New Palestinian Peace Plan May Succeed, Despite Palestinian Leadership

On January 28, the White House, at a meeting both with both Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Natanyahu and his domestic political opponent Lt. General Benny Gantz, introduced the most comprehensive proposal for peace between the Jewish State and the Palestinian people in a two-state solution,

The “Peace to Prosperity” concept differs from its predecessors in that in provides significant expanded territory for the Palestinians, as well as links between Gaza and the West Bank, and a capital in a portion of Jerusalem. Geography, however, may be the lesser of the difficulties in getting a Palestinian agreement. Gaza is controlled by the terrorist organization Hamas, which at this point continues to oppose any compromise with Israel, a state the group does not even recognize as having the right to exist. The refusal of the Palestinian leadership, at times widely seen as corrupt, to compromise in the past has caused considerable suffering to their people. In 2008, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas rejected a plan for sovereignty. Yassar Arafat refused to sign on to the Camp David accords in the 1970s which also would have fulfilled most his people’s goals.

The Arab news service Al Jazeera cited a number of Palestinians sharply rejecting the concept, terming it a “New Balfour Declaration,” a reference to the a public statement issued by the British government in announcing support for the establishment of a “national home for the Jewish people.” There have several past attempts at a settlement that would have given the Palestinians most of what they sought, only to be ultimately rejected by the Palestinian leadership. The current proposal notes that “For nearly a century, international leaders, diplomats, and scholars have debated the issues and attempted to resolve this conflict…Over the decades, many proposals and ideas have been put forward, but elements of those plans were unachievable given the realities on the ground and in the broader Middle East. “ The proposal then goes on to explain that “The world has changed greatly during this period, as have the security challenges facing the Middle East…” There is a great deal behind that observation. The proposal reiterates that .” The State of Israel has made peace with two of its neighbors. It made peace with the Arab Republic of Egypt in 1979 and it made peace with the Hashemite Kingdom of Jordan in 1994, two countries with which the State of Israel had fought multiple wars and numerous border skirmishes. The State of Israel has also exchanged sizeable territories for the sake of peace, as it did when it withdrew from the Sinai Peninsula in exchange for peace with the Arab Republic of Egypt. “ Just six months into his administration, President Trump and the Saudis significantly improved U.S. relations with the wealthiest Arab state. Overriding all other considerations for Middle Eastern nations is the fear of Iranian expansionism. Israel may not be liked, but it is seen as something of a bulwark against Iran’s aggression.

The economics of this latest plan make it one that would be truly embarrassing for the Palestinian leadership to reject, considering the hardships currently endured in both the West Bank and Gaza. Under the proposal, billions of dollars of investment in the electricity, water, and telecommunications sectors, increasing generation capacity would be facilitated, while creating efficient transmission and distribution networks. The plan also calls for, following the adoption of key policy reforms and the construction of essential infrastructure, extraordinary private-sector investment in entrepreneurship, small businesses, tourism, agriculture, housing, manufacturing, and natural resources. The goal of early-stage investment will be to remove constraints to growth and to target key projects that build momentum, generate jobs, and increase gross domestic product.

Patients are requested not to use anti-inflammatory canada viagra medications. To individuals that are at the moment going through this health condition, he on line levitra does not get erections for satisfactory enough for enjoyable act. Unlike their synthetic counterparts, herbal male enhancement supplement pills are preferred by large populace as they don’t pose any side effect and effect is almost the similar to the women viagra order . So, say bye to premature ejaculation and sildenafil viagra de pfizer Erectile Dysfunction is very common in males of all age and gender.Inability problem persists in society from a long period, but its cure was absent till decades.

Illustration: Palestinian flag (Pixabay)

Quick Analysis

Putin’s Saber Rattling

Earlier this week, President Biden reversed his 2022 decision, authorizing the provision of antipersonnel land mines to the Ukrainian government. It follows an earlier Administration authorization to allow the use of an advanced American missile system capable of striking as deep as 100 miles inside Russian territory. The US election season may be ending, but both Russia and the West show no indication of stepping down the conflict. Russian propaganda continues to swell as the Kremlin increases its threats to use nuclear weapons against the West. Last week Andrey Sushentsov, program director of the pro-Kremlin think tank Valdai Discussion Club (VDC), published an article on growing nuclear tensions in the region. Official Russian language in the last few years has been threatening. Since the US election, rhetoric like that in the Sushentsov article, has approached the level of nuclear blackmail. The VDC article’s main theme centers on Russia’s intent to directly confront the West militarily if the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) becomes involved in Russia’s conflict with Ukraine. “On the one hand, these threats are intended to frighten the West, but on the other, Russian propagandists themselves are starting to believe in the inevitability of escalation,” according to Ksenia Kirillova of the Jamestown Foundation. On November 11, Sushentsov wrote that “The conflict will reach a completely new level, with unpredictable consequences for Europe and the entire world.” Kirillova points out that Putin’s distorted image of the world is divorced from reality and is causing the Kremlin to issue demands that are impossible to fulfill. Financial and other Russian resources needed to support Putin’s war are growing scarcer at the same time. This week the Kremlin announced a reduction of payments to its soldiers. Recently North Korea acknowledged it was sending soldiers to fight in Ukraine as Putin is running out of bodies to use as cannon fire. The war is not going well for Russia. One question floating around the Washington intelligence community is whether Putin will act out of desperation before President-elect Trump assumes office. In recent months the Russian propaganda machine is spewing out materials from fairly reputable analytical platforms inside the country. Kirillova says that “Kremlin ‘experts’ do not conceal that such threats are only intended to break the West psychologically, as they themselves are not prepared for full-scale nuclear war.” Despite Russia’s lack of preparation for an all-out war with the West, the expanding nuclear rhetoric carries with it an increase in the threat of a full-scale war in multiple theaters of operation. In June 2023 a founder of the Russian Council on Foreign and Defense Policy, Sergey Karaganov, called for “delivering a pre-emptive strike of retaliation” on Poland to force the West to surrender. In the previous month, Dmitry Suslov, a direct of research programs at the policy center proposed organizing “a demonstration nuclear explosion” aimed at intimidating the West. In September, President Putin announced a reappraisal of Russian nuclear doctrine after speaking earlier in the year at the plenary session of the St. Petersburg International Economic Forum and jokingly calling Suslov a “scary person.” Pavel Baev, writing in the European Daily Monitor, says “Putin intends his announcement to mark an escalation of nuclear brinkmanship and influence the proceedings of future Ukrainian peace efforts.” Putin is expanding the list of environmental conditions that are acceptable for using a nuclear weapon and incorporating it into Russian military doctrine. Baev adds that “The ups and downs of Russian brinkmanship are disconnected from the kinetic battles of the war, correlating instead with Ukrainian peace offensives, such as Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelenskyy’s first peace summit in Bürgenstock, Switzerland.” Despite the increase in vitriolic language, in a You Tube video published a week before the US presidential election, Karaganov openly assured the West the primary goal of the escalation is to break the American spirit and that of the West, not outright nuclear war. By Election Day in the US, with political prognosticators predicting a win for former president Trump, Karaganov changed his tune and called for an increased role in nuclear deterrence. Kirillova points out that Western concessions to Russia are unlikely to reduce the risk of nuclear escalation. The distorted reality inside the Kremlin continues to push that President-elect Trump is an adherent of “world government,” that Ukraine will create a nuclear weapon, and Russia must prepare for a nuclear conflagration to achieve its ambitions for a new world order. President-elect Trump has indicated he will not agree to concessions that destabilize Europe, the Middle East or other regions. Going forward a strong US foreign policy may be the most stabilizing course the West can count on to restrain Putin and his intent to rebuild the Russian empire. Daria Novak served in the U.S. State Dept. Illustration: Pixabay

Our Latest Television Program

New Era in World Affairs

There will be a dramatic change in Washington in the aftermath of the election. What will this mean for America’s national security and foreign affairs? Our guests, former CIA officer and Vice President at the Center for Security Policy Clair Lopez, along with ret. Col. John Mills, (author of The Nation Will Follow) provide extraordinary insights. If you missed the program on your local station, catch it here: https://rumble.com/v5oonnb-the-american-political-zone-november-12-2024.html