Defying warnings of unrest, Trump recognises Jerusalem as Israel's capital

[Morch]

1 hour ago, sanemax said:

East Jerusalem is not in occupied territory , East Jerusalem is named Israels Capital in 1948

 

Err, West.

And technically, the whole of Jerusalem wasn't supposed to be under either side's exclusive control. But that's water under the bridge now.

[habanero]

On 12/7/2017 at 12:46 PM, Krataiboy said:

Now why on earth could that be, do you think?

Maybe because Clinton, Bush, Obama all did it.

[sanemax]

2 hours ago, sanemax said:

West  Jerusalem is not in occupied territory , West Jerusalem is named Israels Capital in 1948

Fixed that mistake 

[F4UCorsair]

Why the big deal?   Obama, Clinton and Bush all undertook to make the move, but caved in.  At least Trump has balls.

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-07/what-have-past-presidents-said-about-israel-and-jerusalem/9234736

 

The Palestinians don't want peace.   They want ongoing unrest, and their stated aim is to exterminate Jews/Israel.

 

 

Truer words than those following have never been spoken.............................

 

“If the Arabs put down their weapons today, there would be no more ‎violence. If the Jews put ‎down their weapons ‎today, there would be no ‎more Israel'‎”

― Benjamin Netanyahu

 

 

 

Edited December 10, 2017 by F4UCorsair

[dexterm]

47 minutes ago, F4UCorsair said:

Why the big deal?   Obama, Clinton and Bush all undertook to make the move, but caved in.  At least Trump has balls.

 

http://www.abc.net.au/news/2017-12-07/what-have-past-presidents-said-about-israel-and-jerusalem/9234736

 

The Palestinians don't want peace.   They want ongoing unrest, and their stated aim is to exterminate Jews/Israel.

 

 

 

 

 

 

>>The Palestinians don't want peace.   They want ongoing unrest, and their stated aim is to exterminate Jews/Israel.
...baloney. The PLO recognized the right of the state of Israel to exist in 1993. The Palestinians are still waiting for Israel to reciprocate.
 
"How Many Times Must the Palestinians Recognize Israel?
Netanyahu’s new 'Jewish state' mantra negates the fact that Palestinians recognized Israel more than twenty years ago. They’re still waiting for Israel to recognize Palestine."
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.579701
 
Yasser Arafat recognized Israel's right to exist as far back as 1988, and repeated it in writing in 1993 at the Oslo Accords.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/recogn.html

 

If anything it suits Israel far more for a final peace agreement to remain on the back burning as long as possible.They can manage a low key conflict quite easily while continuing to build facts on the ground, making a two state solution impossible. Trump's above announcement may even embolden them to speed that process up.

 

Meanwhile time is on the side of the Palestinians. If ultimately Israel annexes the whole of the West Bank not just Jerusalem, then they will also have inherited a 2.5 million majority indigenous Palestinian population.

 

As previous US administrations have pointed out and perhaps why they were more diplomatic, before Trump's bull in the china shop populist approach: An expanded Israel can either be a democracy or a Jewish state. It can't be both.

 

Trump hopefully has just hastened the demise of the racist supremacist Zionist state.

Edited December 10, 2017 by dexterm

[Morch]

3 minutes ago, dexterm said:

>>The Palestinians don't want peace.   They want ongoing unrest, and their stated aim is to exterminate Jews/Israel.
...baloney. The PLO recognized the right of the state of Israel to exist in 1993. The Palestinians are still waiting for Israel to reciprocate.
 
"How Many Times Must the Palestinians Recognize Israel?
Netanyahu’s new 'Jewish state' mantra negates the fact that Palestinians recognized Israel more than twenty years ago. They’re still waiting for Israel to recognize Palestine."
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.579701
 
Yasser Arafat recognized Israel's right to exist as far back as 1988, and repeated it in writing in 1993 at the Oslo Accords.
http://www.jewishvirtuallibrary.org/jsource/Peace/recogn.html

 

If anything it suits Israel far more for a final peace agreement to remain on the back burning as long as possible.They can manage a low key conflict quite easily while continuing to build facts on the ground, making a two state solution impossible. Trump's above announcemnet may even embolden them to speed that process up.

 

Meanwhile time is on the side of the Palestinians. If ultimately Israel annexes the whole of the West Bank not just Jerusalem, then they will also have inherited a 4.5 million majority indigenous Palestinian population.

 

As previous US administrations have pointed out and perhaps why they were more diplomatic, before Trump's bull in the china shop populist approach: Israel can either be a democracy or a Jewish state. It can't be both.

 

Trump hopefully has just hastened the demise of the racist supremacist Zionist state.

 

Funny how you pull out the whole array of debunked talking points. Pretty much each of them was addressed many times in the past.

 

The PLO's recognition did not, in fact, amount to what was agreed upon to begin with. There were several instances over the years when steps to either address or bury this were taken. The results are inconclusive, and Palestinian leaders (even disregarding the Hamas rhetoric - which you'll ignore or twist anyway) occasionally make contradicting statements in this regard. This was discussed in length on previous topics.

 

None of the leaderships involved (two on the Palestinian side and one on the Israeli side) are truly interested in peace, in the sense that it implies major concessions and ideological shifts. Going on about any of them being ready and willing is not even nonsense, its out right misleading. The status quo benefits respective agendas, and maintains the careers of those in relevant positions.

 

Or at least, it used to be this way. As time passes, the risks attached to managing the conflict, playing a waiting or engaging in cycles of violence, become greater. With external (regional and global) conditions changing and not for the best, this trend gains tract.

 

 

Not expecting you'll have any meaningful input or comment other than to try spinning this in the usual one-sided vehement manner.

 

[dexterm]

4 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Funny how you pull out the whole array of debunked talking points. Pretty much each of them was addressed many times in the past.

 

The PLO's recognition did not, in fact, amount to what was agreed upon to begin with. There were several instances over the years when steps to either address or bury this were taken. The results are inconclusive, and Palestinian leaders (even disregarding the Hamas rhetoric - which you'll ignore or twist anyway) occasionally make contradicting statements in this regard. This was discussed in length on previous topics.

 

None of the leaderships involved (two on the Palestinian side and one on the Israeli side) are truly interested in peace, in the sense that it implies major concessions and ideological shifts. Going on about any of them being ready and willing is not even nonsense, its out right misleading. The status quo benefits respective agendas, and maintains the careers of those in relevant positions.

 

Or at least, it used to be this way. As time passes, the risks attached to managing the conflict, playing a waiting or engaging in cycles of violence, become greater. With external (regional and global) conditions changing and not for the best, this trend gains tract.

 

 

Not expecting you'll have any meaningful input or comment other than to try spinning this in the usual one-sided vehement manner.

 

Better take up your debunking points with the editor of Haaretz,  one of Israel's oldest and respected newspapers 

 

"How Many Times Must the Palestinians Recognize Israel?
Netanyahu’s new 'Jewish state' mantra negates the fact that Palestinians recognized Israel more than twenty years ago. They’re still waiting for Israel to recognize Palestine."
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.579701

 

I was merely pointing out the mindless mythology parroted by an ignorant Zionist apologist.

[Morch]

15 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Better take up your debunking points with the editor of Haaretz,  one of Israel's oldest and respected newspapers 

 

"How Many Times Must the Palestinians Recognize Israel?
Netanyahu’s new 'Jewish state' mantra negates the fact that Palestinians recognized Israel more than twenty years ago. They’re still waiting for Israel to recognize Palestine."
http://www.haaretz.com/opinion/.premium-1.579701

 

I was merely pointing out the mindless mythology parroted by an ignorant Zionist apologist.

 

Better refresh your memory - this isn't the first time this came up, nor, I believe, the same time you linked this article. Everything that you posted was addressed more than once. That you pretend otherwise or feign ignorance does not add to your already meager credibility.

 

And while at it, Haaretz is for quite some time now, a mostly left-wing (some will say, extreme left) oriented publication. Not always the most balanced or unbiased source out there. The article you linked is an one-off op-ed penned by Hussein Ibish.

 

And I was merely pointing out the equally mindless mythology parroted by an intentionally obtuse anti-Israeli propagandist.

[dexterm]

28 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Better refresh your memory - this isn't the first time this came up, nor, I believe, the same time you linked this article. Everything that you posted was addressed more than once. That you pretend otherwise or feign ignorance does not add to your already meager credibility.

 

And while at it, Haaretz is for quite some time now, a mostly left-wing (some will say, extreme left) oriented publication. Not always the most balanced or unbiased source out there. The article you linked is an one-off op-ed penned by Hussein Ibish.

 

And I was merely pointing out the equally mindless mythology parroted by an intentionally obtuse anti-Israeli propagandist.

Equally just because Morch has replied to a post doesn't make his response  gospel. You have been caught out with falsehoods previously.

 

I prefer the linked experienced reportage of Haaretz journalists to your not so secret agenda.

 

 

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

Equally just because Morch has replied to a post doesn't make his response  gospel. You have been caught out with falsehoods previously.

 

I prefer the linked experienced reportage of Haaretz journalists to your not so secret agenda.

 

 

 

Not really correct, other than in your wishful thinking.

 

That you prefer the Haaretz is alright, pretending that it does not represent an agenda is preposterous. It doesn't actually make your previous statements correct, though. As for claiming I have a "not so secret agenda" - is pretty much a nothing statement, and inaccurate as well. Coming from someone with a super obvious agenda that's kinda rich.

 

Guess nothing on topic from you, then?

 

 

 

 

[dexterm]

31 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

Not really correct, other than in your wishful thinking.

 

That you prefer the Haaretz is alright, pretending that it does not represent an agenda is preposterous. It doesn't actually make your previous statements correct, though. As for claiming I have a "not so secret agenda" - is pretty much a nothing statement, and inaccurate as well. Coming from someone with a super obvious agenda that's kinda rich.

 

Guess nothing on topic from you, then?

 

 

 

 

"delete"

[dexterm]

Trump is not only alienating the Palestinians with this announcement  with his dog whistle nod to Israel as the undivided capital, he has made it very difficult for his new found buddies in the Gulf states. Weren't they all supposed to be getting closer to Israel to gang up on their mutual enemies?

 

Even if the Gulf leaders are just paying lip service to the unrest Trump has caused by condemning Trump, their religious populations will certainly be watching their future response to Trump.

[Morch]

33 minutes ago, dexterm said:

Trump is not only alienating the Palestinians with this announcement  with his dog whistle nod to Israel as the undivided capital, he has made it very difficult for his new found buddies in the Gulf states. Weren't they all supposed to be getting closer to Israel to gang up on their mutual enemies?

 

Even if the Gulf leaders are just paying lip service to the unrest Trump has caused by condemning Trump, their religious populations will certainly be watching their future response to Trump.

 

There was no nod to Israel  with regard to any "undivided capital". From Trump's statement:

 

Quote

We are not taking a position of any final status issues, including the specific boundaries of the Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem, or the resolution of contested borders. Those questions are up to the parties involved.

 

As for complicating things for possible future cooperation and USA interests, yes - there's that. But no one blamed Trump for being a star diplomat, so nothing new there. Far as I recall he managed the elephant in china shop on other occasions and in other situation.

[dexterm]

33 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

There was no nod to Israel  with regard to any "undivided capital". From Trump's statement:

 

 

As for complicating things for possible future cooperation and USA interests, yes - there's that. But no one blamed Trump for being a star diplomat, so nothing new there. Far as I recall he managed the elephant in china shop on other occasions and in other situation.

If Trump had not wished for his announcement to be a dog whistle nod to Israel, which is exactly as most Palestinian, Arab and world leaders have taken it, he could have said he also supports establishing a US Embassy in a future Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem. 

Edited December 10, 2017 by dexterm

[Morch]

8 minutes ago, dexterm said:

If Trump had not wished for his announcement to be a dog whistle nod to Israel, which is exactly as most Palestinian, Arab and world leaders have taken it, he could have said he also supports establishing a US Embassy in a future Palestinian capital in East Jerusalem. 

 

He could have, he didn't. As said, no one blamed Trump for being a star diplomat or anything other than a walking talking disaster when it comes to international diplomacy. And still, the statement did not quite say what you claimed it did.

[Scott]

Inflammatory post removed.  

[KKr]

On 12/10/2017 at 1:31 PM, sanemax said:

East Jerusalem is not in occupied territory , East Jerusalem is named Israels Capital in 1948

This is from the UN proposal, dated 1947, for division of the land we are discussing.
Jerusalem not allocated to one of the territories in recognition of its religious importance to both parties, and to Christians as well.
That one of the two groups involved were Western sponsored, had more firepower and then grabbed more land  when the Palestinians did not agree to a division, or to leave their land as per the Western devised plan, is at the root of the problem. 

[sanemax]

3 minutes ago, KKr said:

This is from the UN proposal, dated 1947, for division of the land we are discussing.
Jerusalem not allocated to one of the territories in recognition of its religious importance to both parties, and to Christians as well.
That one of the two groups involved were Western sponsored, had more firepower and then grabbed more land  when the Palestinians did not agree to a division, or to leave their land as per the Western devised plan, is at the root of the problem. 

That map was just a proposition though , the final map was 

 

[dexterm]

2 hours ago, sanemax said:

That map was just a proposition though , the final map was 

 

Your map is a bit misleading because of course the arrows on it should have opposing arrowheads(works both ways).. a fact that Israel has well and truly capitalized on (pun intended!) by illegally annexing Jerusalem and  occupying the West Bank.

 

And if the nuclear powered IDF with its all sophisticated weaponry is so dangerously close to its neighbors, why on earth does it want to push its borders further eastward closer to its enemies, endangering its citizens even more? Why not simply make peace with its Palestinian neighbors roughly within the 67 borders (include land swaps), insist upon any sort of security measures it likes, such as demilitarization, a joint IDF/NATO/UN presence on the Jordan River for decades to come. These things can be thrashed out in a peace treaty. Then use the Palestinian state as a buffer zone against more easterly enemies...a zone they could reoccupy over a long weekend if a comprehensive peace treaty went drastically pear shaped.

[dexterm]

2 hours ago, sanemax said:

That map was just a proposition though , the final map was 

 

Your map is a bit misleading because of course the arrows on it should have opposing arrowheads(works both ways).. a fact that Israel has well and truly capitalized on (pun intended!) by illegally annexing Jerusalem and  occupying the West Bank.

 

And if the nuclear powered IDF with its all sophisticated weaponry is so dangerously close to its neighbors, why on earth does it want to push its borders further eastward closer to its enemies, endangering its citizens even more? Why not simply make peace with its Palestinian neighbors roughly within the 67 borders (include land swaps), insist upon any sort of security measures it likes, such as demilitarization, a joint IDF/NATO/UN presence on the Jordan River for decades to come. These things can be thrashed out in a peace treaty. Then use the Palestinian state as a buffer zone against more easterly enemies...a zone they could reoccupy over a long weekend if a comprehensive peace treaty went drastically pear shaped.

[Coconutman]

Israel's parliament and countless other government building including the prime miniaters residence

[sanemax]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

Why not simply make peace with its Palestinian neighbors roughly within the 67 borders (include land swaps), insist upon any sort of security measures it likes, such as demilitarization, a joint IDF/NATO/UN presence on the Jordan River for decades to come. These things can be thrashed out in a peace treaty. Then use the Palestinian state as a buffer zone against more easterly enemies...a zone they could reoccupy over a long weekend if a comprehensive peace treaty went drastically pear shaped.

I suppose that Israel wants the West Bank for itself .

Jordan doesnt want it anymore , its there for the taking .

[dexterm]

3 hours ago, Coconutman said:

Israel's parliament and countless other government building including the prime miniaters residence

All the buildings you mention are in West Jerusalem, which Palestinians are perfectly willing to accept as Israel's capital, even though 33% of the land there was confiscated from Palestinian owners.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Jerusalem#Division_in_1949

 

It's the greed of Israel now wanting its illegal annexation of East Jerusalem recognized too, where Palestinians planned their future capital, that they object to. 

 

Trump's dog whistle nod to that illegal annexation even though he has covered himself saying not necessarily the final borders, is what is causing all the controversy.

 

And if in Trump's mind there is no confusion or controversy, and it won't alter the status quo...why do it at this sensitive moment on the eve of peace talks?

 

Dumb at best; at worst deliberately wrecking peace talks because he knew his "ultimate deal" negotiated by his son in law was actually garbage .

Edited December 12, 2017 by dexterm
spell

[stevenl]

21 minutes ago, dexterm said:

All the buildings you mention are in West Jerusalem, which Palestinians are perfectly willing to accept as Israel's capital, even though 33% of the land there was confiscated from Palestinian owners.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Jerusalem#Division_in_1949

 

It's the greed of Israel now wanting its illegal annexation of East Jerusalem recognized too, where Palestinians planned their future capital, that they object to. 

 

Trump's dog whistle nod to that illegal annexation even though he has covered himself saying not necessarily the final borders, is what is causing all the controversy.

 

And if in Trump's mind there is no confusion or controversy, and it won't alter the status quo...why do it at this sensitive moment on the eve of peace talks?

 

Dumb at best; at worst deliberately wrecking peace talks because he knew his "ultimate deal" negotiated by his son in law was actually garbage .

"Dumb at best; at worst deliberately wrecking peace talks because he knew his "ultimate deal" negotiated by his son in law was actually garbage ."

 

Unlikely he read or has any idea about the content of the proposed deal. So in his defense, I don't think he is deliberately wrecking it.

[Morch]

 

@KKr

 

Might be worth mentioning that the Partition plan was rejected by the Arab/Palestinian side. The same policy of rejection continuing for decades, thus contributing to things dragging on, and to the state of things post-war(s) emerging as the new basis for future agreements.

 

Back in 1947-1949, Israel did not have major Western sponsors, did not have quite the firepower advantage alleged and the alternative to not fighting the war was annihilation.

[Morch]

4 hours ago, dexterm said:

Your map is a bit misleading because of course the arrows on it should have opposing arrowheads(works both ways).. a fact that Israel has well and truly capitalized on (pun intended!) by illegally annexing Jerusalem and  occupying the West Bank.

 

And if the nuclear powered IDF with its all sophisticated weaponry is so dangerously close to its neighbors, why on earth does it want to push its borders further eastward closer to its enemies, endangering its citizens even more? Why not simply make peace with its Palestinian neighbors roughly within the 67 borders (include land swaps), insist upon any sort of security measures it likes, such as demilitarization, a joint IDF/NATO/UN presence on the Jordan River for decades to come. These things can be thrashed out in a peace treaty. Then use the Palestinian state as a buffer zone against more easterly enemies...a zone they could reoccupy over a long weekend if a comprehensive peace treaty went drastically pear shaped.

 

The map is not misleading at all. Israel did not have a declared agenda of conquering all the territory from the river to the sea. The Arab countries and the Palestinians did. The map in question refers to the situation before 1967, which makes your comments regarding the annexation of Jerusalem and the occupation of the West Bank, irrelevant. As a matter of fact, Both the Gaza Strip and the West Bank were occupied at the time (1949-1967) by Egypt and Jordan, respectively. With the latter even annexing the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

 

The IDF is Israel's army, it doesn't make peace agreements. That's up to the government and the parliament. The same goes for other strategical territorial decisions. Most times, the IDF positions are actually not as hard line as those of right wing governments. The various security arrangements proposed (not your simplistic versions of them) are, in a large part, the product of IDF deliberations.

 

The Palestinian state being used as a "buffer zone against more easterly enemies" and "a zone they could reoccupy over a long weekend" are nothing statement, going a long way to either indicate a lack of actual clue or the usual practice of offering rose tainted fantasies.

[Morch]

3 hours ago, sanemax said:

I suppose that Israel wants the West Bank for itself .

Jordan doesnt want it anymore , its there for the taking .

 

Come again?

Jordan renounced its claim to the West Bank a while back, while recognizing the Palestinian claim. No idea how one can imagine "its there for the taking".

[Morch]

1 hour ago, dexterm said:

All the buildings you mention are in West Jerusalem, which Palestinians are perfectly willing to accept as Israel's capital, even though 33% of the land there was confiscated from Palestinian owners.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/West_Jerusalem#Division_in_1949

 

It's the greed of Israel now wanting its illegal annexation of East Jerusalem recognized too, where Palestinians planned their future capital, that they object to. 

 

Trump's dog whistle nod to that illegal annexation even though he has covered himself saying not necessarily the final borders, is what is causing all the controversy.

 

And if in Trump's mind there is no confusion or controversy, and it won't alter the status quo...why do it at this sensitive moment on the eve of peace talks?

 

Dumb at best; at worst deliberately wrecking peace talks because he knew his "ultimate deal" negotiated by his son in law was actually garbage .

 

There is no such unified Palestinian position, except in your propaganda posts. The Hamas, which according to many estimates (in lieu of proper elections) represents about half of the Palestinian electorate/populace - does not support a peace agreement or recognition of Israel, never mind Israel's claim to West Jerusalem.

 

There is nothing recent about Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem, nor about its quest for recognition of such. It is neither a new issue nor is it about "greed". No issues raised with Jews driven out of the Old City in 1949 and the confiscation of their property.

 

Trump's statement included this bit, which you are sure to ignore once more:

Quote

We are not taking a position of any final status issues, including the specific boundaries of the Israeli sovereignty in Jerusalem, or the resolution of contested borders. Those questions are up to the parties involved.

Not quite what you alleged.

 

That posters alternate between portraying Trump as a moron, who doesn't know anything about foreign policy and then engage in speculation about Trump's complex plans regarding such does not inspire a whole lot of confidence in their "analysis". Ignoring domestic and personal factors which could have played part in this decision, or indeed, the chaotic nature of Trump's decision making, is off mark.

 

[dexterm]

22 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

There is no such unified Palestinian position, except in your propaganda posts. The Hamas, which according to many estimates (in lieu of proper elections) represents about half of the Palestinian electorate/populace - does not support a peace agreement or recognition of Israel, never mind Israel's claim to West Jerusalem.

 

There is nothing recent about Israel's annexation of East Jerusalem, nor about its quest for recognition of such. It is neither a new issue nor is it about "greed". No issues raised with Jews driven out of the Old City in 1949 and the confiscation of their property.

 

Trump's statement included this bit, which you are sure to ignore once more:

Not quite what you alleged.

 

That posters alternate between portraying Trump as a moron, who doesn't know anything about foreign policy and then engage in speculation about Trump's complex plans regarding such does not inspire a whole lot of confidence in their "analysis". Ignoring domestic and personal factors which could have played part in this decision, or indeed, the chaotic nature of Trump's decision making, is off mark.

 

Looks like you are the only one who didn't notice Trump's dog whistle approval of the brand of indivisible Jerusalem that Netanyahu is currently touting amongst European leaders. The rest of the world, his Evangelical Christian fan base,  and right wing Israelis somehow heard it differently from you, as he was warned they would.

 

So if as you say, no change, why do it?

Edited December 12, 2017 by dexterm

[KKr]

39 minutes ago, Morch said:

 

@KKr

 

Might be worth mentioning that the Partition plan was rejected by the Arab/Palestinian side. The same policy of rejection continuing for decades, thus contributing to things dragging on, and to the state of things post-war(s) emerging as the new basis for future agreements.

 

Back in 1947-1949, Israel did not have major Western sponsors, did not have quite the firepower advantage alleged and the alternative to not fighting the war was annihilation.

absolutely, the Arab / Palestinian side rejected the Partition Plan.
They were living in that area along with quite a number of indigenous Jews.

It is not hard to understand that, taking a ludicrous example, people of New Mexico  would be rather upset if the Native Indian tribes claimed it is their promised land (and the terms upon which it was surrendered were not fair) and New Mexico needs to be vacated within months, or else an Army larger than yours will take care of it ...

There is I think no discussion that the Partition plan was being imposed by Western Forces. 
It seems that, since they let the Nazi's run out of control, it was apparently felt that a "Widergutmachung" was in order. (Hence the statement that there was no Western sponsorship for the Zionist state is imho fictitious)

Also, please note that the Partition Plan was a "Plan of Partition with Economic Union" so whereas with proper compensation of people to be re-settled away from their (Ancestors) land might have lead to some kind of agreement, apparently such offers (if any) were not sufficient.

And now,  of some kind of Economic Union, we are rather faaaar away.
Unfortunately,  politicians (and war lords even more so) seem more interested in exercising power, than in uniting the area into an economic power house. (and make even more money from economic activity than from war).