Saudi prince says Israel has 'right' to its land
The crown prince and de facto leader of Saudi Arabia said Israel has a "right" to a homeland, a notable shift in the kingdom's position published Monday.
Saudi Arabia and Israel still have no formal diplomatic relations, but behind the scenes, improvements in their ties have accelerated in recent years.
Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman --
speaking to the editor-in-chief of US
news magazine The Atlantic --
appeared to put the rival land claims
on an equal footing.
Both countries see Iran as their biggest outside threat and the United States as their key ally, and both see danger from armed Islamist extremists.
Israel's conflict with the Palestinians has long proved an obstacle to a full rapprochement, however, as Riyadh still supports their claim to sovereignty.
But now Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman -- speaking to the editor-in-chief of US news magazine The Atlantic -- appeared to put the rival land claims on an equal footing.
The prince was asked by Jeffrey Goldberg whether the "Jewish people have a right to a nation-state in at least part of their ancestral homeland?"
"I believe that each people, anywhere, has a right to live in their peaceful nation," said the prince, who is on a three-week US tour.
"I believe the Palestinians and the Israelis have the right to have their own land," he added.
"But we have to have a peace agreement to assure the stability for everyone and to have normal relations."
Since 2002, Saudi Arabia has been the main sponsor of the Arab Peace Initiative, which envisions a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
But no such senior Saudi official is known to have previously accepted that Israel has a "right" to any land beyond the practical need to secure a lasting deal.
If, as expected, the crown prince succeeds his octogenarian father King Salman and ascends to the Saudi throne, he will also become guardian of Islam's holiest shrines.
But he told Goldberg he had no "religious objection" to Israelis living alongside Palestinians, so long as the main Muslim holy site in Jerusalem -- the Al-Aqsa mosque compound -- is protected.
"We have religious concerns about the fate of the holy mosque in Jerusalem and about the rights of the Palestinian people," he said.
"This is what we have. We don't have any objection against any other people."
=============================
by AFP
There may be links in the Original Article that have not been reproduced here.
Tags
Who is online
106 visitors
This story was headlined in Le Monde, but in French of course. So I googled it. Nowhere to be found in American media, even though it starts from The Atlantic.
Of COURSE it's not to be found in American media - what makes you think the left-wing slanted American media would publish a pro-Israel view? But what self-loathing Jew Bernie Sanders has to say dissing Israel, THAT you will get to read.
Now, now, Buzz...
Beware of your blood pressure!
It is actually in the American press.. it just took longer:
The Israeli papers are carrying the story too, but with an additional part:
After Crown Prince Recognizes Israel's Right to Exist, Saudi King Reiterates Support for Palestinians
skirting the CoC [ph]
Why did the moderator comment right below yours and not reprimand you for trolling?
Skirting the CoC [ph] Bob's comment to Buzz was related to and stemmed from the topic of the article. Yours didn't.
Bob was joking with Buzz. BF was joiking with Bob. Do you have any comment of substance on the artilce or do you just need to play the NT Police?
Well, he has to voice support for the Palestinians if he supports Israel.
Comment removed for CoC violation [ph]
Ask Bob if he believes BF's comments to him to be friendly "joking"?
Where the heck have you been for the last two or three years Spike?
Comment removed for CoC violation [ph] Perrie has made it clear that his behavior is not in violation of the CoC.
Interesting.
Of course, in all ME pronouncements, there's a lot of posturing. So we can't know the relative importance of the prince's and the king's statements.
Does that make sense to you?
Let me make something clear to both you Bob and John.
So long as BF is making a comment that is on topic and of value, he is not stalking anyone. He is free, just like any other member here to comment anywhere he sees fit, so long as he follows the CoC. This is my only comment on this subject.
Skirting the CoC [ph] Everyone who has been here for a long enough period of time knows that, so spare us the revisionist history.
I am tempted to say what I think... but you'd probably suspend me.
You actually read Ha'aretz? Subscribe in order to read more than just an introductory statement?
I don't blame you for that. After all it was Sun Tzu, the great Chinese general in history, who wrote:
So to know your enemy is of course important. Personally, I would never waste my time to read an Israel-bashing medium.
Of course I knew it was a good-hearted joke - I even thumbed up his comment.
Bob said nowhere in the American media. Remember-- the American media consists of both left wing as well as right wing media. As well as some outlets that are relatively centrist, etc. This is a major story, so it will be carried by most of not all. (Of course those with a political agenda will slsnt their coverage-- but the story will appear).
Why that's mighty considerate of you!
And I'm sure that Bob will greatly appreciate your concern for his well being! Just as he is sympathetic to you! :^)
The total love, support and caring that Newstalkers sometimes show towards each other is downright amazing...I am deeply moved by the attitudes expressed by both of youse!.
LOL!
The interplay of the drama queens on NT is almost as much fun to watch as the interplay of the super drama queens who rule the countries in the Middle-East!
(I actually dislike that emoticon, but it just seemed so appropriate here...)
So what does that mean?
To what does your "what" refer? To bin Salman's statement, or to its absence in US media? Both are significant, I think, but both are pretty evident, too. So I think you'd need to clarify your question.
None of these interchanges (and misunderstandings) surprise me-- m, Mercury is Retrograde!
So they are typical of that period of time....
I think it may be that the French media picked up the story much earlier. But later it appeared in the American media:
Wow. This is real news!
It is,
In fact I wonder if he has long to live...
But in any event, it may not lead anywhere unless the Palestinian leadership accepts the existence of Israel (even if it means they would get their own independent country and get peace---their actions over time is that they'd choose exterminating the Jews even if it meant no independent Palestine).
Actually they already have an area they rule-- Gaza. But they won't declare it a country, because then they couuld no longer complain they were denied a country. (They could declare Gaza a"Palestinian state" and still argue that they don't have all the territory they claim. In other words, declare Gaza to be "Palestine" and than push for other lands such as the West Bank).
Several important events happened:
1. In 1948 there was supposed to be the creation of an independent country of Palestine (consisting of the West Bank plus Gaza) and an independent country of Israel next door.
2. But on the eve of independence 5 Arab countries invaded in order to "push the Jews into the sea". Israel repealed the invaders.
3. However, Egyptian forces didn't leave the battlefields.. Instead they occupied Gaza, thereby preventing the creation of the new country of "Palestine".
The forces of what was then "The Hashemite Kingdom of Transjordan" had conquered the other area that was supposed to become "Palestine"-- the West Bank. They too refused to leave, occupying the West Bank thus preventing it from becoming part of an independent Palestine.
(Cont'd in next comment, #2.1.3)
Cont'd from previous comment (#2.1.2 )
4. While Egypt continued to occupy Gaza, Jordan eventually changed the status of the West Bank-- it was changed from a Jordan occupied area to part of Jordan itself. Yes-- "Transjordan" actually annexed the West Bank.
5. Later, in the 1967 war, despite being greatly outnumbered, there was an amazing Israeli victory over the combined forces of Egypt, Syria, Lebanon, & Jordan, assisted by Iraq and several other Arab countries (as well as a non-Arab Muslim country,Pakistan). The occupation of Gaza switched from Egypt to Israel. The part of the West Bank that Jordan had illegally annexed was also occupied by Israel.
6. in 2005, both the West Bank and Gaza were now occupied by Israel. Israel unilaterally left Gaza. (Foolishly IMO, as they should've asked forsomething in return-- they should have demanded a peace treaty). Currently Gaza is no longer occupied-- in fact there's no longer a single Jew in the entire place. Gaza is now totally ruled by Palestinians-- it is independent, but of course they refuse to declare statehood.
7. Israel's original plan was to completely end the occupation of Gaza, which they did. Next they were going to slowly pull out of various parts of the West Bank. But when Israel left Gaza, Gazans started firing rockets at Israeli civilian areas-- so plans to begin withdrawing forom the West Bank were immediately halted!
Israelis had lived there a long time. They built settlements (which were supposedly "a permanent obstacle to peace") . But when they left Gaza, they destroyed those so-called "permanent obstacles to peace".
The Israeli government decided to end the occupation of Gaza, but those who had lived there weren't happy. Some refused to leave. So the government sent in the army-- to forceably eject Gazan Jews from their homes! There's an excellent photo essay on the subject that is eye-opening:
Exodus From Gaza
The forcible evacuation of August 2005
J EWS have lived on and off in Gaza for millennia, long before Islam or Christianity were founded, and for many centuries before the concept of a Palestinian nation was born. In the past, others have driven Jews out of this strip of land that hugs the eastern coast of the Mediterranean. But in August 2005, in a period of just seven days, 21 Jewish communities were forcibly removed by their own government, as Israel became the first country in modern history to relinquish land acquired in a defensive war to an enemy that had not yet made peace with it.
Virtually not a single Jewish resident of Gaza left voluntarily. Many had to be carried out by soldiers and police. In some cases water cannon and batons were used, but there was no serious violence. After the residents had gone, the Israeli army, at the behest of the Palestinian Authority, destroyed the settlements, leaving only the synagogues, which it was hoped the Palestinians would respect. On September 12, 2005, the last Israeli soldier left Gaza, and it took just 15 minutes for the first abandoned synagogue to be set alight.
(cont'd in next comment)
(Cont'd from comment #2.1.4.):
Exodus From Gaza
The Forcible Evacuation Of August 2005
Photo: A Jewish woman weeps as Israeli soldiers surround the settlement of Neve Dekalim, in southern Gaza, on August 18, 2005, and prepare to move in.
Even those Israelis who strongly backed the plan were greatly saddened to see Jews dragged from their homes. The leftist novelist David Grossman wrote in Ha’aretz : “These are days of mourning for all Israelis. We can mourn today for the passion, the pioneering spirit, the purposefulness that for years pulsed through Gush Katif and which will soon dissipate like smoke, and for the fabric of life there that will be shredded come tomorrow. ( LINK-- more information and more photos)
...or to be deposed. That thought crossed my mind, especially since his father, the King, added that the Palestinians had rights as well.
Nice to see someone in a leadership position in Saudi Arabia acknowledge the rights of Israelis. A 2 state solution is the end game, but the Palestinians need to get on baord with it or face a lifetime of war, terrorism and reprisals.
They already been doing that for decades...
Their propaganda line is that they want a Palestinian state. But the fact is that given a choice, their priority is to exterminate the Jews (or at least have them all leave theMiddle east). Given a choice o fhaving a Palestinian state and a Jewish state and peace-- or wiping out the Jews whatever the cost-- they prefer the latter . . .their actions make that obvious.
You do realize, Krishna, that every one of these many posts... both those about drama queens and those about the ME... are off-topic?
But hey!