Welcome to Jerusalem Studio!
The birth of the Palestinian State
has been discussed already for 60 years, with no avail.
Many lists have been presented, many talks held,
but they have yet to lead to any practical actions.
Now the Palestinians have presented a list of 15 conditions
based on which they would like to reach a final peace agreement.
This is our topic today with Pekka Sartola. Welcome!
Would you expand a little how did this list come to be
and what factors where involved?
The list was compiled already last summer,
before there was an agreement about relaunching the talks.
The list had been seen by all parties including the US president's office,
and ended up with John Kerry who was asked to mediate the talks.
Not one of the details was allowed into the public,
Kerry alone had the right to reveal any particulars.
However the other parties were more open with their opinions
and also the 15 conditions of the Palestinians leaked out.
And some of them are completely unacceptable for Israel.
What was the process that led to the birth of these conditions?
Lists and preconditions for the talks
stem from the general ideas of the Palestinians
of what belongs to them.
And they hope that the US can force them on Israel.
The list is an exaggeration.
It is impossible to interpret it differently.
They present their ideal goals and pull back a little,
although they say at first that all of it is non-negotiable.
All articles are taken for granted, only cosmetic changes are allowed.
Has Obama accepted that list as the basis of the talks?
He is very aware of it
by allowing the Palestinians to publicly present it.
If he were a sensible president, thinking what can be achieved,
he would have removed half of the conditions from the list.
Lets look at them one by one. What is the first?
Already the first pulls the carpet from under their feet.
"US and Israel must recognize
that the Palestinian State is an occupied territory."
They are already talking about the State of Palestine,
meaning the West Bank, East Jerusalem and Gaza.
We have discussed all this before.
There has never been a Palestinian State,
thus Israel cannot have occupied it.
But here they presume that such a state existed.
Exactly. They are trying to get the US and Israel to admit,
that Palestine was a state which has been occupied till now
and they are trying to get rid of the occupation.
They do not respect the agreements already signed on the matter.
The last relevant UN decision was made in 1922.
Yes. It was adopted as such in UN's charter.
Palestinians do not even recognize the Oslo 2 Accord signed in 1995,
where they admitted being only an autonomous region
in some areas of the West Bank.
Already the first article is based on a lie. - Yes.
What about the next one?
"Israel must stop extending its laws and jurisdiction to East Jerusalem."
It means an indirect nonrecognition
of Israel as a state with its own laws.
East Jerusalem and Temple Mount are under Israeli jurisdiction,
even though Waqf has the administrative oversight.
The lifting of Israeli jurisdiction would also pertain to the old city,
as the Palestinians want it for the capital of their future state.
The Western Wall would be off limits for us again.
Yes. The whole Old City.
The settlement policy would come to play,
as this is Area C, under Israeli jurisdiction,
with plenty of settlement blocs.
This is a non-negotiable issue for Israel, according to Netanyahu.
Yes. Knesset decided already in 1980
that Jerusalem is Israel's eternal and indivisible capital,
and it will not be negotiated.
Netanyahu has promised to submit the peace accord to the referendum,
where this would not pass.
Also Jesus is to return to the Mount of Olives,
which is part of East Jerusalem. - Yes.
All these areas are either directly or indirectly
part of the Palestinian demand list.
Third demand.
"Palestinians must have sovereignty over whole of its air space."
That is a tough issue. - It is difficult to understand.
They are trying to hinder Israeli air traffic,
the potential missiles, intelligence drones
and everything pertaining to civil and military aviation in the area.
It would considerably weaken Israel's military readiness
as Israel has bases in the mountains of Judea and Samaria,
as well as outposts and radar stations.
Israel's standpoint is the ability to defend its own borders,
but that makes it impossible. - Yes. That is unacceptable.
There's no sense in any of these articles.
Number 4 is next.
"Palestine must have complete control over its borders with neighbors."
Israel and Jordan are presumed to be their neighboring states
and they want the Jordan Valley
where the current Israeli-Jordanian border runs.
It means that the Palestinian-Israeli border
would move west from the Green Line.
That is an impossible idea. It is unacceptable militarily.
It would mean free movement for terrorists
and the flow of all kinds of weapons into the current West Bank.
How does all this affect the main highways
which are currently used by tourists and Jews heading for Dead Sea?
These roads would be blocked
and they would have to reroute through the coastline.
There are existing roads, but new ones must be constructed.
But that is impossible to accept from military and trade perspective.
Article 5 is about borders.
"Israel's withdrawal to the pre 1967 borders is not enough."
Palestinians have gotten greedy.
"Palestine demands borders
that came to effect with the 1949 armistice,
including sectors of Israeli state that were demilitarized at the time.
The map shows that the Palestinians want to make the Israeli territory
between the Mediterranean and the West Bank even narrower.
That would bring all the strategic centers
into the reach of gunfire. This demand is incredible.
So far all of them have been unacceptable.
The width of this bottleneck would be around 10 km.
People drive there.
According to the example of the surprise missile attacks from Gaza
it would render the area impassable.
True. That was the reason the security fence was erected
on the border with West Bank and around the settlements.
Cars were constantly being fired at on the highways passing by.
This problem would be multiplied
should this area become but 10 km wide.
It is an impossible demand.
West Bank would move so close to Tel Aviv and the coastline
and all kinds of weapons could be brought there.
It would divide Israel in two militarily -
Northern Galilee and the Southern areas.
In light of the modern weapons
such a narrow sector can be blocked quite successfully.
What does article 6 hold?
It is about electromagnetic space which refers somewhat to article 3.
"Radio, TV and satellite frequencies
in the space above the Palestinian state
must be solely under their control."
This pertains to Israeli satellite surveillance,
communication satellites, intelligence drones
and anything in the space 500 - 600 km above Palestine.
They want to control everything although they are incapable of it.
They want to block any military and trade related electromagnetic activity,
which is completely general and ordinary today.
They want extra territories and give back only bits.
That is the rediculous part of Article 7.
First they wanted more territory outside the Green Line,
now they are ready to return some.
"PA is willing to give up 1,1 % of the West Bank territories."
That would most likely mean Latroun, Ma'ale Adumim
or some of the more populated settlement blocs,
which would remain within their territory.
The specifics have not been provided but it is quite shocking
how much Israel would have to yield in the name of the agreement.
Their imagination must have run wild here.
What about Article 8?
That is one of the more difficult ones.
"All the areas in East Jerusalem
must be under the Palestinian control,
including all the Islamic, Jewish and Christian holy sites."
As a concession it is declared
that all religions are allowed to practice their faith.
That condition was supposed to be in place
already with the UN partition plan in 1947.
For 19 years the Old City and the West Bank
were occupied by Jordan. Jews and Christians were banished.
Jews were driven out of the Old city,
55 schools and synagogues were destroyed.
Now they want to return to these conditions,
even though they claim
that all faiths can practice their religion.
That was not the case then and the following articles deny it again.
Also Article 9 seems impossible for Israeli security.
"Israel and its army must withdraw within three years
from all Palestinian territories.
6 months after the withdrawal
Palestine will sign the final peace accord with Israel."
They seem to leave a loophole
so they can break the whole package any time they wish.
They have lots of loopholes,
especially what comes to the refugee issue in the next article.
They may sign the agreement if in the mood for it, or not.
Israel must accept it all.
Article 10.
This is about refugees and is the most impossible article.
"US and Israel must recognize a fair and acceptable solution
to the Palestinian refugee issue."
How many refugees are we talking about?
At the moment there are 4,5 million living in different countries.
If they would move to Israel, which is their right according to PA,
they would form 70 -80 % of Israel's population.
Yes and that is impossible.
Arafat proposed that in the Camp David talks in 2000,
Israel did not accept it and Clinton called it impossible.
No state commits national suicide by allowing a demographic move
where people can freely come
and settle in the territory of another sovereign state.
The following article ties into that.
Article 11: "Every Palestinian refugee,
up to four generations back,
is entitled to choose between 3 options:
Israeli State, Palestinian State or their current place of residence."
Does this option have a time limit or can they decide also later?
No time restrictions have been determined.
UNRWA has guaranteed
that Palestinian refugee status is hereditary.
It can be inherited decades and centuries onward
until a decision is made to stop it.
Could you say a few words about UNRWA?
It is a UN organization
formed solely to deal with the Palestinian refugee issue.
For the millions of other refugees in the world
there are other organisations, this one only aids Palestinians.
And these refugees are kept isolated in ghetto-like conditions
living a low quality life
thus fueling their hostility towards Israel and the Jews?
The hostility part is right
but the refugee centers are no longer camp sites,
but quite normal cities with all the necessary conditions.
There are enough reports about the refugee centers.
But they have been kept in isolation
by not being granted the citizenship of their current states of residence
and the only aid available to them comes from UNRWA.
They do not live in ghettos, being tortured and harrassed,
like the media wants to portray.
They live secure lives as much as other people do.
What would these 4,5 million people choose,
should that condition be granted.
Majority of them would like to come to Israel.
This is based on the half a million that once fled from the territory.
They could be allowed to return to their former areas of lodging.
Israel is a wealthy and functioning state
and thus quite desirable.
Palestinians have declared
that the refugees will not be granted citizenship
until the whole issue is solved.
What a picture!?
Four articles left, Number 12 is next.
This is connected with article 11. "Whichever option they choose,
the refugees are entitled to fair and proper compensation.
Only when the refugee issue has been completely solved
will Palestine declare the conflict with Israel resolved."
There are holes in this picture.
First they said they'd consider the conflict with Israel resolved
when Israel withdraws from the West Bank.
Now they extend it to the whole refugee issue.
If any of those 4,5 million people does not get what they want,
the whole process remains unsolved.
What if these 4 million each demand a million?
They can demand a penthouse in some Tel Aviv skyscraper
or a whole floor.
It has not been determined what the proper compensation is.
They might claim
that they have lived 50 -60 years in such and such conditions
and demand to be compensated.
A completely open issue with no solution in sight.
What about the lands involved in this?
They have tried to make the issue a bit more international
so it wouldn't be just between Israel and Palestine.
Article 13: "An international mechanism will be created
to administrate the relocation and settling of the Palestinian refugees.
It should include representatives from Palestine, Israel, USA, EU,
Canada, Australia, Japan and the Arab League."
Quite a concoction with all these different countries.
Who's going to lead this group, how the votes will be conducted etc,
is all an open question.
Such a generally worded claim has been included
in order to confuse the whole picture.
It will never work
from the standpoint of solving the whole refugee issue.
Article 14 is again about Israel's security.
The issue of demilitarization has always been on the table.
Israel considers this non-negotiable.
"Palestinian State is entitled to form military alliances and accords
without the involvement of any third party."
Israel has no business there.
Should this demand be granted
Palestinians could agree with the Iranians
and potentially get nuclear weapons, or with any other terrorist groups
that can bring them any arsenal as they are in control of the border.
This will never work.
That would mean the first steps of national suicide for Israel.
It may refer to some hostility in the background.
Article 15 annuls many previous ones.
"All Palestinian territories will be completely free
of the Israeli civilian and military presence."
In article 8 they declare
that all religions have the right to practice their faith in Jerusalem.
Here the Jews are denied the right to visit their holiest places.
We have a few minutes left.
How would you analyze this package?
Is it realistic?
I have followed the talks and their content from the beginning.
The list is made unacceptable for Israel from inception.
Each article is impossible to accept.
It raises a question whether this was on purpose
and the Palestinians know
that Israel would never accept the demand on Jerusalem,
the demilitarization issue, refugee and space issues,
which directly affect their security.
Palestinians must know this.
They are most likely after a solution where they can play martyrs again:
"Israel is unwilling to negotiate with us,
and does not accept all our sensible demands."
So they can fish for more money from EU, UN, IMF, World Bank etc
and blame Israel for everything.
We know that the releasing of the prisoners is costly for Israel
so they were supposed to be free to build in Area C.
Now that Israel has done that, they are criticized.
It was not included in the protocols but agreed upon orally.
Israel agreed to release sentenced criminals,
murderers, bombers, rapists etc, and to appease their own people
they were allowed to announce building plans in settlements.
When all was said and done, Palestinians got their prisoners,
but settlement activity was banned and condemned.
UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon
announced in connection with the last prisoners release:
"Releasing of the prisoners is good
but Israel allowing the construction of new homes at the same time
is more than regrettable." How horrible!?
It is good to release sentenced criminals,
but building homes for civilians is not allowed!
And the prisoners are treated like war heros.
They all got 50 000 shekels immediately
and will later get monthly salaries for the years spent in jail.
Terrorists are rewarded. - Completely.
Our half an hour is up. We managed to cover it all.
We will continue in four weeks. Thank you, Pekka.
Thank you, dear viewers!
There are always new developments and twists and turns in the road here.
Translation: Monika Jaaguri