My Six Point Middle East Peace Plan

1) Hezbollah disarms and/or becomes part of the Lebanese Army.

2) Israel stops its bombing and occupation of Lebanon.

3) Israel and Lebanon engage in a prisoner swap.

4) Israel returns to its pre 1967 borders with slight modifications for the security of all the parties.

5) East Jerusalem becomes the capital of the new Palestinian state.

6) The right of return. A fund would be set up to compensate the 650,000 Palestinians and the 850,000 Jews from Arab nations that were forced from their homes in the aftermath of the 1948 establishment of Israel.

IMHO that's the foundation for a a just peace and it has the proverbial "snowball's chance in Hell of occurring.

Who wants that? I.E. - What country/state wants that?

I'm burned out on this.

As long as both sides nurse and nurture their ancient grievances peace will never occur.

become a reality IF Israel took the enormous step of dismantling a substantial number of the settlements as an act of good faith, and subsequently the Palestinian governing authority unambiguously recognized Israel within the 1967 borders. I believe those actions could lead to meaningful negotiations.

But this conflict interfered.I think most of Israel's neighbors could be co-opted including Syria.
But it's not in the interest of Iran to see the conflict solved.

Israel was about to unilaterally pull out of some of the West Bank, holding on to the larger settlements in concert with building that hideous wall which carves up Palestinian territory.

or maybe not.

The settlements were a stupid idea from the beginning, part of Begin's crazy notion that Israel was divinely entitled to all the lands that the Biblical kingdoms of Israel and Judah ever owned. (By that logic, Italy owns almost all the Middle East, everything the ancient Roman Empire ever conquered.)

Inserting settlements into one of the most crowded areas on earth was bound to lead to trouble, and I predicted it in the early 1980s.

Israel has always made concessions in order to gain peace with its neighbors. Egypt, Jordan, offers to Arafat that were denied. Kinda bucks that "land grabbin zionist" stereotype.

somewhat of a myth- that Israel has made these noble concessions. The frenetic building of settlements on occupied land is hard to argue with.

left the oil rich Sinai to Egypt in their peace agreement? A myth that Israel offered over 95% of the occupied territories for a Palestinian state in the attempted agreement brokered by Clinton that Arafat rejected? ok.

That's why I didn't say it was entirely a myth. Now would you care to address thirty years of building settlements on occupied territory and what kind of a message that sends.

these were dismantled and abandoned in the turnover. the same would be done in the palestinian territories. I do not see this as a legitimate excuse to reject offers from Israel.

were settlements in the Sinai and in Gaza, but it's my understanding that they were not akin to the huge settlements near Jerusalem and in other parts of the West Bank. Would you support Israel unilaterally dismantling some of these settlements as a good faith gesture?

a gesture.

as an act of good faith and would be roundly congradulated. That could indeed be an act that would lead to a lasting peace.

But I can not be blind to the suffering of the Palestinians either.

And if both sides insist on redressing every grievance there will be no end to the bloodshed. Maybe that's just the way it will always be. I couldn't live like that.

I enjoy reading rational discussions on the possibilities for negotiating a settlement to the on-going conflict. Thank you.

eom

I would ask, though, regarding point #3, which prisoners should be involved in that swap?

I'm sure you intend this, but I would add the dismantling of the security barrier and the compensation of those who were deprived of their livelihoods by it.

A reconciliation commissino will be established. This commission will selct 30 children aged 12 to 16 in all countries involved. Groups of children will live and study in host countries under full diplomatic protection. Every few years the groups would rotate into a different country and be provided the best possible cultural education of the country.

Within 30 years when these children mature into adults they will find an easy path to peace.

They bring together Israeli and Palestinian children in the hope of fostering peace and greater understanding between the two groups.

are meaningful steps toward peace.

Hezbollah is not going to disarm and disband, for example, while all the IDF does is (2) and (3). Why would they? Why would they trust that Israel would not simply use their disarming to their advantage? Why not insist, just as absurdly, that the IDF disband or disarm?

Becoming part of the Lebanese Army is problematic within the context of the reality of the Lebanese political system. That system currently shuts out shiites from meaningful participation, by design. The de facto system of government in Lebanon is political parties backed by militias of which Hezbollah is a prime example. It is the ascendency of the Hezbollah militia that has given the shiite Lebanese population any power at all in Lebanon. I doubt they want to return to the prior state of affairs.

What I am saying is forget about (1) until after Lebanon restructures its government to be fairly representational for all the ethnic groups that constitute Lebanon. The reasons for Hezbollah's existence go beyond the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and are not really directly tied to it.

My number 7: complete and total nuclear disarmament of all nations in the region enforced by the UN and the IAEA.