I’d say that it IS the green parts that are the issue as they are the most misleading parts of the maps, particularly the first and third maps, where Ottoman, Jordanian and Egyptian controlled lands are incorrectly labelled Palestinian.
There is an equally valid argument that the Israelis have traded land for peace since 1973 by handing over the Sinai, Gaza, South Lebanon and parts of the West Bank reducing the area under Israeli control by around two thirds.
That's the key word then would you admit? since you used it, "controlled".
I assume when you say Ottoman you mean the first map.
It's true that the Ottoman had control over the lands, but ownership were still Arab Palestinians, and the Ottomans themselves called the land Palestine.
During Ottoman's control and after, the UNCCP held records of more than 530,000 land ownership documents for Arab Palestinians. I mentioned this in my previous post. Although you may want to insist the first map being a blank canvas of Ottoman Empire, the evidence and documents are there that
1. The lands the Ottoman controlled were individually assigned before during and after their control to more than 530,000 Arab Palestinians.
2. The Ottoman refer to the land as Palestine. In fact, the history of the land based on ancient maps from Ptolemy to Herodotus, Ovid to Avicenna, and commentaries from Einstein to Avi Shlaim refers to the land pre 1948 as Palestine.
Thus, Not only map 1 shows Palestine as the name of the country, but also shows the background of its landowners. They are not mostly absentee landlords as established in its inquest. They are mostly owned by Arab Palestinians.
On the Jordanian and Egyptian controlled lands. Egypt never annexed Gaza, it only went under military control. Militarry occupation, in international law, is defined by a temporary control of power without any claim for permanent sovereignty. This, the land may be controlled by Egypt, ownership is still Palestinian. An excellent case is Indonesia's control over Timor Timur. The Indonesians didn't annex the country but simply rule it by military power. It's lands were still owned by Timorese, and upon relinquish of control Timor Leste, the independent state was born, complete with its Timorese owned lands that never could exchange hands.
Jordan did annex West Bank and in doing so had sovereign rights. However, this sovereign rights was only recognised by Pakistan and the United Kingdom. Furthermore, Jordan was itself a new nation and 70% of its populations are Palestinian by reference. The West Bank is Palestine before, Palestinian during and Palestine after.
Finally, on your assertions of handing over occupied land back to Palestine. You do know that the UNSC and US State Department both do not recognise these occupied lands as owned or controlled by Israel, right? Because they are - as words used by these agencies - illegal, a flagrant violation of international laws as well as a violation of the Geneva Convention, and not to mention based on commentaries of prominent individuals as human rights violations and a possible war crime, making this token gesture a moot point.