A Quote by Shaul Mofaz

I am not at all sure we could ever reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians' present leadership. We shall have to wait for the next generation. The most we could expect is, perhaps, another interim agreement. A Palestinian state? A permanent settlement? I do not see that happening in the coming years.
We do not seek an agreement with the [Palestinian] Arabs in order to secure the peace. Of course we regard peace as an essential thing. It is impossible to build up the country in a state of permanent warfare. But peace for us is a mean, and not an end. The end is the fulfillment of Zionism in its maximum scope. Only for this reason do we need peace, and do we need an agreement.
It's possible a Palestinian state will be installed over the heads of the Palestinians. It could be part of an agreement between the Israeli government and moderate Arab states, but not one between Israel and the Palestinians.
I am personally committed to helping Israelis and Palestinians achieve a peace agreement. With determination, compromise, and the belief that peace is possible, Israelis and Palestinians can make a deal.
Jerusalem is a holy site for Jews, Muslims, and Christians. Israelis and Palestinians both lay claim to it as their capital. Jerusalem is the most sensitive of all the issues that need to be addressed in order to achieve a peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians. But Donald Trump determined an important aspect of the United States' position towards Jerusalem before any agreement. Most of the rest of the world feels that it ought not to be dealt with first, that it ought not to be dealt with separately, and that it ought not to be dealt with unilaterally.
The Good Friday Agreement was an incredible breakthrough. But it's my view that the Hillsborough Agreement could see politics in the north come of age, and see us all move forwards on the basis of equality and partnership.
In the frameworks of a peace agreement, a government under my leadership would agree to make real territorial concessions but will not compromise our security borders. We want there to be less friction. We want to remove outposts to help the Palestinian population. We will not reoccupy the Palestinian population.
There are two major peace agreements. One is a comprehensive peace agreement that was consummated by the extremely beneficial intersession of the George Bush administration, who called on John Danforth, the former senator from Missouri, to negotiate a peace agreement after eight years during which President Clinton did not want to promote peace in the Mideast - I mean, in Sudan. And that's holding so far.
It's not by accident that this has not been resolved in 50 years, but I believe this is the best chance we will have for a long time for there to be a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians.
We will not rest until we reach a permanent agreement [with the Palestinians] that would secure a safe future for our children and that would provide us with renewed hope to live in a region where people lead a life of co-operation and not, God forbid, where blood is shed.
I am convinced that our people are now on the way to establishing a Palestinian state. The agreement signed in Cairo is the first step in establishing the state, and therefore it should be implemented.
The agreement is fundamentally that we want to try to resolve this. The agreement is that ISIL is a threat to everybody, and we need to come together to find a way to fight ISIL. The agreement is that we want to save Syria, keep it unified, keep it secular. So surely in those very fundamental principles on which we could agree.
If there is willingness on the Palestinian side to reach an agreement, it is possible. We are conducting the negotiations with goodwill.
The movie [Miral] is not pro-Palestinian. It's about Palestinians. It's a Palestinian story, written by a Palestinian person. I don't know anybody else that could have done that
Morally and philosophically I find myself in agreement with virtually the whole of it: and not only in agreement with it, but in deeply moved agreement.
It was a superb agreement to end a war, but a very bad agreement to make a state. From now on, we have to part company with Dayton and try to build a modern democratic state, for which I have tried to lay the foundations.
It is always possible to argue against an interpretation, to confront interpretations, to arbitrate between them and to seek for an agreement, even if this agreement remains beyond our reach.
This site uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience. More info...
Got it!