December 16, 2012
Ma'ariv's Yemini Cites CAMERA on NYT E1 Corrections
. . . Israel is not exempt from criticism. The continuation of construction in Judea and Samaria portrays Israel as sabotaging every chance for peace. That is Israel's weak point. It would have been possible to accept a substantial part of that building and/or expansion were Israel to say to the Palestinians: We are ready to talk with you on the basis of the Clinton plan, which was and remains the basis for any settlement [solution], so long as there is a chance of a settlement. There are two proposals from that time period. Ehud Barak's Camp David offer, and a later proposal known as the Clinton plan. Indeed, Dennis Ross refuted the Palestinian claims regarding Barak's Camp David offer, according to which the proposal did not allow for a contiguous state, but rather cantons. Ross displayed the map, and clarified that the offer was generous, and that it gave the Palestinians 91 percent of the West Bank. The E1 territory was included in the remaining 9 percent. Also according to the Clinton plan, as depicted in the map in Ross's book, Area E1 appears to lie on the Israeli side of the dividing line. And still, the plan gives the Palestinians 95 percent of the land in Judea and Samaria, and, at the same time, the vast majority of settlements remain on the Israeli side. Contrary to the myth which has gained widespread traction in international media outlets, construction in E1 does not bisect the West Bank (and thanks to Presspectiva for clarifying the matter). [Presspectiva is CAMERA's Hebrew site.] And construction does not destroy the possibility of a two state solution. That was what was published in, for example, the New York Times, which following communication with CAMERA, published a correction. (CAMERA's translation)
Posted by TS at December 16, 2012 02:47 PM
Guidelines for posting
This is a moderated blog. We will not post comments that include racism, bigotry, threats, or factually inaccurate material.