Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: la CNN sui confini del 49

straordinario - un articolo equilibrato
http://edition.cnn.com/2011/WORLD/meast/05/24/israel.1967/
(CNN) -- On the website of Israel's Ministry of Foreign Affairs there
is a map -- with a message. The map itself is a basic display of how
regional borders looked before the Six Day War in 1967. The message is
in the distances drawn from those borders to major Israeli cities.
For example, it's noted that the distance from what was in 1967 the
armistice line with Jordan to the Israeli city of Netanya on the
Mediterranean was 9 miles; to Beersheeba, 10 miles; and to Tel Aviv,
11 miles. The city of Ashkelon was 7 miles from the edge of the Gaza
Strip, then under Egyptian rule.
The point is a simple one: Israel was virtually impossible to defend;
any aggressor would try to cut it in half. Read this story in Arabic
That's just what the Arab armies tried to achieve in 1967. On the eve
of the war, the Egyptian newspaper al Akhbar noted: "Under the terms
of the military agreement signed with Jordan, Jordanian artillery,
coordinated with the forces of Egypt and Syria, is in a position to
cut Israel in two at Qalqilya, where Israeli territory between the
Jordan armistice line and the Mediterranean Sea is only 12 kilometres
(7 miles) wide."
It's a point that Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu stressed
at his White House meeting with President Barack Obama last week.
"Remember that before 1967, Israel was all of 9 miles wide, half the
width of the Washington beltway," he said. "And these were not the
boundaries of peace, they were the boundaries of repeated wars because
the attack on Israel was so attractive from them."
His choice of the word "boundaries" may not have been accidental,
because in 1967 Israel had no agreed borders with its Arab neighbors.
They were instead armistice lines agreed to in 1949 after the division
of Palestine. (Internationally-recognized borders with Jordan and
Egypt have since been agreed upon.) The Six Day War rendered those
armistice lines redundant.
At the end of May 1967, Egypt, Syria and Jordan were massing troops
and armor within striking distance of Israel. Egypt had closed the
Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping. On June 5, Israel launched a pre-
emptive attack that destroyed much of the Egyptian air force. In the
days that followed, Israeli forces captured all of Jerusalem and the
West Bank from Jordan, the Golan Heights from Syria and the Sinai
peninsula and Gaza from Egypt. Suddenly, Israel had some "strategic
depth."
For a time, that altered Israel's military doctrine -- meaning that a
pre-emptive first strike was no longer its only option. The October
1973 war showed that Israel was capable of absorbing a first strike
and retaliating.
But Ariel Sharon, when he became defense minister in 1981, argued that
the modernization of Arab armies and their possession of surface-to-
surface missiles had cancelled out the benefits of "strategic depth."
He argued that Israel could not absorb a first strike and should be
ready to launch preventive and pre-emptive strikes against potential
threats. The same argument is made by many Israeli strategists today,
in relation to a potential nuclear threat from Iran.
Successive Israeli leaders have rejected a return to the pre-1967
boundaries, starting with Golda Meir in 1969, who said it would be
irresponsible for any Israeli government to support such a plan.
Former Foreign Minister Yigal Allon wrote in 1976 that Israel needed
defensible borders "which could enable the small standing army units
of Israel's defensive force to hold back the invading Arab armies
until most of the country's reserve citizen army could be mobilized."
When he was prime minister, Menachem Begin said it would be national
suicide for Israel to retreat to its pre-1967 borders. And in 2004,
President George W. Bush promised then-Israeli Prime Minister Sharon a
"steadfast (U.S.) commitment to Israel's security, including secure,
defensible borders." Even so, the international community has never
recognized Israel's claims to any territory beyond the pre-1967
armistice lines.
Intermittently, there has been greater readiness to negotiate
territorial compromise -- most notably at the Camp David summit in
2000, when President Bill Clinton brought together PLO leader Yasser
Arafat and then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak. Barak floated a
proposal that would give the Palestinians control of about 90% of the
West Bank, while Israel would annex the rest. But there were plenty of
complicating factors. According to one account of that summit, Abu
Ala'a, a leading Palestinian negotiator, refused to negotiate on a
map, arguing that Israel first had to concede that any territorial
agreement must be based on the line of June 4, 1967 -- prompting
Clinton to exclaim: "Don't simply say to the Israelis that their map
is no good. Give me something better!" The summit ended in
recriminations.
Ehud Olmert, shortly before he left office in 2008, said Israel would
eventually have to give the Palestinians a "similar percentage" of
territory in return for the biggest Jewish settlement blocs in the
West Bank that Israel would want keep in any "final status" deal. "We
face the need to decide but are not willing to tell ourselves: 'Yes,
this is what we have to do,'" he said. The man who is now Israel's
foreign minister, Avigdor Lieberman, then described Olmert's ideas as
insanity.
So what, if any, "mutually agreed swaps" -- the phrase used by Obama
-- could give Israel the security and the Palestinians the land that
would satisfy both?
"The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and
reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state," Obama
said last week. But in the 44 years since the Six Day War, the map of
the West Bank has become cluttered with substantial Jewish settlements
-- now home to nearly half a million people. A security barrier
meanders deep into the occupied territory, protecting the settlements
but dividing Palestinian land into a series of enclaves.
Netanyahu said after meeting Obama that the pre-1967 borders were now
"indefensible because they don't take into account certain changes
that have taken place on the ground, demographic changes that have
taken place over the last 44 years." Those "demographic changes" are
the settlements.
In addition, Netanyahu has also said he would insist on keeping
Israeli forces in the valley that divides the West Bank from Jordan,
even after the establishment of a Palestinian state, as a safeguard
against rocket attacks.
"If rockets and missiles break out here, they will reach Tel Aviv,
Haifa and all over the state," Netanyahu said as he toured the area in
March.
Other Israeli leaders -- including Yitzhak Rabin -- have taken a
similar position.
Every year, "facts on the ground" -- and advances in military
technology -- complicate the argument over territory, now as visceral
as it was in 1967 and 1948. And that's before anyone has uttered the
word "Jerusalem."

 The point is a simple one: Israel was virtually impossible to defend;
il punto è semplice infatti: Israele ERA impossibile da difendere.


e quindi deve mantenere una presenza militare nella valle del
Giordano.

 e quindi
oggi si difenderebbe benissimo da una coalizione di tutti gli stati
del MO anche se fosse ridotta alla sola Gerusalemme


Mi pare che comunque lo abbia fatto.
-- 
*Sunspot*
Life is a beautiful, magnificent thing, even to a jellyfish.

 Mi pare che comunque lo abbia fatto.
A maggior ragione delle balle di Bibi. E' chiaro che Nahum ha ben poco
rispetto di sè stesso se continua a ripetere cazzate tanto plateali

 oggi si difenderebbe benissimo
no.

 Mi pare che comunque lo abbia fatto.
a un prezzo che non siamo piu' disposti a pagare


ripetere una balla sesquipedale mille volte,vi fa apparire fessi mille
volte, ragionevoli nemmeno una

 volte, ragionevoli nemmeno una
Figurati discutere sempre con tipi del genere.
Cioč..ma non č che tutto il mondo deve star dietro agli interessi d'Israele.
I confini "legali" sono quelli del '67..non gli sta bene, ok...fanno _al 
loro
interno_ un muro di cemento armato largo 5 metri ed alto 10... e poi
stanno lě a farsi le treccine quanto gli pare.
Altrimenti spostano l'esperimento nelle Falkland e musica finita
Ciao!