"Ariel Sharon spoke about painful costs and refused to elaborate," Olmert told the daily. "I say, we have no choice but to elaborate. In the end of the day, we will have to withdraw from the most decisive areas of the territories. In exchange for the sameterritories left in our hands, we will have to give compensation in the form of territories within the State of Israel."Olmert actually tried to give everything away - including areas within Israel's pre-1967 borders - just before he switched from being Prime Minister to being an 'interim' Prime Minister until the next government is formed (which could still take months). Under Supreme Court rulings there are limits on what an 'interim' Prime Minister can do which would probably prevent Olmert from signing an agreement.
"I think we are very close to an agreement," Olmert added.
These comments were the clearest sign to date of Olmert's willingness to meet key Palestinian demands in peace talks.
Olmert offered Abbas Israeli land inside the pre-1967 borders, including areas near Gaza and Beit She’an, as well as the Jordan Valley, in exchange for certain Jewish areas in Judea and Samaria.Forgetting for a minute about Israel's historical and cultural attachment to Judea and Samaria - areas in which most of the biblical narrative takes place - one would think that the security implications of giving away those areas would be daunting for an Israeli 'leader.' But not for Olmert.
In a last-minute attempt to forge an agreement with the Palestinian Authority before he must leave office, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered to give away Israeli land inside the pre-1967 borders, including areas near Gaza and Beit She’an, as well as the Jordan Valley. At his last meeting with PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas (Abu Mazen), Olmert nearly signed a final agreement in which whole blocks of Jewish settlements inside the pre-1967 borders would be surrendered to the Arabs in exchange for Jewish areas in Judea and Samaria, IDF Army Radio reported.
According to the Sunday morning report, Olmert conducted a series of secret meetings with Abbas, in which the two came close to signing a complete land-swap deal that would determine the “final” borders of a much smaller State of Israel.
In Olmert’s offer, Israel would give up areas within the 1967 borders, including land in the western Negev adjacent to Gaza and the Porah agricultural area near the northern town of Beit She’an.
Olmert also offered to give away the entire Jordan Valley, including the numerous Jewish settlements in it, as well as the land in the Southern Hevron Hills area.
In return, according to the agreement, Israel would be able to retain certain Jewish areas in Judea and Samaria, including the Samaria town of Ariel, Ma’ale Adumim to the east of Jerusalem and the Etzion Bloc of communities southwest of the capital.
The report said that the deal foundered over disagreements over the status of Jerusalem and the so-called “right of return” of Arabs who left Israel in 1948 and 1967. A spokesman for the Prime Minister’s Office declined to comment on the negotiations with the PA.
I read what our (reserve) generals say and I say, how can it be that they haven't learned anything and haven't forgotten anything? By them everything is tanks and land and controlling territory and territory under control and this hill and that hill. All of these things are valueless...So Olmert is willing to put Jerusalem, the coastal plain and Ben Gurion Airport in easy firing range, because he believes that they're already in firing range already. That's sick - life is pretty normal here in Jerusalem (bli ayin hara) and it most definitely would not be normal if we surrendered all the land that's over the 1967 line (not to mention that I would be homeless).
The real threat that we face today in the North, in the South and the center is rockets and missiles. We need an answer for them, but we won't reach an answer by arguing over 200 meters. .We can go another two kilometers and the range of the rockets will increase another 10 kilometers.
I say, there is no need to wait to make a decision. Either I will complete it or Tzipi Livni or whoever comes after her.
In a statement released via the US State Department, the Quartet "noted the significance of this process and the importance of confidentiality in order to preserve its integrity."Olmert is similarly pacifist when it comes to Syria.
Referring in the next line to the "irreversibility of the negotiations," the Quartet also took it upon itself to determine that the current formula whereby Israel can test different offers to the Palestinians without actually committing to future concessions will no longer fly.
Israel's core position since direct high-level peace talks started in 1993 has been that nothing is agreed until everything is agreed. This principle underlined the ill-fated 2000 Camp David talks where former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak made far-reaching offers to try to entice Yasser Arafat into a peace deal, but insisted that all offers were off the table the moment the summit ended. That position was supported and even echoed by their host, former US President Bill Clinton.
But the international community is starting to understand that the Palestinians will settle for nothing less than 100 percent of their demands being met. The only way to achieve that is to make all Israeli offers binding, no matter how tentative, and then stockpile those offers over a period of time until the Palestinians are satisfied.
The Quartet's goal appears to be to change the rules of the game, even to the point of denying Israeli voters the ability to participate in the peace process in any meaningful way. With a public kept in the dark and an opposition unable to campaign on a platform of alternative approaches to peace because all past offers are binding, the current leadership is far more likely to remain in power.
With regard to the Syria track, Olmert added that a future peace agreement required a pullout from the Golan Heights, an area under Israeli control since the 1967 Six-Day War.And Olmert will do just that - move to Switzerland (or France) if he ever succeeds - God forbid - in giving our country away.
"First and foremost, we must make a decision. I'd like see if there is one serious person in the State of Israel who believes it is possible to make peace with the Syrians without eventually giving up the Golan Heights."
"It is true that an agreement with Syria comes with danger," he said. "Those who want to act with zero danger should move to Switzerland."