The statement by PM Olmert as he prepared to leave for the US is both incredulous and poorly timed.He pointed out that for peace he would be willing to give back 90% of the West Bank.
I guess the lessons of Gaza with daily rockets has not sunk in.
Moreover,from a negotiating point of view,why announce your end point before your opponent even recognizes you as a political entity.Theoretically, it is Israel that has the upper hand-a strong economy,powerful army,educated citizens and the support of the US.The Palestinians,on the other hand are bankrupt, forced to resort to terror acts that only hurt their people.They cannot get a state or entity on rhetoric alone.At the end of the day,they must control their factions,and realize that only through negotiations and an end to violence can they get close to meeting their goals.
The problem is,they have never accepted the right of Jews to have a State in the region,and all the talk to the contrary is exposed by their actions,their press and publications,as well as their textbooks.
For PM Olmert to promise such a radical end point,without a mandate from the people is irresponsible.
One other point of timing.With the Baker report coming out after Thanksgiving,there are rumblings that it will lead to negotiations with Syria and Iran even without these two giving up their support of terrorism.It may include greater US pressure on Israelo to solve the Israeli-Palestinian situation.In addition Syria only wants the Golan.
Will the result of the Baker report and the Olmert comments be a concerted effort by the US to pressure Israel to give back the Golan,and water down its security needs in order to give back 90% to Abbas/Hamas?
