Skip to main content

Olmert Says Israel Should Pull Out of West Bank

Olmert Says Israel Should Pull Out of West Bank

By ETHAN BRONNER
Published: September 29, 2008
JERUSALEM — Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said in an interview published on Monday that Israel must withdraw from nearly all of the West Bank as well as East Jerusalem to attain peace with the Palestinians and that any occupied land it held onto would have to be exchanged for the same quantity of Israeli territory.
Prime Minister Ehud Olmert at a cabinet meeting on Sunday. In an interview published Monday, he called for new thinking.
Related
Times Topics: Ehud Olmert
He also dismissed as “megalomania” any thought that Israel would or should attack Iran on its own to stop it from developing nuclear weapons, saying the international community and not Israel alone was charged with handling the issue.
In an unusually frank and soul-searching interview granted after he resigned to fight corruption charges — he remains interim prime minister until a new government is sworn in — Mr. Olmert discarded longstanding Israeli defense doctrine and called for radical new thinking, in words that are sure to stir controversy as his expected successor, Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni, tries to build a coalition.
“What I am saying to you now has not been said by any Israeli leader before me,” Mr. Olmert told the newspaper Yediot Aharonot in the interview on the occasion of the Jewish new year, observed from Monday evening till Wednesday evening. “The time has come to say these things.”
He said that traditional Israeli defense strategists had learned nothing from past experiences and that they seemed stuck in the considerations of the 1948 war of independence.
“With them, it is all about tanks and land and controlling territories and controlled territories and this hilltop and that hilltop,” he said. “All these things are worthless.”
He added, “Who thinks seriously that if we sit on another hilltop, on another hundred meters, that this is what will make the difference for the State of Israel’s basic security?”
Over the last year, Mr. Olmert has publicly castigated himself for his earlier right-wing views and he did so again in this interview. On Jerusalem, for example, he said: “I am the first who wanted to enforce Israeli sovereignty on the entire city. I admit it. I am not trying to justify retroactively what I did for 35 years. For a large portion of these years, I was unwilling to look at reality in all its depth.”
He said that maintaining sovereignty over an undivided Jerusalem, Israel’s official policy, would involve bringing 270,000 Palestinians inside Israel’s security barrier. It would mean a continuing risk of terrorist attacks against civilians like those carried out this year by Jerusalem Palestinian residents with front-end loaders.
“A decision has to be made,” he said. “This decision is difficult, terrible, a decision that contradicts our natural instincts, our innermost desires, our collective memories, the prayers of the Jewish people for 2,000 years.”
The government’s public stand on Jerusalem until now has been to assert that the status of the city was not under discussion. But Mr. Olmert made clear that the eastern, predominantly Arab, sector had to be yielded “with special solutions” for the holy sites.
On peace with the Palestinians, Mr. Olmert said in the interview: “We face the need to decide but are not willing to tell ourselves, yes, this is what we have to do. We have to reach an agreement with the Palestinians, the meaning of which is that in practice we will withdraw from almost all the territories, if not all the territories. We will leave a percentage of these territories in our hands, but will have to give the Palestinians a similar percentage, because without that there will be no peace.”
Elsewhere in the interview, when discussing a land swap with the Palestinians, he said the exchange would have to be “more or less one to one.”
Mr. Olmert also addressed the question of Syria, saying that Israel had to be prepared to give up the Golan Heights but that in turn Damascus knew it had to change the nature of its relationship with Iran and its support for Hezbollah, the Lebanese militia.
On Iran, Mr. Olmert said Israel would act within the international system, adding: “Part of our megalomania and our loss of proportions is the things that are said here about Iran. We are a country that has lost a sense of proportion about itself.”
Reaction from the Israeli right was swift. Avigdor Lieberman, who leads the Yisrael Beiteinu party, said on the radio that Mr. Olmert was “endangering the existence of the State of Israel irresponsibly.”
He added that those who thought Israel’s problem was a lack of defined borders — as Mr. Olmert stated in the interview — “are ignoramuses who don’t understand anything, and they invite war.”
As they reacted to Mr. Olmert’s remarks, Palestinian negotiators said it was satisfying to hear Mr. Olmert’s words but they said the words did not match what he had offered them so far. Yasser Abed Rabbo, a senior Palestinian official, told Palestinian Radio that it would have been better if Mr. Olmert had taken this position while in office rather than while leaving it and that Mr. Olmert had not yet presented a detailed plan for a border between Israel and a Palestinian state.
In theory, Mr. Olmert will continue peace negotiations while awaiting the new government. But analysts generally say that having been forced to resign his post, he will not be able to close a deal.

Comments

Popular posts from this blog

Never Attack a Revolution—Unless It’s Gaza

  By Malik Mukhtar There is a peculiar confidence that comes with being wrong for decades and still being invited back to explain the world. Yossi Alpher—former Mossad official, veteran intelligence analyst, and institutional voice of Israeli “realism”—offers us precisely that confidence in his January 12, 2026 reflections on Iran. His message, distilled, is simple: things are complicated, revolutions are unpredictable, and humility is required . This is sound advice. It just arrives from the wrong mouth, at the wrong time, over the wrong bodies. Because while Alpher warns us—correctly—not to “attack a revolution, ” Israel has spent the last two years doing something far more obscene : attacking a trapped civilian population with no revolution , no army , no air force, no escape —and calling it self-defense . Intelligence: A Sacred Failure, Repeated Faithfully Alpher recalls, with admirable candor, the catastrophic ignorance of Western and Israeli intelligence during...

Gaza Beyond the Alibi of Hamas: Genocide as Method, Silence as Accomplice.( From Chris Hedges report )

We are the most informed generation in human history—and perhaps the least disturbed by what we know. From the first missiles that struck Gaza’s residential blocks to the slow starvation that followed, everything was visible. Every destroyed home. Every burned hospital. Every child pulled from rubble. And yet, the global emotional temperature barely rose. In an age of total visibility, feeling itself has become scarce. Watching has replaced witnessing. Knowing has replaced responsibility. This moral numbness is not accidental. It is cultivated . And at the center of this cultivation stands a single word, endlessly repeated, ritually invoked, and strategically deployed: Hamas . Hamas has functioned not as an explanation, but as an alibi. The Choice Was Announcedk From Day One From the earliest days of Israel’s assault, the policy was articulated with chilling clarity: Gaza’s population would be given two options— stay and starve, or leave . This was not the language of counte...

When the Warning Comes from the General Moshe Ya’alon, Jewish Supremacy, and the Echo Nobody Wanted to Hear

History has a cruel sense of irony. Sometimes the most devastating indictments do not come from the oppressed, the bombed, the buried, or the silenced—but from the very architects of power who once swore they were different. This week, that indictment came from Moshe Ya’alon : former Israeli Defense Minister, former IDF Chief of Staff, lifelong pillar of Israel’s security establishment. Not a dissident poet. Not a radical academic. Not a Palestinian survivor. A general. And what he said shattered the last polite illusion. “ The ideology of Jewish supremacy that has become dominant in the Israeli government is reminiscent of Nazi race theory.” Pause there. Sit with it. This was not shouted at a protest . It was not scribbled on a placard. It was written calmly, deliberately, after attending a Holocaust Remembrance ceremony —then reading reports of Jewish settlers attacking Palestinians , blocking ambulances , fracturing skulls , burning homes. Never Again, apparently, now ...

Ras ‘Ein al-‘Auja: How Ethnic Cleansing Happens Without a Declaration

Ethnic cleansing rarely announces itself with sirens or official decrees. More often, it arrives quietly—through sleepless nights, smashed water tanks, stolen sheep, armed men grazing livestock on stolen land, and the slow realization that survival itself has become impossible. On 8 January 2026 , Israel completed what it had been methodically engineering for months: the forcible transfer of 26 Palestinian families from the shepherding community of Ras ‘Ein al-‘Auja in the southern Jordan Valley. That is 124 people , including 59 children , pushed from homes their families had lived in for decades—not by a single evacuation order, but by sustained terror. This is not a humanitarian crisis caused by “clashes.” It is not a byproduct of war. It is a deliberate policy outcome . Violence as Policy, Militias as Instruments Ras ‘Ein al-‘Auja lies about ten kilometers north of Jericho. It is the last remaining shepherding community in the southern Jordan Valley , and the largest sti...

“Not Auschwitz — Yet Still Genocide”: When Israeli Holocaust Historians Break the Silence on Gaza

  There are moments in history when the most unsettling truths do not come from one’s enemies, but from within. From those who know the past most intimately. From those whose moral authority is built not on ideology, but on memory. In December 2025, two of Israel’s most respected Holocaust and genocide scholars— Prof. Daniel Blatman and Prof. Amos Goldberg of the Hebrew University of Jerusalem—published a deeply unsettling opinion article in Haaretz . What they argued was not casual, rhetorical, or activist hyperbole. It was a grave historical judgment. Their conclusion was stark: What is happening in Gaza is not Auschwitz. But it belongs to the same family of crimes: genocide. Why This Voice Matters Blatman and Goldberg are not marginal figures. They are historians whose professional lives have been devoted to studying Nazi crimes, genocide mechanisms, memory, and moral responsibility . Their scholarship is rooted in the very catastrophe that shaped modern Jewish iden...