HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011832.jpg

2.44 MB

Extraction Summary

6
People
5
Organizations
8
Locations
1
Events
2
Relationships
7
Quotes

Document Information

Type: Memoir draft / manuscript page (likely ehud barak)
File Size: 2.44 MB
Summary

This document appears to be a page from a memoir or manuscript (likely by Ehud Barak, based on the header) discussing high-level Israeli strategic discussions regarding the status of Jerusalem during peace negotiations (likely Camp David 2000). The text details the differing opinions of advisors Israel Hasson, Oded Eran, and Dan Meridor concerning Israeli sovereignty versus Palestinian autonomy in East Jerusalem. The page bears a House Oversight Committee stamp, suggesting it was collected as evidence, likely in relation to the investigation into Jeffrey Epstein's connections to high-profile figures like Barak.

People (6)

Name Role Context
Ehud Barak Narrator / Prime Minister (Implied)
The narrator ('I') leading the summit discussion and decision making. Identified via header '/ BARAK /'.
Israel Hasson Shin Bet veteran
Proposed choices regarding Jerusalem sovereignty; warned about Hamas and Islamic Jihad.
Yasser Arafat Palestinian Leader / Negotiating Partner
Described as a reluctant negotiating partner.
Oded Eran Career Diplomat
Put in charge of formal talks; advocated for giving Palestinians sovereignty over outer Arab neighborhoods.
Dan Meridor Politician / Advisor
Former Likudnik, native Jerusalemite. Opposed dividing sovereignty over Jerusalem.
Amnon Lipkin Advisor / Military Official (Amnon Lipkin-Shahak)
Pointed out boundaries regarding pre-1967 Jerusalem.

Timeline (1 events)

July 2000 (Contextual)
Camp David Summit negotiations regarding Jerusalem status.
Camp David
Israeli delegation Palestinians

Relationships (2)

Ehud Barak Professional/Subordinate Oded Eran
whom I’d put in charge of frustrating, formal talks
Ehud Barak Professional/Advisor Dan Meridor
I knew he was as determined as I was

Key Quotes (7)

"Divide sovereignty."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011832.jpg
Quote #1
"Why should we want to annex them"
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011832.jpg
Quote #2
"It would be like accepting the 'right of return' through the back door."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011832.jpg
Quote #3
"I’m against any concessions when it comes to Israeli sovereignty"
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011832.jpg
Quote #4
"Shanah haba b’Yerushalaim. Next year, in Jerusalem."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011832.jpg
Quote #5
"What we decided here in Camp David... also affects Jews in New York. In Moscow. In Johannesburg."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011832.jpg
Quote #6
"But even if sovereignty over Jerusalem means that the deal collapses, I’m not willing the pay that price."
Source
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011832.jpg
Quote #7

Full Extracted Text

Complete text extracted from the document (2,741 characters)

/ BARAK / 75
stake. I didn’t know whether peace was within reach. I was still deeply skeptical.
But if it was, we had to accept that Jerusalem would be key. And if the summit
failed, for whatever reason, what inevitably awaited us was “confrontation.”
Israel Hasson, the Shin Bet veteran, spoke first. He saw two choices. Either we
could retain Isrsaeli sovereignty over a “united Jerusalem” with functional, day-to-
day autonomy for the Palestinians in their neighborhoods, or we could in effect
divide the city. “Divide sovereignty.” He didn’t say which he favored, only that it
was essential that we made the decision now if we could, however difficult or
reluctant Arafat was as a negotiating partner. If we waited, we’d end up having to
deal with Islamists: Hamas and Islamic Jihad. Oded Eran, the career diplomat
whom I’d put in charge of frustrating, formal talks with the Palestinians in the
months preceding the summit , said he was convinced that we should give the
Palestinians full sovereignty over at least the “outer” Arab neighborhoods in East
Jerusalem, which had become part of the city only when we’d expanded the city
boundaries after 1967. He said that was in Israel’s own interest. We had no historic
connection to these Arab villages, and something like 130,000 Palestinian lived
there. “Why should we want to annex them,” he asked. It would be like accepting
the “right of return” through the back door.
Dan Meridor’s voice, for me, was especially important. I knew he was as
determined as I was to try to get a peace agreement with the Palestinians. But he
was also a former Likudnik, and a native Jerusalemite. “I’m against any
concessions when it comes to Israeli sovereignty,” he said. “Any attempt to divide
Jerusalem would be a serious blow, and not just for Jews in Israel.” For centuries,
Jewish communities all over the world, had looked to Jerusalem, prayed for
Jerusalem. The yearly Seder meal, on Passover, ends with the Hebrew phrase:
Shanah haba b’Yerushalaim. Next year, in Jerusalem. “What we decided here in
Camp David,” Dan said, “also affects Jews in New York. In Moscow. In
Johannesburg.” He urged us to focus instead on offering Arafat as attractive as
possible a package of concessions on all the other issues. “Then let him decide.
But even if sovereignty over Jerusalem means that the deal collapses, I’m not
willing the pay that price.”
No voices were raised. It was the rarest of political discussions. People offered
their views, and listened to others’. Amnon Lipkin pointed out that a large area of
what was now came inside the boundaries of Jerusalem was not part of the city
he’d known before 1967. Echoing Oded Eran, he said: “It’s in our interest for as
361
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_011832

Discussion 0

Sign in to join the discussion

No comments yet

Be the first to share your thoughts on this epstein document