(Community Matters) Reading a couple of Facebook comments about President Obama’s call for the 1967 Israeli borders as the starting negotiating point for a Palestinian state (as well as specific assurances for Israeli security), I am surprised at the either the lack of awareness or misleading comments.
Israel has annexed most of the West Bank immediately west of Jerusalem, while dividing into unsustainable parcels much of the rest. (And let’s remember, most of Jerusalem, aka East Jerusalem, is outside the 1967 borders as well.) The Israeli government often avoids talking about the 1967 border, instead simply referring to the West Bank. Though areas of the West Bank annexed into Jerusalem are no longer counted as the West Bank and are not included in calculations of percentages of land to be or not to be “unoccupied.”
Also, when the Israeli government says it is willing to return 80% of the occupied West Bank (remember, not including what they’ve annexed into Jerusalem) much of the excluded 20% includes West Bank sources of water plus the most farmable lands along the Jordan.
Absolutely, there must be assurances for Israeli security. And, the 1967 borders alone do not provide for such – especially in light of the indefensible lobbing of missiles from Gaza at civilians. While the cement wall serving as a border disturbs many, its success preventing suicide bombing of children, women and men is indisputable. And, in many of my visits with Israelis, most are happy to trade land for assured peace.
Community Matters 
Eugene,
On my first visit to israel in 1961 there was still shells being fired from the Golan Heights.
The recent action by Syria to allow a border incident there reminds us that protection at the Golan is critical to Israel’s safety.
Jim
indeed, Jim. That’s such a strategic site, especially because of its position overlooking so much of Northern Israel. I know Israeli’s will make the right negotiating decisions in a way to ensure security for Haifa, Nazareth and its other northern cities