Israel Matzav

Saudis throw cold water on Obama's 'peace plan'

At a press conference with Secretary of State Hillary Clinton on Friday, Saudi foreign minister Saud al-Faisal threw cold water on President Obama's 'peace plan.'

I would be remiss if I didn’t express our thanks and appreciation to President Obama and to Secretary Clinton for their early and robust focus on trying to bring peace to the Middle East. I expressed to the Secretary our view that a bold and historic step is required to end this conflict and divert the resources of the region from war and destruction to peace and development.

It is time for all people in the Middle East to be able to lead normal lives. Incrementalism and a step-by-step approach has not and-- we believe-- will not achieve peace. Temporary security, confidence-building measures will also not bring peace. What is required is a comprehensive approach that defines the final outcome at the outset and launches into negotiations over final status issues: borders, Jerusalem, water, refugees and security.

The whole world knows what a settlement should look like: withdrawal from all the occupied territories, including Jerusalem; a just settlement for the refugees; and an equitable settlement of issues such as water and security. The Arab world is in accord with such a settlement through the Arab Peace Initiative adopted at the 2002 Arab Summit in Beirut which not only accepted Israel, but also offered full and complete peace and normal relations in exchange for Israeli withdrawal from all Arab territories occupied in ’67. This initiative was adopted unanimously by the Islamic countries at Makkah Summit in 2005.

Today, Israel is trying to distract by shifting attention from the core issue- an end to the occupation that began in ’67 and the establishment of a Palestinian state to-- incidental issues such as academic conferences and civil aviation matters. This is not the way to peace. Israel must decide if it wants real peace, which is at hand, or if it wants to continue obfuscating and, as a result, lead the region into a maelstrom of instability and violence.

The question is not what the Arab world will offer. That has been established. But an end to the conflict, recognition, and full normal relations as exist between countries at peace. The question really is: What will Israel give in exchange for this comprehensive offer? And remember, what Israel is asked to give in exchange for peace, namely the return of the occupied territories, never belonged to it in the first place. Israel hasn’t even responded to an American request to halt settlements which President Obama described as illegitimate.

You will recall that President Obama was trying to obtain 'normalization gestures' from the Saudis and other Arab countries in return for Israel halting 'settlement construction.' That's obviously not going to be forthcoming. You will also note that what Prince Faisal is describing is the unchanged 'Saudi plan' from 2002. It features Israel's retreat to the 1949 armistice lines and the resettlement of the 'Palestinian refugees' in what is left of Israel. Those are non-starters for nearly all Jewish Israelis. And note Prince Faisal's idea of a 'negotiation': The final outcome is defined at the outset. That's not much of a negotiation in my book.

Secretary of State Clinton tried to make the best out of what must have been an uncomfortable situation:

MR. CROWLEY: We’ll go to question with David Gollust of VOA.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, I just – the foreign minister’s very strong opposition, obviously, to confidence-building measures before a comprehensive settlement, I wonder if that for you means that it makes it very difficult for success in this process because, of course, Senator Mitchell has made the search for confidence-building measures on each side as an interim step to a comprehensive settlement as something he’s seeking. Does this complicate your – the Administration’s efforts at peacemaking?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, I don’t think so at all. I think that the efforts we are undertaking are to create a negotiation that will lead to a comprehensive settlement in the interests of both the Palestinian and the Israeli people. There are many aspects to this. Some of them were mentioned – security, water, borders, refugees, Jerusalem. All of these have to be discussed and agreed to by the parties.

Our intention is to try to get agreement from the parties to be part of such a negotiation and to begin it, and to begin it with the intention of finishing it and resolving all of the issues in a comprehensive way. What the Arab Peace Initiative did, very importantly, was to obtain unanimous support, as His Royal Highness said, to the proposition there should be a two-state solution; that as a part of that two-state solution, there should be a recognition of Israel and relations with Israel.

We know that this is all in the process that has to be undertaken, and we are looking forward to seeing the parties sitting down at the negotiating table, supported not only by the United States, but by other nations led by Saudi Arabia and the Arab and Muslim nations that signed on to the Arab Peace Initiative.

QUESTION: You don’t see that as a setback?

SECRETARY CLINTON: No, not at all.

Not at all? I guess if you never expected the Saudis to give anything anyway, it wasn't much of a setback.

Arutz Sheva adds:

The Saudi rebuff, which also ignored an appeal by more than 200 Congressmen for “gestures” towards Israel, leaves President Obama with little room for maneuvering after his two-month-hold demand that Israel freeze all building for Jews in eastern Jerusalem as well as in Judea and Samaria fell on deaf ears in Israel. American media and the Jewish community increasingly have criticized President Obama for going too far in trying to pressure Israel, the only democracy in the Middle East and a close ally of the United States.

Well, some American media have criticized President Obama.

The real question is where the administration goes from here. Will they step up the pressure on Israel? Will they back off and risk the same kind of criticism that the Bush administration got for not doing enough to bring 'peace' to the Middle East? I think that depends in part on where the administration is domestically. If the economy starts to recover and some form of Obamacare goes through, I'd bet you'll see a lot more pressure on Israel in September. But if Obama continues to struggle with sinking poll numbers and rising unemployment, he may have to put his plans to fight with Israel on the back burner.

In any event, bowing to the Saudis does not seem to have helped much.

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:21 AM