He signed an executive order on Thursday, saying violence had reached “intolerable levels”.

The sanctions will block the individuals from accessing all US property and other assets.

Violence in the West Bank has spiked since Hamas’s 7 October attack on Israel.

  • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
    link
    fedilink
    arrow-up
    25
    arrow-down
    1
    ·
    8 months ago

    Oslo II was signed by the PLO on behalf of the Palestinian people. It’s the most recent document that both sides agreed to, dealing with partition of land. Israel has failed to do what it agreed to and slowly cede back the West Bank entirely - they have done the opposite and taken more land.

    Camp David accords was between Israel and Egypt, decided without the Palestinians, and condemned by the UN and rejected as illegitimate by;

    • Resolution 33/28
    • Resolution 34/70
    • Resolution 34/65 B

    And yes the rapprochement with the Saudis is a big development towards normalization and stability for Israel, and cements alliances between the region - but Israeli realpolitik is fucking up the juggling act US diplomats are doing.

    • PatFusty@lemm.ee
      link
      fedilink
      arrow-up
      2
      arrow-down
      16
      ·
      edit-2
      8 months ago

      Sorry I forgot the part where PLO leader Arafat refusing any concessions in camp David was Egypt’s doing. I forgot that the reason the second intifada and Hamas uprising was because of pesky old Egypt not negotiating for them or that the UN called it illegitimate. The part where the entire world was puzzled why Palestinians refused any offers that apparently Egypt was doing, very weird.

      • Milk_Sheikh@lemm.ee
        link
        fedilink
        arrow-up
        12
        ·
        8 months ago

        Arafat wasn’t a part of the Camp David Accords in 1978, you’re confused with the 2000 Camp David summit.

        That 2000 summit fell apart because of a loggerhead over what is fundamental to both sides, and an Israeli negotiation redline hypocrisy - right of return. Arafat may well have been an Arab nationalist who wanted the three no’s forever and wouldn’t sign anything - but then why engage and negotiate at all? Concessions were offered from on both sides but Israel refused to permit those in the diaspora to return to their land, all while funding birthright trips for foreign Jews.

        Egypt has a viable country and government, and got the canal back and A SHITLOAD of land Israel had taken. Palestinians were being offered what the US and Canada gave the First Nations after we broke treaty after treaty.

        • PatFusty@lemm.ee
          link
          fedilink
          arrow-up
          2
          arrow-down
          11
          ·
          edit-2
          8 months ago

          Ah shit you got me i got the words swapped. I meant the summit being the last attempt of a treaty that Arafat didnt even bother trying to negotiate. What i was trying to say was there was an attempt for land swaps and a passage way for peace but the PLO captain shat his pants and decided he wants murder on his hands. Oslo II might have been the last official treaty but there have been attempts to get peace and a 2 state solution since then.

          The only reason Egypt even has the Sinai back is because Israel offered it back as a sign of peace after it was captured. Palestinians have nothing to offer. Not even the Egyptians want them back in the Sinai now.

          • febra@lemmy.world
            link
            fedilink
            arrow-up
            9
            arrow-down
            1
            ·
            edit-2
            8 months ago

            Not even the Egyptians want them back in the Sinai now.

            That is an extremely problematic view. It reminds me of the Évian Conference where Hitler was arguing that “no one wants the jews” since the US, UK, and other countries refused to take in german jewish refugees, and thus “the final solution” was spawned. It’s an extremely dehumanising view that ended up in genocide. Please refrain from repeating such opinions.

            Besides that, the Palestinians have a long history in Palestine. I don’t understand what you’re hinting at with “wanting them back”. Back where? They already have a home.

            • PatFusty@lemm.ee
              link
              fedilink
              arrow-up
              2
              arrow-down
              8
              ·
              8 months ago

              You misconstrued what I said. I meant they don’t have anything to offer either Israel nor Egypt. Even if they wanted to negotiate again, they don’t have anything going for them. Don’t twist my words to fit some other topic.

              • betheydocrime@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                4
                arrow-down
                1
                ·
                8 months ago

                Tbh, if you don’t want people to misunderstand the things you say, then you need to start saying things with your chest. Stop posting inscrutable and reactionary blandities and start posting clear and intelligible opinions supported by as many facts as you’re able to muster. Lemmy will be a better place if you do :)

                • PatFusty@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  2
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Wow so I don’t play along and you hit me with the “reactionary blandities”. You can confront what I said rather than spout off. I’m sure you have some great points to cover. I don’t particularly like being made a scarecrow but please educate me.

                  • betheydocrime@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    4
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    edit-2
                    8 months ago

                    The point that I’m trying to make is that your comments are so nonspecific that it is impossible to “educate you” for the same reasons that it is impossible to nail a cloud to a wall. For example, in your first comment, you say that it is “Interesting how you used Oslo II and not the failed camp David summit options that Israel tried” but you don’t explain why you think it’s interesting or why they failed or why you think they should have succeeded but didn’t or any other jumping off point to give others a chance to agree with you or rebut you. You just said something bland and vague and impossible to pin down. How could anyone possibly agree or disagree or even have a discussion about a statement as generic as “I find this interesting!”?

              • febra@lemmy.world
                link
                fedilink
                arrow-up
                2
                ·
                8 months ago

                The do explain why you said “they don’t want them back”. When have the majority of Palestinians come from the Egyptian part of the Sinai peninsula? Since you’re obviously taking about this “back” it implies they must come from there, right? And please do explain what that message is hinting at or implying. Why would it even matter if someone “wanted them back”?

                Let me put it this way for you: Do Europeans want the Ashkenazi Jews back? Does that even matter? Can you see how out of place this sounds now?

                • PatFusty@lemm.ee
                  link
                  fedilink
                  arrow-up
                  3
                  arrow-down
                  2
                  ·
                  8 months ago

                  Why are you guys harping on one sentence… All I meant was that Palestine has 0 friends here. They have no leverage yet they want fucking Oslo II to come back like if the last 20 years was a bad dream.

                  • febra@lemmy.world
                    link
                    fedilink
                    arrow-up
                    2
                    arrow-down
                    1
                    ·
                    8 months ago

                    Because you’re clearly showing your true colours. There’s no point in having a genuine conversation with someone that talks in such a dehumanising manner.