Re: FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON REFLECTS ON THE MID-EAST CONFLICT
Unfortunately, Clinton neglects to mention the quid pro quo for that offer, namely that the Palestinians would have to give up the right of return and any compensation claims. I believe that that was the deal breaker for Arafat.
Not for Arafat. He gave zero effffs about any of that. He was facing pressure to abandon the agreement, which he co-wrote, and knew what was included and what was not.
He did it because peace is not profitable (for him or his buddies) and he and the rest of the Palestinian leaders would likely be imprisoned for embezzlement, fraud, etc once it all came out and then he would have to give up his fancy Parisian apartment that his wife loved so much, as well as the “good life”.
The right of return has NEVER been on the table, not on a large scale, at least.. Arafat used it as an excuse to renege on the Accords, but only after he signed them and got the Noble Peace Prize and reaped all the other benefits of signing them.
Olmert offered an equally generous plan eight years later. Also snubbed. The lack of a “right” of return is not the real reason either were rejected. The real reason is that Arafat and later Abbas had no interest in the kind of accountability each would have faced as heads of independent states with no Israelis to blame for their corruption and oppression.
Re: FORMER PRESIDENT BILL CLINTON REFLECTS ON THE MID-EAST CONFLICT
Unfortunately, Clinton neglects to mention the quid pro quo for that offer, namely that the Palestinians would have to give up the right of return and any compensation claims. I believe that that was the deal breaker for Arafat.
Not for Arafat. He gave zero effffs about any of that. He was facing pressure to abandon the agreement, which he co-wrote, and knew what was included and what was not.
He did it because peace is not profitable (for him or his buddies) and he and the rest of the Palestinian leaders would likely be imprisoned for embezzlement, fraud, etc once it all came out and then he would have to give up his fancy Parisian apartment that his wife loved so much, as well as the “good life”.
The right of return has NEVER been on the table, not on a large scale, at least.. Arafat used it as an excuse to renege on the Accords, but only after he signed them and got the Noble Peace Prize and reaped all the other benefits of signing them.
Olmert offered an equally generous plan eight years later. Also snubbed. The lack of a “right” of return is not the real reason either were rejected. The real reason is that Arafat and later Abbas had no interest in the kind of accountability each would have faced as heads of independent states with no Israelis to blame for their corruption and oppression.