Make your own free website on Tripod.com
Oct. ...Nov. 2000         Regarding CNN Message Board, Mid East
./.
One Solution for the Middle East Problem

By Pavel Kollar
Arabs are repeating the same conditions for peace with Israel as Arafat required in negotiations. But Arafat, when already reached the goal refused a small and unimportant compromise to end the deal successfully. Now there remained a war as solution. But in war all are losers. Wars are repetition of past, of history. A poor performance for every politician.

I offer one solution from the standpoint of future. The problem has solution but in a different way of thinking. Imagine Israel annex West Bank and Gaza Strip and thereafter also Jordan annex West Bank and Egypt annex Gaza. So, West Bank and Gaza Strip will be 'double annexed' territories. Nonsense! Not at all. One needs only to apply a principle which is different from traditional sovereignty principle. The result will be that some territories of these three states(Israel, Jordan and Egypt) will be considered as their 'trunk' or 'secluded' territories and some as 'shared' or 'joined' territories. On these 'shared' territories only the land between settlements will bo really 'shared', the settlements will be sovereign, either Arab or Israeli and people in these settlements will live every under their own rule. So, there will not be Arabs living under Israeli rule, neither will Israelis living under Arab rules(the status of the so called 'national minority' in a traditional sovereign state, what is undemocratic). There will be one Israeli administration in (undivided) Jerusalem for Israelis, one for Arabs from West Bank and for Arabs from East Bank in Amman and the third one, for Arabs from Gaza Strip and all Arabs south or south west of Gaza Strip, in Cairo. All persons will have their own national citizenship. Those living in mixed settlements (for ex. Jerusalem and similar) will acquire their citizenship according their national belonging, which is either from Jerusalem or from Amman or Cairo, but their rights and obligations will be subject of special bilateral agreements among the three administrations. The problems coming from sharing territories will also be regulated by similar contracts or it can be created a special institution for these questions, something as mini-UN, in some place different from 'national' administrative places. So, no special peace negotiations are necessary because there already exist peace agreements between these three states. I think this model is the best and can satisfy all participants.

In addition to this, and for the purpose of reconciliation and restitution, I propose establishment of an International Tribunal for Middle East for investigation of all crimes and atrocities committed since 1948 and an establishment of International Commission for Compensation for all refugees and displaced persons in Mid East and Europe since 1933, both under UN administration.
./.
Your comment:
©Copyright 2000 Pavel Kollar



20 October 2000           Regarding CNN Message Board, Mid East,
./.
The statement of one Arab participant: '...... when it comes down to it all poeple dream of a few commomn things a good home a nice family and a regular income. Peace is not the outcome of a treaty its a state of mind.

All poeple are good and most poeple do not go around killing each other just for the heck of it. Most of us agree that am independant palestinian state is a virtual reality now nothing can stop it what it comes down to is borders and that is what the fighting is about.

In particular we are talikng about jerusalem and the old city more precisely. Who will get it? it depends all i know is that both parties will have to feel some kind of achievement has been reached Barak couldn't come out in camp david and say yes to dividing it.He knew it will cost him his position and the right will kill the deal. Sharon has prooved an even more extremist that netenyahu maybe a goverment comprising both barak and netenyahu can sell the idea better. do not forget that barak prepared thye road quite well when he offered parts of the old city and there were talks about a jerisalem capital of israel and al quds capital of palestine the end will be something in this kind of thought.

But the only thing i can assure you is that when the deal is done peace will be a reality.'
----------------------------------------
My replay ' ..Do you make difference between political game play and solution of problems of people: to have income, to go to school, .... What you described(as condition for the second) is a political game play, a never ending game which lasts already 35 years with people sitting in camps and throwing stones .... and this game can last very long. But, finally what is the role of politicians, to play pocker with one another or to care about functioning of institutions?
./.
©Copyright 2000 Pavel Kollar
**********************************************.
./.
The discussion of one pro-Arab participant: ....'Supporting Israel is like supporting a comic book factory their religion is fictional, as are all religions, but theirs is constantly adjusting itself so it can be in corruption
with those forces around the globe that are willing to believe their propaganda and killing excuses. Supporting Israel is fostering dependence! Land is land food is food schools are schools hospitals are hospitals and that is what the Palestinians need. You attack people who are being deprived of an even battle and you make excuses for the deaths of innocent children, you should join your fiction spewers in the American media. I wish you the worst.'
---------------------
My replay: 'Why you ascribe this ' ... not having schools, hospitals, .... ' to Israel, why not to Arafat?'
./.
©Copyright 2000 Pavel Kollar
**********************************************
./.
My discussion: 'Cairo summit. A bad policy came out. Bad for whom? For all. Pressing only on Isarel and encouraging Palestinians won't contribute to desires of Arab participants on this board. Arafat and the idea of Palestinian state are cause of the present confusion. Arab world embraced Arafat without knowing who being he really. A Troya hourse of future revolution which will one day kick out those who are supporting him today. They are blinded by blood relation, not seeing that Israel in reality protects their interests. They are only repeating Europ's mistakes of the last century. What kind of state will be this Palestinian state? Will it really contribute to that bright Arab future described here by several Arab participants or it will be an obstacle to Arab greatnesss? Europe learned that to slip into populism is much easir than to get out.'
./.
©Copyright 2000 Pavel Kollar
---------------------------------
One reaction: '...nice approach. Basically you are saying these little animals do not deserve a state. What a comment knowing your history when they were begging the British for a state "Please help help Hitler is frying us" what was Israel before 1948, the answer is NOTHING it was Palestine. Not because they raped the land and kicked the Arabs out they can judge now who can have a state and who can not!!!!! Come on, We will have our own state whether you like or not.'
--------------------------------
My respond: 'I meant 'Palestinian state under Arafat'. Had your leader been only so reasonable as the leaders of Egypt or Jordan, I would congratulate you on your state.'
./.
©Copyright 2000 Pavel Kollar
-------------------------------------------------------------
Your comment:



18 October 2000              Regarding CNN Message Board, Mid East

To Stone Throwing Diplomats!

By Pavel Kollar
The arguments of the stone throwers .... they are throwing stones because of spontaneous expression of feelings, no possibility to go to school because their land is occupied and the authority closed the schools, ...... so lot of time for street.

Several years ago I read an article in one magazine about life in Central Europe in period between the end of 19th century and the beginning of WWII. The point of the article was on life in general, the Jews were mentioned only marginally. But even this was sufficient to focus on conditions under which Jews lived in Europe for centuries. Here are several examples. They lived mostly on attached places and they did not enjoy the freedom of movement as another. For a trip to the next place they had to ask permission and this was limited on a day or hours. By trespassing the limit the penalty was arrest. Their schools were at first at home because they were not allowed to visit official schools. Knowledge was transmitted mostly verbally. There were no special books. The only books were often the Talmud and Bible. The Medicare institution was also at home. Knowledge for curing of different diseases was transmitted from one generation to another in the families. In some places there was a custom of beating Jewish children by their Christian neighbour-fellows in the event Christian holidays or by start of the school year. In greater places they were not allowed to enter some streets or pass the Christian churches or parishes, if so, they risked being beaten. There was only a limited number occupation they could exercise in relation to others, and they were not allowed to use all institutions. They were exposed to mockery and to cynicism with consequences that they were allowed to be deprived, deceived and similar.

I do not argue that my knowledge about the life of Jews in Europe is complete, maybe others know more, but I think Palestinian knows too little about the life the Jews in Europe. Their life was far from life in freedom without constraints. But they never protested any authority. Just contrary, they were loyal to authorities who in reality were at least their enemies. Those who disliked them were the poor classes of domestic inhabitants. From time to time there were pogroms, made to deprive them of their property. If they made business with domestics, many credits remained unpaid by those who borrowed from them. They were called 'green' for their banking business, and disliked for this, but still they were mostly the only who could provide some financial help to lower class families of domestics. Later when they were allowed to attend public schools, the jealousy of domestics came often to manifestation if they showed a better success in the school. And when they later made carriers, they were hated also for this. With the time, domestic also learned something from them and became more wealthy, but it seems that the degree of dislike did not decrease. With time, they became something as hatestick of Europe. And when populists, the representatives of European poor(or lower mid, at least they presented themselves so) gain power, the first what they have done, was the extermination of those whom they disliked for centuries.

Today Palestinians hate them for near the same reasons for what they have been hated in Europe in past centuries. And they advanced to become the hatestick of the World, thanks the successful propaganda of Arab World. The so called 'Palestinian refugees' problem is only a mean in the hand of Arab propaganda. They are keeping this problem artificially unsolved to have arguments in influencing others.

Whose problem is this, Jewish or Palestinian? One cannot say that the Jews are on wrong place there. This is their place. If Palestinian hate them, this is Palestinian problem, not of the Jews. The external observer can say only that the differences between Palestinians and Jews in some fields are significant. The handicap of Jews is that they are a tiny minority there, so that they cannot govern the rest, but neither they allow to be governed by others. Possibly this 'neither ... neither' is the real cause of the conflict.
./.
Your comment:
©Copyright 2000 Pavel Kollar