Deal of the Century Or ‘Path to Apartheid’? Inside Trump’s Divisive Peace Plan

• Deal of the Century Or ‘Path to Apartheid’? Inside Trump’s Divisive Peace Plan
  by https://www.independent.co.uk/
  Whether it’s ratified or not, the plan erodes previously accepted principles of peace so far as to do them irreparable damage, writes Bel Trew
  –
  To rapturous applause on Tuesday, Donald Trump and his close friend, Israeli prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu, launched what they described as “the opportunity of a century” to fix one of the trickiest conflicts of our time.
  –
  The UK, the EU, Egypt and most of the Gulf states made noises of commendation, saying the 181-page peace plan was a workable starting point to jump-start long-dead negotiations.
  –
  But the fractured Palestinian leadership, in a rare moment of unity, condemned it as “nonsense” and a “conspiracy”. Israeli human rights groups, meanwhile, said that rather than building peace it “delivered apartheid”. One said it was as “detached from reality as it was eye-catching”.
  –
  So which is it? This sprawling document, which has polarised opinion so dramatically, is almost bizarrely detailed in some respects. At one point, 100 pages in, it allocates funds for specific year-long Palestinian internships abroad.
  –
  At other intervals, however, it sweeps vaguely through some of the rawest issues at the centre of the conflict, such as what to do about the more than five million registered Palestinian refugees scattered across the globe who have, for decades, kept the right to return home so close to their hearts.
  –
  Few would, however, disagree with the idea that it is the most pro-Israeli vision for a solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict to come out of the White House. It states that Jerusalem will be the undivided capital of Israel and that Israel can annex the Jordan Valley and nearly all its settlements in the occupied West Bank, although they are illegal under international law.
  –
  There will be land swaps and a cap on settlement expansion, but otherwise it appears to answer most of the key Israeli demands. This is why Mr Netanyahu agreed to sign the document and called it the “best plan for Israel and the best plan for peace”. But it is also why it is doomed to remain just a “vision” – the Palestinians have roundly rejected it.
  –
  Instead, it serves another purpose. The plan erodes previously accepted principles of peace and the language which makes that up so far as to do them irreparable damage. By re-framing the terms of the conflict, it sparks a paradigm shift in attitudes towards what the baselines should be.
  –
  read more.

end