Israel Negotiates with Hamas--reaches truce

[Dari]

I wonder what John McCain thinks of these Israelis? He'd probably call them pussies. Then again, Israelis have a tradition of winning. The same cannot be said of McCain.
----------------------------------------------------------------------------
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/7459200.stm

Israel and Hamas 'agree truce'

Israel and militant group Hamas have agreed to end months of bitter clashes with a truce starting on Thursday, Palestinian officials say.

A Hamas official said he was confident all militant groups in Gaza would abide by the agreement, brokered by Egypt.

Israeli officials said they were "looking to see if this is serious".

Earlier at least six Palestinians were reportedly killed in Israeli air strikes in southern Gaza. Israel said it had targeted "terror operatives".

Islamic Jihad said a missile struck a car carrying five of its members near Khan Younis. A sixth man died in a separate strike nearby.

Two-stage deal

Hamas took over Gaza in June 2007, driving out forces loyal to Fatah, the political faction led by Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

Since then, Israel, the Palestinian Authority and the international community have sought to isolate Hamas.

Israel declared the territory a "hostile entity" and has blockaded it in an attempt to pressure Hamas into stopping rocket fire from the strip into Israel.

Over the past seven days, more than 20 people have died in Gaza as a result of Israeli military action. In the same period, the Israeli army says that Palestinian militants have fired more than 90 rockets and mortars into Israel.

Egypt, which has worked for months to clinch a deal between Israel and Hamas, urged both sides to "exert all efforts to bring the calm to a success", senior officials were quoted as saying.

The BBC's Tim Franks in Jerusalem says a ceasefire should lead to an improvement in people's everyday lives in southern Israel and Gaza, but any talk of political upheaval or breakthrough is premature.

Palestinian and Egyptian officials say the truce is to come into effect at 0600 (0300 GMT) on Thursday. As well as a halt to all hostilities, this stage of the deal also envisages a partial reopening of Gaza's borders, they add.

A second stage would focus on the return of captured Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit and on a deal to reopen the main Rafah crossing into Egypt, they say.

In the talks process until now, Israeli concerns have centred on whether all militant groups would adhere to a truce, and what Egypt would do to stop arms smuggling into Gaza, says our correspondent.

'New situation'

Israeli officials stress that phone lines to Cairo are "still running hot".

Israeli government spokesman Mark Regev said: "Words are important, deeds much more so.

"If indeed we see an end of hostile terrorist attacks from Gaza into Israel, if indeed we see the end to the Hamas military build-up inside the Gaza Strip, if indeed we see movement on the issue of our hostage Gilad Shalit, then of course it'll be an entirely new situation."

Hamas official Ahmed Yousef told the BBC: "I am confident that everybody will abide by what we've agreed. All the groups which went to Cairo gave their okay to the ceasefire. If anybody does anything, they will be doing it on their own," he said.

According to a detailed breakdown released by Hamas, Israel will ease its restrictions on Gaza crossings with Israel on Friday morning, followed by the bigger commercial crossings next week.

After two weeks, talks will start involving Israel, Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and the European Union on finding agreement on reopening the Rafah crossing into Egypt, Hamas says.

The truce will apply only in Gaza, Hamas says, and it will not be allowed to respond from Gaza to any Israeli action in the West Bank.

Next steps

Egyptian officials say they will continue efforts to broker a similar ceasefire in the West Bank.

The last ceasefire between Hamas and Israel ended in April last year, shortly before the Islamist movement took control of the Gaza Strip.

Mr Yousef said that the aim now was to push ahead talks on a prisoner exchange, as well as a new round of talks in Cairo between the rival factions of Fatah and Hamas.

A delegation from Fatah has already travelled to the Gaza Strip from the West Bank for talks with other party members.

The group is the first representing Mr Abbas to go to Gaza since Hamas seized control. Hamas has said it is prepared to hold talks with the Fatah officials, but there has been no word from Fatah on whether such a meeting will take place.

 

[fskimospy]

Does this mean that Israel is appeasing the Nazis?

 

[mxyzptlk]

Originally posted by: eskimospy
Does this mean that Israel is appeasing the Nazis?

This was all instigated by Jimmy Carter, and therefore by extension, B. Hussein Osama, oh sorry I meant Obama..

b. HUSSEIN AND TERRORISTS HAVE JOINED FORCES WITH THE NEWLY REVIVED ZOMBIE HITLER!

 

[heyheybooboo]

After two weeks, talks will start involving Israel, Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and the European Union on finding agreement on reopening the Rafah crossing into Egypt, Hamas says.

Condi better hop a plane - if peace breaks out the US might look bad.

I wonder if Tony had anything to do with this ??

 

[Queasy]

This isn't the first time that a cease-fire/truce has been brokered between Israel and Palestinians. They inevitably end up getting broken.

 

[nageov3t]

so is this thread trolling or not?

 

[QuantumPion]

Hamas only calls for truce when they run out of rockets. They'll be back.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Usually, it is someone on the Palestinian side that has an itchy finger and then the Palestinians blame Israel for the response.

If Hamas will actually control, it will be a big step forward. Then Israel should take a reciprocating step (as per the agreement).
Baby steps lead to walking.

Both sides will have to take care to rein in the extremists on both sides for this to work.
No pointing fingers at the past - move forward to the future.

I would envision that there will be a barrage of rockets/mortars on Wednesday from Gaza and there may be an Israeli response.

It would be nice is Israel holds off any retaliation (allow Hamas to have no excuse to not put up) if such an last minute attempt occurs. And will Hamas attempt to shut down before the target time?

 

[magomago]

So as long as Israel keeps building more illegal settlements, and refuses to dismantle existing ones any truce will be difficult.

 

[Thump553]

Condi Rice, with the full blessing of the administration verbally tore Israel a new orifice over the weekend about all the illegal settlements Israel has on the drawing board. I was stunned (and I imagine Israel was too) for this is the first time in my recollection that the Bush administration was the least bit critical of Israel. Maybe it had some effect.

 

[EagleKeeper]

1) Illegal settlements are in the eyes of the beholder. Does the fact that those settlements were there only because Israeli opponents failed to exterminate Israel multiple times and lost control of that land.

2) The whole purpose now is to move forward, not use the past as a justification for actions.

3) Settlements can be dismantled by Israel, if they feel safe enough domestically and politically to do so.
At present it is a political hot potato; both for the land and the impression of security that they provide as a buffer/trip wire. If the buffer is felt to be no longer needed, then the politician will be strong enough to remove the settlements.

This goes for the West Bank as well as the Golan.

 

[ForumMaster]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
1) Illegal settlements are in the eyes of the beholder. Doe sthe fact that those settlements were there only because Israeli opponents failed to exterminate Israel multiple times and lost control of that land.

2) The whole purpose now is to move forward, not use the past as a justification for actions.

3) Settlements can be dismantled by Israel, if they feel safe enough domestically and polically to do so.
At present it is a political hot potatoe; both for the land and the impression of security that they provide as a buffer/trip wire. If the buffer is felt to be no longer needed, then the politican will be strong enough to remove the settlements.

This goes for the West Bank as well as the Golan.

there are now legal settlements in the Golan. mostly locals that were there before 1967. the west bank though, is another issue. just like the stupid religous extremists in america, the same kind belive that regardless of the current situation, because the bible says we have the right for the land, it ours. that's a problem that won't be easy to solve. hopefully if this actually holds for more then a couple of weeks (i'm thinking days but we'll be optimistic) then israel might start considering dismanttling settlements in the west bank.

although to be fair, we evacuated and retreated from the Gaza strip and it did nothing to help. it only hurt us further.

 

[palehorse]

I guess these guys didn't get the memo... :|

 

[Dari]

Originally posted by: palehorse
I guess these guys didn't get the memo... :|

Israel killed them...

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
1) Illegal settlements are in the eyes of the beholder. Doe sthe fact that those settlements were there only because Israeli opponents failed to exterminate Israel multiple times and lost control of that land.

2) The whole purpose now is to move forward, not use the past as a justification for actions.

3) Settlements can be dismantled by Israel, if they feel safe enough domestically and polically to do so.
At present it is a political hot potatoe; both for the land and the impression of security that they provide as a buffer/trip wire. If the buffer is felt to be no longer needed, then the politican will be strong enough to remove the settlements.

This goes for the West Bank as well as the Golan.

If only Israel and the US (at times - sometimes we have to condem these ridiculous actions because we can't ignore it) support these, while the UN completely agrees they are illegal, while no other nation that little shits like Micronesia will agree with them....yes, they are illegal.

If your definition of "eye of the beholder" can include these illegal settlements, then to call Hizbollah a terrorist organization ALSO falls under the "eye of the beholder"

I agree let us move FORWARD. Don't use the past as a justification of further violence because everything is so convoluted its almost impossible to see if an action is the starting fuse for violence, or a reaction to existing violence. That said, to move FORWARD does NOT imply to remove settlements and leave things be. Israel doubled the number of settlements in the 90s, and these shouldn't be tolerated. A contiguous Palestinian state (save for west bank/ gaza separation) is imperative to ensure social and economic stability; a SOVEREIGN Palestinian state is also needed. The right is return is the right of Palestinians and CANNOT be denied, but a settlement (not the kind Israel builds ) can be negotiated because of the logistical difficulties in implementing the right of return. It doesn't mean they give it up, it doesn't mean its useless, it is their right but they have the option to pursue a settlement.

Lets be honest - what is the "buffer" about the settlements. You don't build suburban spawling areas, schools, groceries in an area that should be a "buffer". That isn't a buffer - that is taking land under the guise of a buffer to build on it. I agree that settlements CAN be dismantled, and I agree they SHOULD. That said don't think I don't think Israel's own security is NOT important - It needs guarantees that moving back to what many want (67 lines) will NOT invite further attacks.

I would hope after the establishment of Palestine in the occupied territories they can break down their barriers and begin to unite the land slowly. But for now, let us get Palestine established and then we can move to another dream of a country for all people.

 

[magomago]

Originally posted by: ForumMaster

Originally posted by: Common Courtesy
1) Illegal settlements are in the eyes of the beholder. Doe sthe fact that those settlements were there only because Israeli opponents failed to exterminate Israel multiple times and lost control of that land.

2) The whole purpose now is to move forward, not use the past as a justification for actions.

3) Settlements can be dismantled by Israel, if they feel safe enough domestically and polically to do so.
At present it is a political hot potatoe; both for the land and the impression of security that they provide as a buffer/trip wire. If the buffer is felt to be no longer needed, then the politican will be strong enough to remove the settlements.

This goes for the West Bank as well as the Golan.

there are now legal settlements in the Golan. mostly locals that were there before 1967. the west bank though, is another issue. just like the stupid religous extremists in america, the same kind belive that regardless of the current situation, because the bible says we have the right for the land, it ours. that's a problem that won't be easy to solve. hopefully if this actually holds for more then a couple of weeks (i'm thinking days but we'll be optimistic) then israel might start considering dismanttling settlements in the west bank.

although to be fair, we evacuated and retreated from the Gaza strip and it did nothing to help. it only hurt us further.

Those who lived in Golan before what happened should have every right to stay. Anyone who came in later, I'm sorry to say, would have to leave. This applies most everywhere. If Jewish families have deeds going back to 1930s and earlier (and there were quite a bit of Jews who did!) that were purchased, then it becomes hard to evict them on the same moral principles of why Palestinians also have a right to their land.

Gaza was evacuated, but they were starved to death in a prison. Jet flights over the strip soley to harass the people, cutting off ALL economic activity with the outside only CREATES problems...
I agree - evacuating Gaza, harassing the population, and starving them in the physical and economic sense only hurts Israel further

 

[Jaskalas]

Originally posted by: Queasy
This isn't the first time that a cease-fire/truce has been brokered between Israel and Palestinians. They inevitably end up getting broken.

Rockets will continue to rain in Israel.

 

[jamesall]

OH WOW, the thousandth time now that they reach a truce. This will certainly last.:roll:
As usually, Hamas will resupply their stockpile of rockets during the time of truce.

 

[palehorse]

Originally posted by: Dari

Originally posted by: palehorse
I guess these guys didn't get the memo... :|

Israel killed them...

Thank you Captain Obvious.

 

[fallenangel99]

We'll see how it holds up in a couple of weeks..

 

[libs0n]

I have to hand it to Olmert for committing to negotiation, and not sticking to the fruitless status quo. The Israelis deserve credit for going this route. As does Hamas, although I'm one to believe that they've been ready to come to terms with the Israelis since they were elected, and have been waiting for the other side to come around. They've also been talking to Hezb'allah, but we'll have to wait and see the results of that. The Syrians too!

Bush/Cheney is ending. This is writing on the wall.

 

[EagleKeeper]

Originally posted by: libs0n
I have to hand it to Olmert for committing to negotiation, and not sticking to the fruitless status quo. The Israelis deserve credit for going this route. As does Hamas, although I'm one to believe that they've been ready to come to terms with the Israelis since they were elected, and have been waiting for the other side to come around. They've also been talking to Hezb'allah, but we'll have to wait and see the results of that. The Syrians too!

Bush/Cheney is ending. This is writing on the wall.

Hamas/Palestinians have previously attempted to put restrictions/conditions/escape valves on any negotiation to eliminate responsibilty.

This time, based on what has been published, indicates that there are no escape clauses except (and I might be paranoid).

If anybody does anything, they will be doing it on their own

If this is intended to be for the parties involved, it is fine.
For the Palestinians, if is always an escape valve for others (more than one slipup), then it will demonstrate that the people that claim to be in charge are unable to stand by their word.

If there is only one slipup, then hopefully Israel wil exercise restraint. (I do not think that Israel will initate an incident)

This becomes a chance for all to demostrate there is honesty behind all the words that have been tossed around.

 

[Zebo]

Originally posted by: QuantumPion
Hamas only calls for truce when they run out of rockets. They'll be back.

+1 two steps forward one step back.

"if Muslims are weak, a truce may be made for ten years if necessary, for the Prophet made a truce with the Quraysh for that long, as is related by Abu Dawud" ('Umdat as-Salik, o9.16).

The bottom line is Hamas is feeling the heat and wants a truce in order to regroup and emerge in a stronger position. Israel, idiots they are, will fall for it again.

 

[jman19]

Originally posted by: heyheybooboo
After two weeks, talks will start involving Israel, Hamas, the Palestinian Authority and the European Union on finding agreement on reopening the Rafah crossing into Egypt, Hamas says.

Condi better hop a plane - if peace breaks out the US might look bad.

I wonder if Tony had anything to do with this ??

Wait, they had talks??? Does that mean the terrists have won?

 

[Aimster]

No negotiations with Hamas until they stop training their children to blow up non-Muslims.

Send in the 4,000 tank army and kill them all.