Beginning in July 2000, Palestinians and Israelis
tried to negotiate a permanent peace settlement with active American help, first at Camp David, and in December of 2000
in Washington. The Israelis and Palestinians continued negotiations in January 2001 at Taba. Because no maps of offers
were published, various claims were made about what was offered. "Palestinian sources" published maps that supposedly
showed that Israelis had offered non-contiguous "Bantustans" with US approval. Israelis claimed that PM Barak had made a
"generous offer." In Dennis Ross in "The Missing Peace, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 2004, US negotiator Dennis
Ross published maps that support the Israeli version.
July 2000
The Clinton offer at Camp David as characterized by
Palestinians (at left) and the map that President Clinton actually proposed according to Dennis Ross, and which Arafat
rejected. Ross observed in an
interview. (http://www.cceia.org/viewMedia.php/prmTemplateID/8/prmID/5000:
_
-
For the first time, I present maps that compare what the Palestinians were offered with what Arafat says he was offered.
-
Arafat says he was offered cantons, small, isolated Palestinian islands, completely divided up by Israeli roads and settlements and surrounded by the Israelis - completely untrue. He says he wasn't even offered 90 percent of the West Bank - completely untrue.
 |
December, 2000
During the final weeks of the administration of Israeli PM
Ehud Barak in 2000, there was an attempt to complete final status negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians.
Clinton was a lame duck president, and Barak was facing elections in February. Violence initiated by the Palestinians in
September 2000, and Israeli countermeasures formed the background for these talks held in Bolling Air Force base and in
the White House. At the conclusion of these talks on December 23, President Clinton presented
bridging proposals
that, as reported were principles rather than detailed borders, and asked that the sides accept them. Both sides
eventually accepted them as a basis for further negotiations. According to some sources, Clinton also presented a map at
these negotiations, and that is the map shown below.
A second round of talks was held in Taba, Egypt, near the
Israeli town of Eilat on January 21-27, under European sponsorship.
Pro-Palestinian analysts claim that Barak proposed a
Palestinian state of "Bantustans," enclaves separated by zones of Israeli control and large areas of temporary Israeli
sovereignty. Pro-Israel analysts claim that Barak made a generous offer comprising 97% of the area of the West
Bank and the Gaza Strip. In actuality, there were several stages in the negotiations, and, if informal reports are
correct, the final offer of the Israeli side was indeed generous relative to earlier offers - but it is not clear that
the offer was really made. The map of the "final Israeli offer" that has been published in several places (see below)
didn't include enclaves or zones of temporary authority. However, according to the non-paper of
Miguel Moratinos which summarized the negotiations, there was nonetheless disagreement between the sides about
borders, Jerusalem and refugees. Moratinos notes that the Israelis made an offer which Barak later rescinded as invalid
It is not clear if the map of the final offer of January 2001 published in several places is the one that was rescinded
by Israel.
On January 27, both sides published a
statement saying they had never been closer to agreement, but Barak, facing elections, suspended the talks.
Miguel Moratinos' "non-paper" summarizing the positions of
the sides. Post-mortem of the Oslo Process - click here
These maps were provided by FMEP. Though they were not
disputed by the sides, according to Dennis Ross they were NOT an accurate reflection of President Clinton's bridging
offer. According to the maps, the Palestinian state would have been permanently divided into several sub areas in
the West Bank , separated by areas of Israeli Control. Striped areas would have remained under Israeli control for 12 to
20 years. According to FMEP, The calculation that the Palestinians were getting 97% of the land ignores the area of
Jerusalem and the striped areas. In actuality, the area of the Palestinian state would initially be about 70% of some
2,200 square miles.
US Bridging Proposal According to Palestinians |
Israeli Proposal According to Palestinians |
 |
 |
| These two maps were circulated by FMEP based on Palestinian sources. According to Dennis Ross, the map showing the US proposal in December 2000 is incorrect. The correct map is shown below. Dark gray areas are currently Areas A and B of Palestinian control. Light gray and dark gray areas would become part of the Palestinian state. Gray-striped areas would become part of the Palestinian state after an interim period. Maps are adapted from http://www.fmep.org. Note that the dark and light gray areas are both to be ceded to the Palestinian state, and do not represent "enclaves." | A map showing supposedly the projection of the Israeli proposals of the government of Israeli PM Barak, December, 2000. Dark gray areas are currently Areas A and B of Palestinian control. Light gray and dark gray areas would become part of the Palestinian state. Gray-striped areas would become part of the Palestinian state after an interim period. Maps are adapted from http://www.fmep.org. Note that the dark and light gray areas are both to be ceded to the Palestinian state, and do not represent "enclaves." |
Map Showing Clinton Ideas for Palestinian-Israeli Peace Settlement, December 2000.
 |
At left is a map drawn by Dennis Ross
that shows President Clinton's Bridging Proposals. The inroads into Palestinian territory are much smaller, and the
confusing and irrelevant Areas A, B and C are not shown. Likewise the zones of temporary Israeli control are not shown.
This map is presented by US negotiator Dennis Ross in "The
Missing Peace, Farrar, Strauss and Giroux, 2004.
In an interview, Ross noted: In the Clinton ideas, which are also presented in the book, the Palestinians were offered the following: 100 percent of Gaza, roughly 97 percent of the West Bank. The principles that guided the way the borders should be drawn and determined by the two sides, based on the percentages were: Contiguity of territory for the Palestinians, non-absorption of Palestinians into Israel. |
" |
January 2001- MAP: Taba negotiations
Map is adapted from Foundation for Middle East Peace
|
According to Gush Shalom and Foundation for
Middle East Peace, Barak submitted another map in January 2001, as shown at left. Note that the dark and light gray
areas are both to be ceded to the Palestinian state, and do not represent "enclaves." This map is similar
to the Clinton bridging proposal map of December 2000, but the area around Ma'aleh Edumim that is ceded to Israel is
a bit larger. On the other hand, the area ceded to Israel in the north that is shown in Ross's map is not evident in any
other maps.
In this map there were no longer any areas of temporary Israeli control
and no Palestinian enclaves. A large area between Jericho and Maaleh Edumim, previously claimed by Israel, was included
in Palestinian territories. The Palestinians supposedly "accepted" this map "as the basis for further negotiations" but
they did not agree to the borders, and apparently insurmountable problems remained regarding
Right of Return of refugees Jerusalem and other issues. On Jan 27, 2001, the sides issued a joint
statement saying, "The sides declare that they have never been closer to reaching an agreement and it is thus our shared belief that the remaining gaps could be bridged with the resumption of negotiations following the Israeli elections." Barak broke off the negotiations on the next day, reportedly saying, "There is no point in talking with Arafat. I am cutting off contact with him until after the election." Right wing critics had considered the negotiations pointless because of the approaching elections, in which Barak was defeated on February 6. The map at left is based on surmise and leaks. No official map was ever released. It is not at all clear that it was accepted by the Palestinians The "non-paper" of Miguel Moratinos issued after the negotiations fell apart indicates that there was in fact no agreement: "According to the document, Israel gave up all the Jordan Valley settlements, focusing instead on its security interests in that area. The dispute centered around the large stretch of territory between Ma'aleh Adumim and Givat Ze'ev, which contains both a fairly large Palestinian population and East Jerusalem's most important land reserves. The Palestinians retracted their earlier readiness to include these two settlements in the settlement blocs to be annexed to Israel after realizing that Israel also insisted on annexing the large tract that joins them - which would mean that Palestinian citizens would suddenly find themselves in sovereign Israeli territory. Barak instructed his chief negotiator, Gilad Sher, to tell the Palestinians that the map presented by then foreign minister Shlomo Ben-Ami, which reduced the area of the settlement bloc (including the Ma'aleh Adumim-Givat Ze'ev tract) to only 5 percent of the West Bank, had no validity."
In the map at left, Givat Zeev
and Ma'ale Edumim are part of the territories to be kept by Israel. It is not clear if this is the map that Barak
rescinded, or the map that the Palestinians objected to.
|
Map showing the current division of land
Orient House Maps of the Camp David 2 Offer
back to Camp David Proposals Home
No comments:
Post a Comment