Thursday
Oct222009
Israel-Palestine: Space for a US-Brokered Solution Narrows
Thursday, October 22, 2009 at 12:21
Bring It On: Israel Counter-attacks UN over Gaza Enquiry
Palestine: Suffering Life at Israeli Checkpoints
Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis
Is there any space left for the US as the "honest broker" of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks?
On Tuesday night, President Obama declared, on the eve of Israeli President Shimon Peres's Facing Tomorrow Conference in Jerusalem, that Israeli-US relations were "more than a strategic alliance." In a speech full of praises on Peres, he added:
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhQaubxx6Rw[/youtube]
Obama's speech was undercut, however, by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Ostensibly, he was calling for "peace", by putting the burden upon Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas:
The problem is that Netanyahu's demands comes in the context of a series of Israeli conditions on the talks, including the dispute over expansion of settlements and Tel Aviv's insistence on addressing of specific economic and security issues rather than the general recognition of a Palestinian state. So PA negotiator Saeb Erekat, who happened to be in Washington, pointedly said, "There's no agreement" and accused Israel of feigning interest in negotiations while claiming the Palestinians were preventing progress.
Israeli representatives were unable to reach common ground with Palestinians over three demands put by the latter: the start of the negotiations would be accompanied by a statement saying the goal was to reach an agreement within two years; the goal would the establishment of a Palestinian state with permanent borders based on an Israeli withdrawal; and there would a complete halt to construction of settlements, including in East Jerusalem. Late Tuesday, Israeli sources stated that negotiations failed.
Still the US persists. On Wednesday, the US Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice told Israelis to "relaunch Middle East talks now" At Peres's conference, she said: "As President Peres always reminds us, being serious about peace means taking risks for peace. Being serious about peace means understanding that tomorrow need not look like yesterday."
That is enough for now, it appears, to keep the idea of a negotiation alive. After the message of the Obama Administration, One Israeli official said, "There appears to be a meeting of the minds and hopefully the Israeli-Palestinian dialogue will be able to re-start in the near future." Another explained under the prospective deal, on which Palestinians have not yet commented, the negotiations could be held on the basis of two UN Security Council resolutions, 242 and 338, from the 1960s and 1970s.
The resolutions call for "withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict"; however, each party interprets this in its own way. For Palestinians, it obliges Israelis to withdraw unconditionally to pre-1967 borders, whereas Israel interprets this as a partial withdrawal.
So far from making Washington's task easier, the border issue may bring talks to a critical stage. Unless Israel is willing to drop its step-by-step approach in favour of a grand resolution, or conversely the Palestinians are willing to compromise on a de facto Israeli occupation while other issues are considered, there will be a stalemate, if not a dramatic collapse. Saed Erekat's words, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton prepared her detailed report on talks to Obama, laid the foundation for blame rather than agreement, "The report would identify the spoiler in the talks."
Palestine: Suffering Life at Israeli Checkpoints
Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis
Is there any space left for the US as the "honest broker" of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks?
On Tuesday night, President Obama declared, on the eve of Israeli President Shimon Peres's Facing Tomorrow Conference in Jerusalem, that Israeli-US relations were "more than a strategic alliance." In a speech full of praises on Peres, he added:
Our moment in history is filled with challenges that test our will and invite pessimism. We can choose to defer action, to sustain a dangerous status quo, or we can meet the challenges of our time head-on. Like you, I believe now is the time to act.
[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhQaubxx6Rw[/youtube]
Obama's speech was undercut, however, by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Ostensibly, he was calling for "peace", by putting the burden upon Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas:
Now it is your turn to say the truth about peace, the need for it and the true way to achieve it. What is important is to do it publicly, not just behind closed doors; to say the truth about peace publicly, to our people and to the Palestinian people.
The problem is that Netanyahu's demands comes in the context of a series of Israeli conditions on the talks, including the dispute over expansion of settlements and Tel Aviv's insistence on addressing of specific economic and security issues rather than the general recognition of a Palestinian state. So PA negotiator Saeb Erekat, who happened to be in Washington, pointedly said, "There's no agreement" and accused Israel of feigning interest in negotiations while claiming the Palestinians were preventing progress.
Israeli representatives were unable to reach common ground with Palestinians over three demands put by the latter: the start of the negotiations would be accompanied by a statement saying the goal was to reach an agreement within two years; the goal would the establishment of a Palestinian state with permanent borders based on an Israeli withdrawal; and there would a complete halt to construction of settlements, including in East Jerusalem. Late Tuesday, Israeli sources stated that negotiations failed.
Still the US persists. On Wednesday, the US Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice told Israelis to "relaunch Middle East talks now" At Peres's conference, she said: "As President Peres always reminds us, being serious about peace means taking risks for peace. Being serious about peace means understanding that tomorrow need not look like yesterday."
That is enough for now, it appears, to keep the idea of a negotiation alive. After the message of the Obama Administration, One Israeli official said, "There appears to be a meeting of the minds and hopefully the Israeli-Palestinian dialogue will be able to re-start in the near future." Another explained under the prospective deal, on which Palestinians have not yet commented, the negotiations could be held on the basis of two UN Security Council resolutions, 242 and 338, from the 1960s and 1970s.
The resolutions call for "withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict"; however, each party interprets this in its own way. For Palestinians, it obliges Israelis to withdraw unconditionally to pre-1967 borders, whereas Israel interprets this as a partial withdrawal.
So far from making Washington's task easier, the border issue may bring talks to a critical stage. Unless Israel is willing to drop its step-by-step approach in favour of a grand resolution, or conversely the Palestinians are willing to compromise on a de facto Israeli occupation while other issues are considered, there will be a stalemate, if not a dramatic collapse. Saed Erekat's words, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton prepared her detailed report on talks to Obama, laid the foundation for blame rather than agreement, "The report would identify the spoiler in the talks."
Reader Comments