Israel Matzav

'Palestinians' have more to lose if 'direct talks' collapse

The Washington Post correctly surmises that the 'Palestinians' have much more to lose than Israel does if the 'direct talks' fall apart.

Mr. Netanyahu risks looking like a spoiler if he fails to offer Mr. Abbas at least a partial concession -- perhaps a private assurance that no building permits will be given to settlements in East Jerusalem or beyond Israel's West Bank fence. But in the end the Palestinian president would be foolish to end the talks. In so doing, he would leave Israel free to proceed with unchecked settlement construction while postponing Palestinian statehood indefinitely. He would also place himself at greater domestic political risk, since the end of negotiations would empower Palestinian militants.

If he stays in the talks, Mr. Abbas can oblige Mr. Netanyahu to spell out his specific terms for Palestinian statehood, something he has yet to do. If they resemble those offered by previous Israeli governments, it might be possible to move relatively quickly toward an accord on borders and security. If the Israeli offer is unreasonable, the pressure will shift to Mr. Netanyahu.

Mr. Obama and Mr. Abbas all along have sought to put the Israeli leader on the spot. But they must do so on the right issue -- not settlements, but the terms for Palestinian statehood.

The difference between how the two sides are playing the midnight Sunday night deadline could not be more stark. Various 'Palestinian' spokesmen continue to throw tantrums about how they are walking away from the table unless Israel extends the freeze that they ignored for nine months. Meanwhile, Israel is maintaining total radio silence on the issue, with the cabinet member most likely to mouth off - Ehud Barak - on a plane from the US since last night and likely to be whisked into a 'cabinet meeting' as soon as he lands here.

Short of Jonathan Pollard's release - which I don't see happening - I don't believe the cabinet will just extend the freeze. There are three reasons why they won't. The first reason is the one you have heard all along: The votes aren't there for it. The only members of the cabinet likely to vote in favor are the five Labor party members, Dan Meridor (who has emereged as a supporter of a compromise and not of an extension) and Netanyahu himself.

The second reason it won't be is that most of the cabinet recognizes that extending it will reward the nine months of 'Palestinian' intransigence in which they acted as if the freeze did not exist, and would likely start a souk-like bargaining process in which the 'Palestinians' sought to extend the freeze without any time limit and to extend it to Jerusalem. That just won't fly here.

The third reason the freeze won't just be extended is that there was a second side to that proposal: The determination of borders over the next three months. The last thing Israel wants is to determine future borders with (God forbid) a 'Palestinian state' in a vacuum in which Israel's greater concerns (security and every other issue) are not discussed.

And no, I don't believe the government can just forbid all building by not giving out permits. Everyone is onto that game already.

Israel Radio has been talking about a compromise of sorts (after giving us a sampling of radio headlines from around the world in which the freeze extension is the lead story) in which we will build in areas that we anticipate keeping in a future settlement. But the 'Palestinians' give no indication that they would accept such a compromise, and I'm not sure the votes exist in the Israeli cabinet to pass it. Everyone here is tired of being the victims of extortionists!

I suspect strongly that the compromise has already been proposed and that the 'Palestinians' are being asked to accept it before it's even brought to the Israeli cabinet for a vote. It would be much harder to vote against a compromise that the 'Palestinians' have already accepted.

But the 'Palestinians' have more to lose here and everyone expects that they will stay at the table for now and blow the talks up over something more substantive. No one here expects Netanyahu to offer as much as Barak and Olmert did - and almost no one wants him to make an offer like that.

What could go wrong?

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 1:03 PM