“It can’t go v/far if it doesn’t have what ‘47 plan had: some degree of international endorsement.” Going back in time, my ⁦⁩ colleague historian ⁦⁦⁩ compares #Trump plan to 1937 #Peel Report & 1947 UN partition.
How does Trump’s partition plan compare?
How does Trump’s partition plan compare? explains that the 'Deal of the Century' emerges from the political needs of Trump and Netanyahu; no one else is desperately awaiting such a plan, so few will make sacrifices for its success
The #TrumpPeacePlan isn't the first proposal for partition. looks at how it stacks up to the others. (via )
How does Trump’s partition plan compare? explains.
Recommended read from BICOM's Daily Brief: How does Trump’s partition plan compare? By in at
“Trump’s plan is focused on drawing final borders and building Palestinian state capacity. It may be a fool’s errand, but it’s not as radical as its predecessors.” My latest
“Because the Trump plan so closely hews to the status quo, it won’t spark much jubilation among Israelis or much violence among Palestinians. But perhaps that’s its best hope.” My latest.
“A partition plan, to make history, doesn’t need Palestinian backing, as 1947 showed. But it can’t go very far if it doesn’t have what the 1947 plan had: some degree of international endorsement.” My latest.
'The Palestinians have appealed every verdict of history, and have lost every time.'
“The Trump partition plan emerges from the urgent political needs of Trump and Netanyahu. Since no one else is desperately awaiting such a plan, few will be keen to make sacrifices for its success.” My latest.
“The Palestinians have appealed every verdict of history, and have lost every time. Odds are that this pattern will be repeated yet again, because the Palestinians remain too weak and divided, or resentful and myth-infected, to say ‘yes.’” My latest.