Which side is giving up territory for peace, but still being attacked? Negotiations are not possible if only one side follows through on the agreements.
http://www.pbs.org/wgbh/pages/frontline ... otiations/1993
Oslo sketched out a peace process with a two-phase timetable. During a five-year interim period, Oslo envisioned a series of step-by-step measures to build trust and partnership.
Palestinians would police the territories they controlled, cooperate with Israel in the fight against terrorism, and amend those sections of the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) charter that called for Israel's destruction. Israel would withdraw almost entirely from Gaza, and in stages from parts of the West Bank. An elected Palestinian Authority would take over governance of the territories from which Israel withdrew.
After this five-year interim period, negotiators then would determine a final peace agreement to resolve the thorniest issues: final borders (see map), security arrangements, Jerusalem, whether the Palestinians would have an independent state, Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, and Palestinian refugees' claims to land and property left behind when they fled Israel.
My comment: The charter was never changed nor was there ever any real attempt to curb the attacks on Israel1994
Israeli forces withdraw from Gaza and Jericho, the first step in the peace process. Israel remains responsible for Israelis and settlements in these areas;
Palestinians are now responsible for public order and internal security for Palestinians, and will act to prevent terror against Israelis in the areas under their control. Some 5,000 Palestinian prisoners who have not participated in attacks against Israelis will be released.
1995
Signed by Yitzhak Rabin and Yasser Arafat, this was the second major step in the Oslo process.
Israeli forces would withdraw from the six largest cities in the West Bank. Three percent of the West Bank territory -- which contained approximately one-third of its Palestinian population -- now came under Palestinian Authority jurisdiction. Under Oslo II, the West Bank was to be divided into three areas: one under exclusive Palestinian control; one where Palestinians had civilian control and Israelis controlled security; and one area that would be controlled exclusively by Israel.
1997
After four months of difficult negotiations,
Israel agreed to transfer control of the West Bank city of Hebron to the Palestinian Authority. Unlike earlier withdrawals from the West Bank, 20 percent of the city -- the central area where more than 400 Jewish settlers lived among 130,000 Palestinians -- would remain under Israeli control. Palestinians cheered the withdrawal, but Jewish settlers felt betrayed by Prime Minister Netanyahu.
1998
The agreement allowed for the building of an international airport in the Gaza Strip. Israel agreed to pull back from an additional 13 percent of the West Bank and to release 750 Palestinian security prisoners. (Ultimately, only half of the pull-back is done and only 250 prisoners are released.)
The Palestinian Authority agreed to combat terrorist organizations, arrest those involved in terrorism, and to collect all illegal weapons and explosives. (Little or none of this is ever done.)1999
Signed by Yasser Arafat and Israeli's new prime minister, Ehud Barak, this agreement outlined a bold framework and timetable for a "final status" peace agreement. It also listed further redeployments of Israel's forces in the territories:
Within a few days, Israel was to transfer 7 percent of the West Bank from its total control to partial control by Palestinians; on Nov. 15, 5 percent more would be transferred; and on Jan. 20, 2000, a third transfer would take place. (By then 40 percent of the West Bank would be under partial or full Palestinian control.) Final-status negotiations would be due by mid-February 2000.
2000
Issues never before discussed at senior levels between Israelis and Palestinians -- Jerusalem, statehood, boundaries, refugees -- were put on the table. Barak and Clinton suggested a path-breaking plan permitting a Palestinian state with a capital in Jerusalem. But the Palestinians criticized Barak for coming to Camp David with a proposal for dividing the West Bank they had already rejected. And,in their eyes, the Clinton/Barak plan would have left the new Palestinian state with significant loss of water and good land, almost split by Israeli annexation running east from Jerusalem, and with Israel getting roughly 9 percent of the West Bank. However, U.S. and Israeli officials contend that throughout the summit, the Palestinians rejected Israeli proposals while offering no proposal of their own. Publicly, both Clinton and Barak blamed Arafat for the failure to reach an agreement on a two-state solution.
2001
Two weeks after the negotiations at Taba, hard-liner Ariel Sharon was elected prime minister, defeating Barak in a landslide. Sharon had consistently rejected the Oslo peace process and criticized Israel's positions at Camp David and Taba.
The Palestinian intifada's cycle of violence continued and escalated.
On March 29, 2002, after a suicide bomber killed 30 people, Israel launched Operation Defensive Shield. Israel's troops re-entered Palestinian cities and refugee camps, hunting down terrorists and often leaving massive destruction in their wake. Three months later, in mid-June 2002, two more suicide bombings struck Israel.
Sharon announced Israel would immediately begin a policy of taking back land in the West Bank, and holding it, until the terror attacks stopped.
Login
Register
FAQ
