Oh, and the Palestinians will never accept an agreement without right of return.
You can't make a peace deal on the basis of such categoric statements.
Neither are the Palestinians living in refugee camps.
Please. No historical amnesia here. *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
The right of return is somewhat of a silly notion anyway. First of all, the people who live in Palestine today have nothing to do with the people who fled Israel 50 years ago. Second of all, it remains a question mark how many of those who fled did so on their own vs. being forced out. Third of all, it is hard to negotiate with the government that doesn't even want to recognize the state of Israel. Mikhail from SF
Barak's offer didn't include granting the right of return, it only included a promise of aid for refugees re-settled to Palestina. In fact, at Taba, Barak proved more uncompromising on the issue of right of return than his own negotiators, who together with their counterparts moved the debate to the number of refugees to be accepted back (and it was Barak who broke off the negotiations).
There would have been an independent Palestine by now
A mini-bantustan cut up and completely dependent on Israel. That's not an offer, that's blackmail, one built upon Barak's all previous broken promises (for example settlement expansions). Look at Gush Shalom's presentation (Flash; same as html; they don't even show the Israeli-patrolled crossing roads; also look at this timeline map series).
A good detailed analysis of Camp David (and Taba) comes again from Gush Shalom.
Palestine today have nothing to do with the people who fled Israel 50 years ago.
Ah come on.
it remains a question mark how many of those who fled did so on their own vs. being forced out.
The circumstances of fleeing from your homes are totally irrelevant to the question of the right of return. Ethnic Serbs in Croatia who fled on their own didn't lost their right to return, however much Croatian nationalist leaders wished them away. Besides, the Palestinians have several UN resolutions to base their claim on.
it is hard to negotiate with the government that doesn't even want to recognize the state of Israel.
Have you now switched to Hamas? Or do you rely on Barak's snide rhetoric about why Arafat rejected Clinton's offer to only have 'guardianship' over the Temple Mount? But even ignoring that, this is a most silly argument - when one side is armed with helicopters, fighter jets, nuclear bombs and occupies the other and continues to settle its territory, not to speak of acknowledging their statehood, then the solution must start with the other's a-priori acknowledgement of statehood?... *Lunatic*, n. One whose delusions are out of fashion.
"The Palestinian side as repeatedly pointed out that the right of return doesn't mean actual return by hundreds of thousands. Most don't want to live in Israel, you see. But it could be the basis of (a) reparations, (b) visits to old dwelling-places inside Israel, and (IIRC this one wasn't said openly by Palestinians) (c) Israeli subsidies for the construction of new homes for refugees in the new Palestina."
Isn't this exactly what Barak was offering minus visits to old dwelling places? So, which right of return are you talking about - right of permanent return, or compensation for living in Palestine? I'm sure had Arafat asked for allowing people to visit temporarily at Camp David, he would have gotten it.
