اجعلنا صفحة البداية RSS خدمة Add to favorite Facebook Twitter

Advanced

Israel refuses to compromise on Jordan Valley
Published Thursday 05/12/2013 (updated) 07/12/2013 10:28
Font- Font+
(MaanImages/file)
JERUSALEM (AFP) -- Israel's deputy defense minister ruled out Thursday any compromise on security in the Jordan Valley as Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu held security talks with US Secretary of State John Kerry.

"The Americans are proposing joint control over the crossing points (into Jordan)," Danny Danon told Israel's army radio.

"From the Israeli point of view, there will not be any Palestinian presence at the crossing points," said the deputy minister, who is a radical member of Netanyahu's rightwing Likud party.

"An Israeli civilian and military presence in the Jordan Valley is essential."

Kerry arrived in Israel late on Wednesday in his latest attempt to drive forward the faltering peace talks which have almost reached the halfway point with very little visible progress.

US officials have said the focus this time would be on Israel's security arrangements, although they have refused to confirm media reports that Kerry was to present Netanyahu with a plan of how this could look in the context of a peace deal.

Israel has always insisted that in any final agreement, it would have to maintain a military presence in the Jordan Valley, which runs down the eastern flank of the West Bank, bordering Jordan.

According to a report in Maariv newspaper, when US General John Allen briefs Netanyahu during the morning meeting, he will outline a "bridging proposal" which will enable Israel to reduce, as much as possible, its military presence in the Jordan Valley.

Quoting senior diplomats, the paper said the plan would outline arrangements for a transitional period and a permanent status arrangement and may include "guarantees, advanced technological equipment and unique weaponry" which would enable Israel to either "reduce or to replace its military presence along the Jordan River".

A central part of the plan would address early warning stations and security over air space, particularly around Israel's main international airport near Tel Aviv.

Haaretz newspaper on Wednesday said Washington was now focusing on resolving Israel's security needs in the hope it will allow them to push Netanyahu on other aspects, such as the borders of a future Palestinian state.

"The Americans have concluded that Netanyahu will not agree to move forward on other elements (of a peace deal) such as the borders of a future Palestinian state without an arrangement on security," it said.

Israel has demanded that any future Palestinian state to be demilitarized with an Israeli military presence along the Jordan Valley.

Netanyahu has said Israel would only accept the emergence of a Palestinian state if it was demilitarized, with Israeli troops deployed along the Jordan Valley.

And he has completely ruled out any transfer of security control in the border area to a third party -- an option which would be acceptable to the Palestinians.

After talks with Netanyahu, Kerry will head to Ramallah to meet President Mahmoud Abbas at 12 p.m.
Print
1 ) Shame on these wierd jews / why do they care about
05/12/2013 18:39
their security???? strange people.

2 ) zionazi to keep jordan valley? / USA
05/12/2013 18:44
so they want to keep the occupation going but call it a peace deal...

3 ) hamid amiri / brighton, UK
05/12/2013 22:20
Jordan allowed Iraq troops to enter west bank in May 1967 to assist their invasion of Israel. Without control of the Jordan an "independent" Palestine can "invite" foreign troops in as before. With very small hinterland no wonder Israel will not tolerate a repedition.

4 ) Adam / USA
05/12/2013 22:43
Tactically it would be stupid for them to leave the jordan valley, infact it would be stupid for them to leave the West Bank. And they will not leave willingly. As long as there is no balance in power in the Middle East they will keep taking more. The only situation that would result in them leaving the West Bank and jordan valley is if they were forced out. That is the reality.

5 ) @3 more zionazi excuses / USA
05/12/2013 22:49
to steal more land....good thing there aren't more of you to take over the whole world for your 'security'....what a stupid lame excuse! you are common thieves and filth

6 ) Julie / USA
05/12/2013 23:50
it's the Jordan/Palestinian border for which izrael should have NO SAY whatsoever regardless of any paranoid security rhetoric. let the Jordanians and Palestinians deal with it, and if izrahell doesn't like it, TOO BAD, call in UN or NATO troops for security. izrael's 'demands' are for more occupation and should NOT be considered, nor should izraeli needs/demands be one iota more superior to the needs/demands and sovereignty of Palestinians.

7 ) southparkbear / usa
06/12/2013 02:06
but we'll allow a tunnel or two

8 ) Colin Wright / USA
06/12/2013 02:30
I'm trying to recall: did the Bantustans South Africa set up have control over their border crossings?

9 ) Colin Wright / USA
06/12/2013 02:32
To zionazi #2: 'so they want to keep the occupation going but call it a peace deal...' They want to set up ghettos for Palestinians and call it an independent state. I would compare the proposal to Indian Reservations, but Indians can vote in national and state elections, and they can leave the reservation, so that wouldn't be accurate.

10 ) Colin Wright / USA
06/12/2013 02:37
To 'Shame' #1: If they cared about their security, they'd hardly be in Palestine and attacking every neighbor they had.

11 ) Colin Wright / USA
06/12/2013 02:39
To hamid #3: 'Jordan allowed Iraq troops to enter west bank in May 1967 to assist their invasion of Israel.' There was no invasion of Israel in 1967.

12 ) @3 zio liar in UK / USA
06/12/2013 03:08
Jordan did not attack israhel, israhel attacked egypt and jordan first....secondly liar and zio apologist how much land do you zionazi intend to steal to feel secure? any idiot can tell you that a theif can never feel secure

13 ) southparkbear / usa
06/12/2013 07:51
security, biblical rights are very important. but the pleasure comes from just saying no

14 ) Simple / Reality
06/12/2013 16:55
Neither side will consider changing their position ever, so
** NO COMPROMISE will be agreed upon ever, and
** NO PALESTINIAN STATE will be created ever, and
** Both sides seem to prefer this 1-State/No-State Solution,
to a solution that would require them to compromise !!!

15 ) Julie / USA
06/12/2013 17:40
#14 - Palestine is already a state, given statehood by the UNGA, the same body that gave izrael statehood. nobody's problem but yours if you can't deal with it. but so pathetic that izrael relies on others to 'recognize' them for validation. i don't need anyone to recognize me in order for me to validate myself.

16 ) Rafael / USA
06/12/2013 21:59
Palestine is not a state until Israel recognizes it in the real world. Since the Palestinians are not being realistic in compromising with the Israeli positions, there will not be a new actual running functioning state on the ground.

17 ) Colin Wright / USA
06/12/2013 22:14
To southparkbear #13: '...security, biblical rights are very important...' Both parts of this are nonsensical. You can't claim a right to 'security' for lands that you have yourself agreed you have no title to in the first place. Second, since both Muslims and Christians see themselves as reclaiming the 'pure' revelation that Jews corrupted, they could as easily claim a 'Biblical' right of protection from Jews as Jews can claim from them.

18 ) Common / Sense
06/12/2013 23:14
#15) Palestine is not a state. It only has an observer role at the U.N. If it is pathetic for Israel to rely on others for recognition, why isn't it for the Palestinians. After all, Jews are in their historical homeland; Palestinians are not (Yasser Arafat was born in Egypt, Mahmoud Abbas was born in Safed in Galilee, Israeli territory, e.g.). You are using the term "validate" pretty loosely. Do you even understand what it means?

19 ) southparkbear / usa
06/12/2013 23:28
and finally when will palestinians understand that a 'no' means 'no'

20 ) palestinian / palestine
08/12/2013 17:19
how come comments are not allowed in the arabic version..... how come you quote israeli sources on weather when we have an outstanding team like the one on طقس فلسطين.....
Name Country
Comment
Characters
Note: Comments will be reviewed for appropriate content. Click here for more details.

Share/Bookmark

Hamas calls on Arab, Muslim countries to expel Israeli ambassadors
World Bank to provide $13 million for Gaza environmental projects
Tension around al-Aqsa Mosque ahead of Jewish Passover

Close Next Previous
All Rights Reserved © Ma'an News Agency 2005 - 2014