The media is all a twitter (giddiness not the social network) for the first time in many years there is a chance that the Israelis-Palestinians may be closing in on a peace accord.  It would be laughable if it were not so damn pathetic…..this story is 40 years old and it is no closer than it was a half a century ago.

We can pretend that this is a good move on everyone’s side but it is not….these talks are to decide if there will be other talks that will lead to yet more talks that in turn may lead to some sort of agreement……dies anyone else see the humor in all that?

Shall we recap for those that have no intention of caring one way or the other?

1968–UN Resolution 242–The resolution called for the “withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict”, and “respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force”.

1978–Camp Davis Accords–The talks lasted for 12 days and resulted in two agreements.

The first was called A Framework for Peace in the Middle East. It laid down principles for peace, expanding on resolution 242, set out what it hoped was a way of resolving what it called the “Palestinian problem”, agreed that there should be a treaty between Egypt and Israel and called for other treaties between Israel and its neighbours.

The weakness of the first agreement was the section on the Palestinians. The plan aimed to set up a “self-governing authority” in the West Bank and Gaza, leading to eventual “final status” talks, but the Palestinians were not party to the agreement.

The second accord was the framework for the peace treaty between Egypt and Israel. This followed in 1979, after an Israeli withdrawal from the Sinai.

This was the first recognition of Israel as a state by a major Arab country. They probably stand as the most successful negotiations in the whole peace process.

1991–Madrid Conference–This conference, co-sponsored by the US and the Soviet Union, was designed to follow up the Egypt-Israel treaty by encouraging other Arab countries to sign their own agreements with Israel.

Jordan, Lebanon and Syria were invited as well as Israel and Egypt. The Palestinians were also represented, but as part of a joint delegation with Jordan and not by Yasser Arafat or other leading figures in the Palestine Liberation Organisation (PLO), to whom the Israelis objected.

The conference eventually led to a peace treaty between Israel and Jordan in 1994, but this probably would have happened anyway.

1993–Oslo Agreement–The talks took place in secret under Norwegian auspices and the agreement was signed on the White House lawn on 13 September 1993, witnessed by President Bill Clinton.

WHITE HOUSE HANDSHAKE On this day

The PLO leader Yasser Arafat and the Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin shook hands.

The agreement was that Israeli troops would withdraw in stages from the West Bank and Gaza, that a “Palestinian Interim Self-Governing Authority” would be set up for a five-year transitional period, leading to a permanent settlement based on resolutions 242 and 338.

There was an exchange of letters in which Yasser Arafat stated: “The PLO recognises the right of the State of Israel to exist in peace and security.” Yitzhak Rabin said: “The Government of Israel has decided to recognise the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people.”

2000–Camp David–The talks took place in July between Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat.

At Camp David in 2000, Barak and Arafat failed to agree

There was no agreement. However, the negotiations were more detailed than ever before.

The basic problem was that the maximum Israel offered was less than the minimum the Palestinians could accept.

Israel offered the Gaza Strip, a large part of the West Bank, plus extra land from the Negev desert, while keeping major settlement blocks and most of East Jerusalem. It proposed Islamic guardianship of key sites in the Old City of Jerusalem and contributions to a fund for Palestinian refugees.

The Palestinians wanted to start with a reversion to the lines of 1967, offered the Israelis rights over the Jewish quarter of the Old City and wanted recognition of the “right of return” of Palestinian refugees.

2002–Saudi Peace Plan–After the failure of bilateral talks and the resumption of conflict, the Saudi peace plan presented at an Arab summit in Beirut in March 2002 went back to a multilateral approach and in particular signalled a desire by the Arab world as a whole to put an end to this dispute.

Under the plan, Israel would withdraw to the lines of June 1967, a Palestinian state would be set up in the West Bank and Gaza and there would be a “just solution” of the refugee issue. In return, Arab countries would recognise Israel.

The plan was re-endorsed by another Arab summit in Riyadh in 2007.

Its strength is the support given by Arab countries to a two-state solution. Its weakness is that the parties have to negotiate the same issues on which they have failed so far.

2003–Road Map–The road map is a plan drawn up by the “Quartet” – the United States, Russia, the European Union and the United Nations. It does not lay down the details of a final settlement, but suggests how a settlement might be approached.

It followed efforts made by US Senator George Mitchell to get the peace process back on track in 2001.

The plan was preceded by an important statement in June 2002 by President George W Bush who became the first US president to call for a Palestinian state. The road map tries to lay down conditions for its achievement.

It proposed a phased timetable, putting the establishment of security before a final settlement. It is designed to create confidence, leading to final status talks.

Phase 1: Both sides would issue statements supporting the two-state solution, the Palestinians would end violence, act against “all those engaged in terror”, draw up a constitution, hold elections and the Israelis would stop settlement activities and act with military restraint

Phase two: Would see the creation, at an international conference, of a Palestinian state with “provisional borders”

Phase 3: Final agreement talks.

The road map has not been implemented. Its timetable called for the final agreement to be reached in 2005. It has been overtaken by events.

2003–Geneva Accord–While official efforts foundered, an informal agreement was announced in December 2003 by Israeli and Palestinian figures – Yossi Beilin, one of the architects of Oslo, on the Israeli side, and former Palestinian Information Minister Yasser Abed Rabbo on the other.

It reverses the concept of the Road Map, in which the growth of security and confidence precede a political agreement and puts the agreement first, which is then designed to produce security and peace.

Its main compromise is that the Palestinians effectively give up their “right of return” in exchange for almost the whole of the West Bank, though there could be a token return by a few. Israel would give up some major settlements such as Ariel, but keep others closer to the border, with swaps of land in Israel for any taken in the West Bank.

Palestinians would have the right to have their capital in East Jerusalem, though with Israeli sovereignty over the Western Wall in the Old City. The Geneva agreement has no official status.

Another unofficial agreeemnt was one drawn up by a former head of the Israeli Shin Bet internal security service Ami Ayalon and a former PLO representative in Jerusalem Sari Nusseibeh. This envisaged a return to the 1967 lines, an open city of Jerusalem and an end to the Palestinian claim to a right of return to former homes.

And new Obama and Kerry have a new plan to bring peace in our time……everyone of those plans and most had some good points were derailed by one major item….SETTLEMENTS!  And now we are at it again….trying to bringing peace to a land that does not want peace……

Before the talks start in earnest there has been a major situation….again….