Israeli PM Olmert: Divide Jerusalem, Return Golan, I Was Wrong
Published October 07, 2008 @ 01:59PM PT
Former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert gave a holiday interview to Israel's largest daily newspaper, Yediot Ahronot on September 28th. In it, he dropped a few bombshells - divide Jerusalem, return the Golan Heights to Syria, withdraw from all or nearly all of the West Bank. Wow. Uri Avnery translated some of the juiciest bits in his weekly column:
- "We must reach an agreement with the Palestinians, the essence of which is that we shall actually withdraw from almost all the territories, if not from all the territories. We shall keep in our hands a percentage of these territories, but we shall be compelled to give the Palestinians a similar percentage, because without that there will be no peace."
- "… including Jerusalem. With special solutions, that I can visualize, for the Temple Mount and the historical holy places … Anyone who wants to keep all the territory of the city will have to put 270 thousand Arabs behind fences within sovereign Israel. That won't work."
- "I was the first who wanted to impose Israeli sovereignty on all the city. I admit … I was not ready to look into all the depths of reality."
- "Concerning Syria, what we need first of all is a decision. I wonder if there is one single serious person in Israel who believes it is possible to make peace with Syria without giving up the Golan Heights in the end."
- "The aim is to try and fix for the first time a precise border between us and the Palestinians, a border that all the world [will recognize]."
- "Let's assume that in the next year or two a regional war will break out and we shall have a military confrontation with Syria. I have no doubt that we shall smite them hip and thigh [an allusion to Judges 15:8] … [But] what will happen when we win? … Why go to war with the Syrians in order to achieve what we can get anyway without paying such a high price?"
- "What was the greatness of Menachem Begin? [He] sent Dayan to meet with Tohami [Sadat's emissary] in Morocco, before he even met Sadat … and Dayan told Tohami, on behalf of Begin, that we were prepared to withdraw from all of Sinai."
- "Arik Sharon, Bibi Netanyahu, Ehud Barak and Rabin, his memory be blessed …each one of them took a step that led us in the right direction, but at some point in time, at some crossroads, when a decision was needed, the decision did not come."
- "A few days ago I sat in a discussion with the key people in the decision-making process. At the end [I told them]: listening to you, I understand why we have not made peace with the Palestinians and the Syrians during the last 40 years."
- "We can perhaps take a historic step in our relations with the Palestinians, and a historic step in our relations with the Syrians. In both cases the decision we must make is the decision we have refused to face with open eyes for 40 years."
- "When you sit on this chair you must ask yourself: where do you direct the effort? To make peace or just to be stronger and stronger and stronger in order to win the war … Our power is great enough to face any danger. Now we must try and see how to use this infrastructure of power in order to make peace and not to win wars."
- "Iran is a very great power … The assumption that America and Russia and China and Britain and Germany do not know how to handle the Iranians, and we Israelis know and we shall do so, is an example of the loss of all sense of proportion."
- "I read the statements of our ex-generals and I say: how can it be that they have learned nothing and forgotten nothing?"
The significance of this change of heart is heart to underestimate, and the consequences have yet to fully percolate throuh the Israeli (or American) political system. It's harder to portray these views as 'soft on Israel' coming as they do from a prince of the Israeli right wing, former mayor of Jerusalem, and now, former prime minister.
Share this Post
Related Posts
-
Video: Riots in Israeli Arab City of Um al-Fahm
-
Israel Erupts in Looting Last Week
-
Is the Left Dead in Israel?
Comments (11)
Comments on Change.org are meant for further exploration and evaluation of the ideas covered in the posts. To that end, we welcome constructive comments. However, we reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive, abusive, or off-topic; that contain ad hominem attacks; or that are designed to subvert or hijack comment threads rather than contribute to them. Repeat offenders may be permanently removed from the site at our discretion.
Facebook
Twitter
Digg
StumbleUpon
Delicious
Email


















Olmert had probably opportunist reasons to say these things which the peace movement has been saying all the time. He needed a smokescreen to hide the very humiliating end of his prime ministership and he hardly could have created a similar effect by suddenly leaning to the right. Still, in spite of the depressing context, he has left us now with something to quote, and - he said these things as acting prime minister, making it hard on his successor to ignore this altogether.
Posted by Beate Zilversmidt on 10/18/2008 @ 05:04AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I think that Israel is running out of time, the demographic clock is ticking for Israel, Arabs in Israel are growing in numbers and percentage, and yes, they can vote, and no, they are not happy being second class citizens in the Jewish State, on the other hand, the numbers of Palestinians are growing sooo fast, if Israel didn't find a solution that addresses all the major issues that need to be addressed, including: withdrawing from all the lands that were occupied in 1967 including East Jerusalem, and the right of return, or at least a generous compensation for the 1948refugees, if this problem wasn't solved to the satisfaction of all parties within the next few years, the demographic will later impose a diffirent playground where the Palestinians may possibly have an edge, all that Israel need to do now is to withdraw to the pre 1967 boarders, this means that the Palestinians get only 23% of historic Palestine. what is Israel doing in teh West Bank anyway? are they protecting the few religious nuts who are living in the settlements and costing Israel blood, money and international reputation?
In my opinion, it is in Israel's best interest to just hurry up, and follow the UN resolutions, before the Arabs and the Palestinians start to get the demographic advantage, and then they might not even agree to take back just 23% of historic Palestine.
Thanks for reading.
Posted by Haya K on 12/09/2008 @ 12:28AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
I'm promoting an idea for creating lasting peace in the Middle East and the world. It still needs a lot of votes to make it into the second round. Please help provide a more hopeful vision and alternative to the endless spiral of violence escalating in the Middle East by casting your vote today. Thank you.
http://www.change.org/ideas/view/israel_as_cornerstone_for_a_future_united_states_of_earth
Posted by Eli Williamson-... on 12/29/2008 @ 08:59AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Earthpledge.net is promoting an idea to create lasting peace in the Middle East and the world. The first proposal wasn't as clear as it needed to be which caused some confusion. Please take a closer look at this hopeful vision and alternative to the endless spiral of violence escalating in the Middle East and cast your vote today. Thank you.
http://www.change.org/ideas/view/israel_as_cornerstone_for_a_future_united_states_of_earth
Also, please check out my friend Josep's proposal for human unity:
http://www.change.org/ideas/view/human_union
Posted by Eli Williamson-... on 12/30/2008 @ 08:19AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Firstly- In light of all of the criminal claims against Olmert, I doubt if anyone takes anything he says seriously anymore - He indeed seems like nothing but an oportunist.
Secondly - Basically, I think peace is more important than land, but have you ever heard the expression - "Give him a finger and he'll want the whole hand?"...History has proven that Arab mentality and wishes are to kick the Israelis completely out of the region. Why would they settle for just a pieace of this area or just a piece of that area?!
Posted by M Green on 01/01/2009 @ 01:25PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Firstly- In light of all of the criminal claims against Olmert, I doubt if anyone takes anything he says seriously anymore - He indeed seems like nothing but an opportunist.
Secondly - Basically, I think peace is more important than land, but have you ever heard the expression - "Give him a finger and he'll want the whole hand?"...History has proven that Arab mentality and wishes are to kick the Israelis completely out of the region. Why would they settle for just a pieace of this area or just a piece of that area?!
Posted by M Green on 01/01/2009 @ 01:25PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Firstly- In light of all of the criminal claims against Olmert, I doubt if anyone takes anything he says seriously anymore - He indeed seems like nothing but an opportunist.
Secondly - Basically, I think peace is more important than land, but have you ever heard the expression - "Give him a finger and he'll want the whole hand?"...History has proven that Arab mentality and wishes are to kick the Israelis completely out of the region. Why would they settle for just a pieace of this area or just a piece of that area?!
Posted by M Green on 01/01/2009 @ 01:25PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Charles,
Thank you for posting this. I choose to take to heart the hope that this article engenders.
Posted by Judy Walenta on 01/18/2009 @ 02:28PM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
Thank you Charles, I too hope that sooner rather than later decision makers in Israel will take these visions seriously.
In addition I hope that they will admit that the recent campaign in Gaza was unneccesarily harsh.
Posted by betty Chatterjee on 01/19/2009 @ 01:43AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
The big question remaining is, who represents the Palestinians, is it Hamas or Abbas? Do they have one voice? and will they abide by any agreement reached?
Both Egypt and Jordan are in compliance with the peace agreements, the Palestinians do not have a central government, any agreement will not be binding.
Posted by Michael Ross on 04/06/2009 @ 10:28AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.
In the words of William Pfaff "Israel already is internationally recognized within its legal borders. Everyone knows that it is a Jewish state. But the demand to recognize it as such is meant to exclude the Arab citizens of Israel, who were there long before there was an Israel. Netanyahu's new foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, has already demanded that they be forced to take a loyalty oath (or be expelled).
The demand is also meant to foreclose Palestinian claims on illegally seized property in 1948 or after, and most important, to close off any Palestinian "right to return" (or recompense).
This demand is also made for propaganda purposes, and is of transparent bad faith. It is that Israel be "recognized as a Jewish state" by all its interlocutors. This is impossible because Israel refuses to describe which "Israel" is to be recognized. The 1948 state recognized by the U.N.? Israel within the 1967 armistice borders (long ago violated by colonies and annexation of Palestinian lands)? Or an Israel with frontiers yet to be defined-since annexation and colonization continue today?
This position is propaganda to impress foreign public opinion and Jews living in Europe and America: "You see, the Arabs won't even recognize us as a Jewish state!"
The demand that the threat of Iran be eliminated before Israel negotiates on Palestine replays a well-worn record. The issue could still be considered live a year ago, when Israel sought American permission (and assistance) in an attack on Iran. That was rejected by President George W. Bush, probably to greater surprise in Jerusalem than in Washington, where the political class has no desire for still another war sure to involve the United States.
President Netanyahu will probably tell President Obama that he will be happy to negotiate but only on conditions that cannot be met, including total suppression of Hamas, denial of a sovereign Palestine state in full control of its territory, and without removing established Israeli colonies or Israeli air and water rights.
Since none of this can be taken seriously, the great question is what response Barack Obama will give. That will reveal to the world whether there will or will not be more war in the Middle East....."
See the article in full at: http://www.truthdig.com/report/item/20090507_israels_bad-faith_negotiating_position/
Posted by Francine Last on 05/08/2009 @ 09:55AM PT
You must be signed in to report content.