stipulating that the majority of Palestinians remain on Palestinian side, while the Jews are on Israeli side. He expressed hope that the negotiations would continue, after the Palestinians asked for clarification.

A spokesman for the Palestinian Authority said that the negotiations were useless, because the response of Israel is not leading toward more talks. He added that the Israeli chief negotiator Yitzak Molcho, did not provide any map for the borders he proposed and did not include Jerusalem or the Jordan valley in what was discussed.

The negotiator went on to say that the Israeli proposal for borders was the wall that separates the West Bank from Israel. The proposal also said that Jerusalem was part of Israel and would remain under Israeli rule.

The Palestinian official added that this arrangement is no more than a reframing of the occupation of the territories of the Palestinians.

Even though the Palestinians seem unlikely to accept such a proposal, it is possible to mark the end of Netanyahu’s career as a fighter against Palestinian independence, especially since the abandonment of the West Bank into the hands of the Palestinians may be seen as a betrayal by those who consider it a valuable part of the Israeli history.

Netanyahu is also facing the prospect of losing his grip on the coalition that keeps him in power, since some of the parties within the coalition share the nationalist view of the right hard line.

The proposition was not confirmed by the members of the Israeli cabinet, which preferred to be discrete about it, but the deputy prime minister said that if Molcho made such a proposition, it was a great news.

It is the most detailed offer Netanyahu made the Palestinians yet, and comprises what he thinks about how much land Palestinians should get. It is highly unlikely that Mahmoud Abbas would ever accept a country without East Jerusalem as capital of it.

The Palestinian officials have told the Jewish counterparts that the only acceptable deal was one which included the West Bank, the Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem. It is considered that they may even be ready to compromise on little swaps for the settlements that are close to the border, but nothing else.

The promise made by Netanyahu is considered less than his predecessors Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert had agreed to give the Palestinians, given that the two prime ministers had agreed to the partition of Jerusalem.

Half a million Jews have settled in the West Bank and East Jerusalem since 1967, when the territories were occupied by Israel.

The wall Netanyahu proposed as border was built in 2002 as temporary security precaution, but was seen by many as a future border Israel would contend for, because it included settlements and even expending possibilities, prompting the Palestinians to call them a theft of land.

During the negotiations, Molcho is said to have spoken of the Jordan Valley as of a strategic Israeli security asset, though the wording is said not to have imply a control over the region. The Jordan Valley makes one quarter of the West Bank.

Netanyahu said that he wanted Israel to maintain a military presence in the future state of Palestine as part of any agreement between the two sides. He explained it as a buffer between the Jewish state and the neighboring states that are not friendly to Israel.

Military officials said that the military presence in the Jordan Valley may be revised in the future.

Mahmoud Abbas is under pressure from the Middle East Quartet to continue talks with Israel, even though he said that Israel did not meet the deadline for a serious proposition on borders.

After hearing what the Netanyahu cabinet had to say, he said he would consult with the Palestinian Liberation Organization and Fatah, and that next week he will also consult with the Arab League before making any decision on continuing talks.

Abbas is pursuing three ways of attaining a state for the Palestinians, none of which is progressing well. The talks with Israel are as fruitless and difficult as ever, the unity government with Hamas has its ups and downs, depending on the evolution in the countries surrounding Israel, and the statehood bid by the United Nation, which is a dead end, and was like so before it was launched.

Earlier this month a British official alluded that as the time went by the two-state solution was becoming more and more feasible. He said that in the context of criticism against the settlement policy of Israel.

The two-state solution has been the solution for the most part of negotiations between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. Besides this solution, a three-state solution began to gain momentum, especially in Jordan. This solution would imply the return of the West Bank to Jordan and of the Gaza Strip to Egypt, as it was before the war in 1967.