So why does everybody hate the Oslo accords?
Sure, they didn't end in peace for our times, so perhaps there was a bit of unwarranted optimism.
But they did move things forward. PLO and Israel mutually recognized each other, for the first time, I think. Israel withdrew from Gaza and partially from the West Bank. The PA was set up as a legitimate representative for the Palestinian people.
Were these steps in the wrong direction? What were the alternatives? A one-state solution?
Thanks for the link.
So from the Israeli perspective, there is disappointment of increased rather than decreased violence after giving in to demands (Gaza, recognition of PLO, establishing PA, partial WB withdrawal) - and especially the second intifada, costing about 1000 Israeli lives, to a large part from suicide bombers.
Secondly, there are questions about intent - e.g, that the references to Hudaybiyyah means the Oslo negotiations were only a ruse, and that the plan is and always is the destruction of the Israeli state.
Does this about sum it up?
@ketil glad to see that you're actually taking this seriously and are open-minded enough
@ketil this might interest you too (it's from 2007): http://www.palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=92&doc_id=101
Thanks, I see (at least to some extent) the Israeli side of this. And seriously, people should read the Hamas charter, and consider why these guys were elected before sending ships to break the blockade.
But what is the Palestinian side of things? Why are they equally disappointed by the Oslo Accords?
@ketil
I hope this satisfactorily answers your questions:
http://palwatch.org/main.aspx?fi=157&doc_id=26320#.W5qCjru55Zc.vk