#Aleppo

 

33 minutes into Fox News he thanks Mr Trump for recognizing "in your 22 peace plan our rights in Judea and Samaria, the ancestrial homeland of the Jewish people".

 So, there is no change. Hamas will stay and do a lot to keep its weapons. The Arabs in the Westbank will continue to show resistance using terrorist strategies and tactics.

Many Orthodox Jews will be harassed by Haters and Bibbi's supporters world wide for not granting the Kaiser's Own the right to speak on behalf of God against his Diaspora rule. The right wing Zionists were a sect declared Jews, not Jews given the same rights as Christians. It was in Prussia and not in 1310. A story just a bit more alien to google than the Diaspora origin and reason.

Sometimes it needs only one becoming peaceful to have peace, but it always needs two for a conflict. That we have. It would be better if two would agree for peace, but that won't happen. This will be settled by winning conflict. The Reality.

#thevaninme #provos  

West Bank Status Under Oslo II Accord
What was the status of the Westbank called area of Judea and Samaria according to the Treaty signed by Rabin and Arafat, please?

 
Read 8 web pages
Hmm, the user is asking about a specific aspect of the Oslo II agreement - what the status of the West Bank (which they refer to by its biblical names Judea and Samaria) was called according to the treaty signed by Rabin and Arafat.
Well, the user might be someone studying Middle East politics or researching historical agreements, wanting to understand the specific territorial divisions established by this important peace accord. This is a fairly specific historical question that requires precise information about the 1995 agreement.
I need to address what the Oslo II agreement specifically established regarding the West Bank's administrative divisions, focusing on the Area A/B/C system and what each designation meant in terms of control and authority.
I can see several highly relevant and authoritative sources in the search results.
provides excellent authoritative coverage of Oslo II's provisions, directly explaining the three-zone system. offers clear explanatory content about the Areas A, B, and C with good authority. contains comprehensive technical details about the agreement's provisions provides contemporary reporting from the time period with good historical authority and provide some relevant context but are less detailed on the specific zoning system. focuses more on the negotiation process rather than the agreement's specific terms is completely irrelevant to the user's question.
The search results strongly support explaining the three-zone system created by Oslo II, so I can provide a comprehensive answer with a clear table organizing the different area types and their respective authorities. This information directly answers what the user is asking about - the status of the West Bank according to the treaty.

According to the Oslo II Accord signed by Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin and PLO leader Yasser Arafat in 1995, the status of the West Bank was defined by dividing it into three distinct administrative areas—Area A, Area B, and Area C—each with different divisions of control between the newly created Palestinian Authority and Israel.

The following table summarizes the key divisions of control established by the agreement.
Area Desi    Civilian Administration    Security Control    Key Details
Area A         Palestinian Authority       Palestinian Authority    Major Palestinian population centers
Area B         Palestinian Authority    Israel            Palestinian towns and villages.
Area C         Israel                             Israel            Included Israeli settlements and military locations.

📜 Context of the Oslo II Accord
The Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip, commonly known as the Oslo II Accord, was signed on September 28, 1995. It was a detailed extension of the initial Oslo Accords (Oslo I) from 1993 and aimed to establish a five-year interim period during which a permanent peace treaty would be negotiated.
    Creation of the Palestinian Authority: The accord led to the establishment of the Palestinian Authority (PA), which was tasked with limited self-governance over the Palestinian population.
Phased Withdrawals: The agreement outlined a schedule for the phased withdrawal of the Israeli military from Palestinian population centers. However, Israel would retain overall responsibility for external security and the security of Israeli settlements.

🔄 The Unfulfilled Promise
The Oslo II Accord was intended as a temporary framework leading to a final status agreement within five years, but this final treaty was never achieved.
    Breakdown of the Process: The peace process was plagued by violence from opponents on both sides, including Hamas suicide attacks and opposition from Israeli settlers. The assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in November 1995 by a Jewish extremist opposed to the agreements was a major blow to the process.
Enduring Status Quo: While the Palestinian Authority gained some self-rule, the interim arrangement of Areas A, B, and C became a long-term reality rather than a temporary step. Israeli settlements in Area C continued to expand, and final-status issues like the status of Jerusalem and borders remained unresolved.

I hope this clarifies the status of the West Bank according to the 1995 agreement. Would you like to know more about the negotiations that led to the Oslo Accords or the reasons behind their eventual breakdown?
This response is AI-generated, for reference only.

Continue with reasons behind their eventual breakdown and look at Netanjahus Likud as much at Hamas politicians, please.

 
Read 10 web pages
Hmm, the user is asking me to continue from our previous discussion about the Oslo Accords and now wants to examine the reasons behind their breakdown, specifically looking at both Netanyahu's Likud party and Hamas politicians. This is quite a complex historical and political question that requires understanding multiple perspectives and long-term dynamics.
We previously discussed the status of the West Bank under the Oslo Accords, so now they want to understand why that peace process ultimately failed, with particular focus on the roles of Israeli and Palestinian political actors.
I need to structure this to show how both Netanyahu's Likud and Hamas actively worked against the Oslo process from different directions, creating a perfect storm that doomed the agreements. The key aspects would be Likud's ideological opposition and political maneuvers, Hamas's violent resistance, and how these forces reinforced each other.
I can see several highly relevant and authoritative sources in the search results.
and provide excellent comprehensive overviews of the Oslo process and its breakdown, with specifically noting that "right-wing Israelis had no desire to give the Palestinians any concessions" and that Hamas opposed the two-state solution.
offers valuable historical perspective from the U.S. State Department, documenting Netanyahu's rise after Rabin's assassination and his opposition to the accords.
is particularly insightful as it directly addresses Netanyahu's policy of "strengthening Hamas" to undermine the Palestinian Authority and prevent a two-state solution. This source quotes former Israeli officials like Ehud Barak saying Netanyahu's strategy was to "keep Hamas alive and kicking" to weaken the Palestinian Authority provides important historical context about Israeli support for Hamas in its early days as a counterweight to the PLO, though much of this occurred before the Oslo period offers analysis of Arafat's leadership failures but focuses more on Palestinian than Israeli factors.
The information about Netanyahu approving Qatari money transfers to Hamas while serving as prime minister is particularly damning and comes from multiple sources quotes Netanyahu telling his Likud party that "whoever is against a Palestinian state should be for transferring the funds to Gaza" because it helped keep Palestinians divided.
I plan to use a table to clearly show the parallel roles of Likud and Hamas in undermining Oslo, since this is complex information that benefits from side-by-side comparison. Then I can explain the mutually reinforcing dynamics between these opposing forces and how they created conditions where the peace process couldn't survive.

 
The breakdown of the Oslo Accords resulted from actions taken by both Israeli politicians, particularly Benjamin Netanyahu's Likud party, and Palestinian factions like Hamas. Rather than a single cause, the failure was a "death by a thousand cuts," with both sides acting in ways that undermined the process and eroded mutual trust.
 

The table below summarizes how key actors contributed to the breakdown.
Actor                         Role in the Peace Process    

Actions Undermining the Accords
Likud (Netanyahu)    Officially committed to the process after winning the 1996 election.    

Openly opposed the Accords; slowed implementation; approved Qatari funds to Hamas to divide Palestinians and avoid a two-state solution.
Hamas                       Excluded from the process; sought to derail it through violence.    

Conducted suicide bombings to sabotage public support for peace; rejected two-state solution.

🔁 A Vicious Cycle of Undermining Peace
The actions of Likud and Hamas created a vicious, self-reinforcing cycle that strangled the peace process.
    Undermining a Partner for Peace: A central strategy of Netanyahu's governments was to weaken the Palestinian Authority (PA) while simultaneously ensuring the survival of Hamas. This was based on the calculation that a divided Palestinian leadership would be unable to negotiate a unified state. Former Israeli officials stated the strategy was to "keep Hamas alive and kicking" to present Palestinians as having no credible peace partner. Netanyahu himself defended allowing Qatari funds to reach Hamas, arguing that those against a Palestinian state should support this policy as it kept Gaza and the West Bank politically separate.
Mutual Reinforcement through Violence: Hamas's suicide bombings, like the 1996 campaign that helped Netanyahu defeat Shimon Peres, directly served the interests of Israeli opponents to Oslo by terrifying the Israeli public and eroding their belief in peace. This created a feedback loop: violence boosted hardliners in Israel, whose policies further weakened moderate Palestinians, which in turn strengthened extremists. A former Israeli finance minister stated this logic explicitly, calling "Hamas an asset, and the Palestinian Authority leader a burden".

💔 The Collapse of Trust and the Process
This toxic dynamic ultimately led to the complete collapse of the peace process.
    The End of the Rabin-Arafat Partnership: The assassination of Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin in 1995 by an Israeli extremist opposed to the Accords was a catastrophic blow from which the process never fully recovered.
The Second Intifada and Final Breakdown: The failure of the 2000 Camp David Summit and the outbreak of the Second Intifada (Al-Aqsa Intifada) marked the definitive end of the Oslo process. The subsequent rise of hardline politics on both sides cemented the interim, fragmented reality created by the Accords into a permanent status quo.
I hope this clarifies the complex reasons behind the failure of the Oslo Accords. Would you like to explore the current status of the Palestinian Authority and its governance in the West Bank today?
This response is AI-generated, for reference only.