Follow @PoliticsIE
 
 
 
Results 1 to 8 of 8

Thread: Lieberman for Prime Minister of Israel.

  1. #1

    Default Lieberman for Prime Minister of Israel.

    A political storm has erupted in Israel in the wake of Government FM Lieberman's address to the UN. Lieberman: Peace deal may take decades - Israel News, Ynetnews
    Calls for him to be fired are being heard from all quarters amid allegations that he has made statements to the UN which represent his own opinion rather that Israeli Foreign Policy. The offending principles of his speech seem to be that he claimed that "coming up with a long-term intermediate agreement, something that could take a few decades," and "the guiding principle for a final status agreement must not be land-for-peace but rather, exchange of populated territory..Let me be very clear: I am not speaking about moving populations, but rather about moving borders to better reflect demographic realities,"

    Strangely enough this is, in fact, Israeli Government policy and has long been the stated objectives of the Israelis. So what exactly did Lieberman do wrong? Tell the truth ? Spill the beans to fast ? Did Netanyahu want to draw out the lead in period for a few months until he eventually got down to talking about territorial swaps ?
    Israelis or Palestinians cannot benefit from cat and mouse games at this point in time and if it takes an extremist like Lieberman to definitively state Israel's position, then so be it. Lieberman for Prime Minister !

  2. #2

    Default

    Article in the Irish times claims that : Mr Lieberman had said a final deal with the Palestinians would involve the transfer of Israelís Palestinian citizens to the Palestinian state in exchange for the evacuation of Israeli Jews from settlements.

    http://www.irishtimes.com/newspaper/world/2010/0929/1224279906835.html

    But Lieberman didnt say that he said : "Let me be very clear: I am not speaking about moving populations, but rather about moving borders to better reflect demographic realities,"

    Perhaps he should sue for defamation ?

  3. #3
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    528
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Avigdor Lieberman is from a right (more right than Likud)wing semi religious party. I wouldn't expect them to be the largest party in the Knesset any time soon. Hopefully a Labour led coalition with Kadima, might bring about some change.

  4. #4
    Politics.ie Member jackryan's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2008
    Location
    Dublin, but lived in Tipp, Limerick, Kildare, NI, UK & USA
    Posts
    3,681
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dakid View Post
    Avigdor Lieberman is from a right (more right than Likud)wing semi religious party. I wouldn't expect them to be the largest party in the Knesset any time soon. Hopefully a Labour led coalition with Kadima, might bring about some change.
    But if you don't bring some of the right wing with you any peace deal is doomed! bit like needing Paisley in the north!

  5. #5
    Politics.ie Member
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Posts
    624
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    i wouldnt be sure israel has a few decades technology being what it is

  6. #6

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by dakid View Post
    Avigdor Lieberman is from a right (more right than Likud)wing semi religious party. I wouldn't expect them to be the largest party in the Knesset any time soon. Hopefully a Labour led coalition with Kadima, might bring about some change.
    Leadership requires honesty. Perhaps he's the most truthful man in Israel?

  7. #7
    Politics.ie Member L'Chaim's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Dublin
    Posts
    18,970
    Mentioned
    0 Post(s)

    Default

    Of course transfers of populations (Jew and Palestinian) will have to be dealt with in any peace agreement. I argued this point months ago and it's not a new concept. Here's what I said back then......

    "Do you seriously think that the future of Israeli arabs is not going to be in a Palestinian state, if and when it comes about? Regarding the palestinians, this would be a case of 'be careful what you wish for'. In a new independent Palestinian state of course there would be a transfer of people.......both ways. Maybe the Palestinians didn't think about that when they were demanding their own independent state. And it wouldn't be just a transfer of populations to and from Israel and the new Palestinian state, it would also be a transfer of populations from every Arab state that has Palestinian refugees.

    Israel and the Arab states (including the new Palestinian state) and the international community will have to look at transferring populations when it comes to any peace agreement. And this transfer of populations to bring about peace is nothing new. There was a transfer of populations between the Greek and the Turkish sides of Cyprus in the 1970s. Up to 200,000 Greek Cypriots and 45,000 Turkish Cypriots were moved without any loss of life or anyone being killed due to the transfer. Now if that was the case in Cyprus, then why can't or why shouldn't that be the same with Israel and the new Palestinian state? And if the Israeli government are required to have Jews leave their homes and communities and livelihood, in an effort to move closer to a final peaceful solution, then why cannot the same government decide to move other populations for the same goal? If population movement is potentially a legitimate tool in reaching a peaceful solution (like it was in places like Cyprus), then it has to be a legitimate tool for populations other than Jews. In any peace agreement transfer of people will have to be dealt with"

    http://www.politics.ie/foreign-affai...deputy-14.html

  8. #8

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by L'Chaim View Post
    Of course transfers of populations (Jew and Palestinian) will have to be dealt with in any peace agreement.
    I don't know if you're quite getting the point. Its not really the fact that Lieberman is touting land transfers or even population transfers as being part of the negotiations, it's the fact that Netanyahu is pretending that he said something wrong. Its official Israeli state policy to include West Bank land upon which they are housing people in the final state territory. Thats land and population transfer right there. The notion of mutual and minor alterations to the 67 line has been around a long time. Why is Netanyahu pretending to be surprised that Lieberman has simply said this ?
    If its a case that we are going to be watching Netanyahu play a slow game of show and tell for the next two years then it's better for both Israelis and Palestinians that Lieberman do the negotiating. At least he'll cut to the chase.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •