Nickhere - 09 Mar 07 - 05:53 PM

Question:
But if Jordan has recognised Israel's 'right to exist' and Israel grabbed the West Bank during the 1967 war, and has promised to hand back / vacate land grabbed in return for peace and recognition, why didn't it simply withdraw from the West Bank (which wasn't part of the original mandated state of Israel in the first place) and there would have been no PLO / Hamas etc.,?

Answer:
The deals struck with Egypt and with Jordan took a bit of time to come to fruition. In that intervening period there were some changes, particularly in Jordan. Of all the countries that Arab Palestinian refugees fled to during the 1948 Arab-Israeli War Jordan probably treated them best, especially following the total defeat of the Arab armies in 1967. In response, Tosser Arafat then tried his utmost to overthrow the Hashemite rulers of Jordan and for his pains he and his paramilitaries were thrown out – Tosser toddled of to Tunisia, where he helped himself to large chunks of cash donated by the gullible for the supposed intent of helping the "Palestinian" people (sole invention of Arafat), which it did, I suppose, it helped one of them enormously, Tosser Arafat himself - $300 million plus – not bad eh?

But go back a bit. After the dissolution of the Ottoman Empire, this territory was part of the British Mandate of Palestine. The 1948 Arab-Israeli War saw the establishment of Israel in the former mandate, while the Gaza Strip was captured by Egypt. The West Bank, which was part of what was considered to be the "Jewish Homeland" under the British Mandate, was captured and annexed by Jordan, and the 1949 Armistice Agreements defined its interim boundary. From 1948 until 1967, the area was under Jordanian rule (Jordan formally claimed it in 1950, Great Britain was the ONLY country to recognise the West Bank as being Jordanian territory), though Jordan did not officially relinquish its claim to the area until 1988. It has been occupied by Israel following the conclusion of the Six-Day War. With the exception of East Jerusalem, it was not annexed by Israel. The West Bank is currently considered under international law to be a territory not part of any state. It is considered by the United Nations Security Council, the United Nations General Assembly, the International Court of Justice, and the International Committee of the Red Cross to be Israeli occupied.

In 1988, Jordan ceded its claims to the West Bank to the Palestine Liberation Organization, as "the sole legitimate representative of the Palestinian people. Pretty generous gesture really when you consider that they took the place by force of arms forty years before. But doubly generous to give it to the very people who had tried to take over their kingdom only eighteen years before.

The 1993 Oslo Accords declared the final status of the West Bank to be subject to a forthcoming settlement between Israel and the Palestinian leadership. Following these interim accords, Israel withdrew its military rule from some parts of West Bank, which was then split into:
•        Palestinian-controlled, Palestinian-administered land (Area A)
•        Israeli-controlled, but Palestinian-administered land (Area B)
•        Israeli-controlled, Israeli-administered land (Area C)
Areas B and C constitute the majority of the territory, comprising the rural areas and the Jordan River valley region, while urban areas – where the majority of the Palestinian population resides – are mostly designated Area A.

Now rather than negotiate and actually display a bit of leadership Nickhere, tell us exactly what path Tosser Arafat elected to follow? It was all there for the taking, all he had to do was talk about it. But he chose not to didn't he.

So Nick, its not so cut and dried as you would like to have people think. Now on right of return, what about return of Jewish property on the West Bank to its rightful owners, or are you trying to tell us that no Jewish settlers were displaced as the Jordanian Army swept in to capture the place?