Jerusalem pääkaupungiksi
Lapanen kirjoitti:
Mistä te oikein googletatte? Vai nappaatteko jostain röökipaikkakeskustelusta minkä tahansa heiton faktana?
Camp Davidin, tai minkään muunkaan, sopimusluonnoksen mukaan ei, ikinä - missään, ole tarjottu Israelin toimesta Itä-Jerusalemia suvereenin palestiinalaisvaltion suvereeniksi pääkaupungiksi. Ei sellaiseksi, millaiseksi sana pääkaupunki mielletään missä tahansa poliittisessa kulttuurissa.
Ei ihme, jos ajatellaan mitä ajatellaan, kun tiedot ovat mitä ovat.
Koittakaa nyt vähän perehtyä ja nähdä vaivaa. Menee muuten ihan hulinaksi.
Kannattaa tosiaan googleta, jos ei tietoa muuten meinaa löytyä. Oheisista linkeistä mm. käy ilmi, että Arafat yritti keksiä ihan mitä tahansa veruketta, ettei sopimusta saataisi aikaiseksi. Väitti jopa, ettei historia tunne juutalaisten vaikuttaneen Jerusalemissa... Yasser ja seuraajansa Hamasia ja Hizbollahia myöten haluavat vapauttaa "all of Palestine" ja tämähän käytännössä tarkoittaa sitä, että Israelin pitää kadota. Mm. Iran on perinteisesti kommentoinut hizbollahin iskuja Israeliin iskuiksi Pohjois-Palestiinaan, samoin terroristiorganisaatiot itse.
http://www.guardian.co.uk/print/0,,4419440-103680,00.html
"… The proposals included the establishment of a demilitarised Palestinian state on some 92% of the West Bank and 100% of the Gaza Strip, with some territorial compensation for the Palestinians from pre-1967 Israeli territory; the dismantling of most of the settlements and the concentration of the bulk of the settlers inside the 8% of the West Bank to be annexed by Israel; the establishment of the Palestinian capital in east Jerusalem, in which some Arab neighborhoods would become sovereign Palestinian territory and others would enjoy "functional autonomy"; Palestinian sovereignty over half the Old City of Jerusalem (the Muslim and Christian quarters) and "custodianship," though not sovereignty, over the Temple Mount; a return of refugees to the prospective Palestinian state though with no "right of return" to Israel proper; and the organisation by the international community of a massive aid programme to facilitate the refugees' rehabilitation.
…
…
"
http://www.indybay.org/newsitems/2002/05/08/1266411.php (Yhdysvaltain erityislähettiläs Dennis Rossin kommentteja neuvotteluista)
"…
Listen to what Dennis Ross said. He was there at Camp David and Taba.
Monday, April 22, 2002 Dennis Ross: Arafat rejected deal that would give the Palestinians 97% of West Bank and 3 percent of Israel.
Following is a transcript excerpt from Fox News Sunday, April 21, 2002.
BRIT HUME, FOX NEWS: Former Middle East envoy Dennis Ross has worked to achieve Middle East peace throughout President Clinton's final days in office. In the months following Clinton's failed peace summit at Camp David, U.S. negotiators continued behind-the-scenes peace talks with the Palestinians and Israelis up until January 2001, and that followed Clinton's presentation of ideas at the end of Decem-ber 2000.
ROSS: The ideas were presented on December 23 by the president, and they
basically said the following: On borders, 97 percent of the West Bank would go to the Palestinians. There would be about a 3 percent annexation in the West Bank for the Israelis and a 3 percent swap of Israeli land to the Palestinians. So there would be a net of 100 percent of the territory that would go to the Pales-tinians.
On Jerusalem, the Arab neighborhoods of East Jerusalem would become the capitol of the Palestinian state. On the issue of refugees, there would be a right of return for the refugees to their own state, not to Israel, but there would also be a fund of $30 billion internationally that would be put together for either compensation or to cover repatriation, resettlement, rehabilitation costs.
And when it came to security, there would be a international presence, in place of the Israelis, in the Jordan Valley. These were ideas that were comprehensive, unprecedented, stretched very far, represented a culmination of an effort in our best judgment as to what each side could accept after thousands of hours of debate, discussion with each side.
FRED BARNES, WEEKLY STANDARD: Now, Palestinian officials say to this day
that Arafat said yes.
ROSS: Arafat came to the White House on January 2. Met with the president, and I was there in the Oval Office. He said yes, and then he added reservations that basically meant he rejected every single one of the things he was supposed to give.
HUME: What was he supposed to give?
ROSS: He supposed to give, on Jerusalem, the idea that there would be for the Israelis sovereignty over the Western Wall, which would cover the areas that are of religious significance to Israel. He rejected that.
HUME: He rejected their being able to have that?
ROSS: He rejected that. Yes! He kept telling us, that the Jews had no history in Jerusalem and that the Wailing Wall was really the Baraq Wall and was Arab.
...
…
…. (kannattaa lukea haastattelu loppuun asti antamastani linkistä)"
