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

When the President Sounds the Alarm, But the Government Looks Away.

A President's Moral Warning Israeli presidents traditionally avoid political confrontation. Their role is largely ceremonial and symbolic, intended to unify rather than divide. Yet Herzog chose to speak openly about something many observers have documented for years: the erosion of moral restraints. His language was unusually severe. Warning of what he called " a terrible process of brutalization " within Israeli society, Herzog lamented that " there are segments among us that are barely shocked by violence anymore " while " certain other segments treat it lightly." Perhaps most alarming was his warning that extremist conduct is no longer confined to society's fringes. Such behavior, he said, is " threatening to enter the mainstream ." The significance of the speech lies not merely in what was said, but in who said it. When a country's ceremonial head of state feels compelled to warn that brutality is becoming normalized, the ...

Hajo Meyer: Auschwitz, Zionism, and the Courage to Say “Never Again Means Never Again”

Hajo Meyer did not speak from ideology. He spoke from Auschwitz . Born in Germany in 1924, Meyer survived the Nazi machinery of annihilation and emerged with a conviction that would shape the rest of his life: the Holocaust was not a Jewish lesson alone—it was a human one . To betray that universality, he believed, was to betray the dead. Late in life, Meyer became one of the most unsettling voices in Jewish ethical discourse —not because he denied Jewish suffering, but because he refused to let that suffering be weaponized . The Moral Core of The End of Judaism (2005) In his seminal book, The End of Judaism: An Ethical Tradition Betrayed , Meyer argues that Judaism is not defined by land, power, or ethno-nationalism , but by an ethical tradition rooted in justice for the vulnerable. One of his central claims is uncompromising: “ Judaism is not a bloodline or a state . It is an ethical tradition. When that tradition is abandoned , Judaism ends — regardless of who claims ...

ACTIVE CITIZEN WORKSHOP

Active citizen workshop held in Mid city hotel Near Dera Adda Multan at October 28, 2010 with the coordination of Awaz Foundation and British council. It was four days workshop that ended at October 31, 2010. There were 29 Participants in this workshop from varieties of culture, ages, education, social standard, mental approach and gender. It was like a group of flowers with different colors,size and different perfumes. Mr. Sultan and Ms. Shabnum Ayyub were Facilitator of this workshop who performed their assigned tasks beautifully and effectively. CRITICAL APPRECIATION OF THIS WORKSHOP AS AN OBSERVER AND PARTICIPANT The scope of this workshop was to make realize the youth of this area that they have abundance of qualities too much that can bring a good CHANGE, the change that is long desire of our homeland. Decreasing the trust deficit between each others, between different social groups, between peoples of rural areas and urban areas. Understanding to each others that is key in this ...

Starving Gaza: How Silence Is Enabling a Genocide in Real Time

  Gaza: Starving a Nation in Broad Daylight — and the World Must Act Now Seven weeks. Zero aid. Two million lives on the brink. Gaza is not just suffering — it is being starved. Deliberately. In full view of the world, an entire population is being pushed into famine, death, and despair. No humanitarian aid or commercial supplies have entered Gaza for over seven agonizing weeks. This is now the longest closure the Gaza Strip has ever faced — a man-made catastrophe unfolding before our eyes. The evidence is clear and horrifying: All 25 WFP-supported bakeries in Gaza have been forced to shut down. No wheat. No fuel. No bread. WFP food parcels — intended to last two weeks — have been completely exhausted. Safe drinking water has run dry , leaving families to scavenge scraps to burn just to cook a basic meal. Food prices have exploded by up to 1,400%. Hospitals are collapsing without medicine, electricity, or clean water . And yet, just beyond Gaza’s sealed borders, h...

De dollarization a nightmare for global power elite.

" First and foremost, the weakening of the U.S. dollar would begin if Saudi Arabia accepted local currencies for oil trade. If Saudi Arabia demands that other countries pay in local currencies only, then demand for the U.S. dollar would dip drastically. The move could lead to the dollar facing a depreciation in the international forex and currency markets . A weak dollar would make imported goods more expensive in the United States and potentially impact the overall U.S. economy. Secondly , other nations will begin to diversify their reserves and accumulate other currencies apart from the U.S. dollar . The development would increase demand for other local currencies and put them in direct competition with the dollar. Central Banks around the world will keep reserves of all currencies and commodities like gold, making the USD dip. Thirdly , and in conclusion, Saudi Arabia might not make such a decision as their currency, the Riyal, is pegged to the U.S. dollar. Therefore, if the ...