SIEGEL: Well, in practice, what did the Israelis think of this idea that we wanted to keep the settlement of Ariel and the territory around it, and that we would end up on the border somewhere else? The Paulet Newcombe Agreement, a series of agreements between 1920 and 1923, contained the principles of the boundary between the mandates of Palestine and Mesopotamia attributed to Britain and the mandate of Syria and Lebanon attributed to France. To really unpack this sentence, we need to look at two notions: “1967 lines” and “mutually agreed swaps”. The Israeli-Jordanian peace treaty, signed on 26 October 1994, resolved all outstanding territorial and border issues between the two countries that had existed since the 1948 war. The treaty establishes and fully recognizes the international border between Israel and Jordan, with Jordan confirming its renunciation of any rights to the West Bank. “By definition, this means that the parties themselves – Israelis and Palestinians – will negotiate a different border from that of June 4, 1967,” he said. According to the personal documents of British Colonel Wilfed A. Jennings Bramley, who influenced the negotiations, the border served mainly British military interests – it promoted the Ottomans as much as possible from the Suez Canal and gave the United Kingdom full control of the two Red Sea gulfs – Suez and Aqaba, including the Strait of Tiran. At that time, the Aqaba branch of the Heja Railway had not yet been built, and the Ottomans therefore did not have easy access to the Red Sea. The British were also interested in making the border as short and patrollable as possible and did not take into account the needs of local residents in the negotiations.  Nevertheless, the Palestinians insist that no negotiations can take place until all sides agree that the pre-1967 borders would be their basis. . . .