Why Obama-Kerry are preventing a Netanyahu-Abu Mazen meeting even though Netanyahu already conceded almost everything
In an earlier post, I reported that the Obama-Kerry junta has been
preventing a meeting between Prime Minister Netanyahu and '
moderate' '
Palestinian' President
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen.
Ben Caspit explains why.
While American sources claimed Abbas’ statement was “inaccurate,”
senior Palestinian and Israeli officials alike confirmed that the
Americans were not enthusiastic about such a meeting taking place. They
believe it would be explosive and cause the situation to deteriorate
even further. The Americans have learned from experience. They bear the
battle scars of countless disappointments. They would therefore prefer
to spend time preparing for such a meeting, honing positions,
coordinating expectations and going for a sure thing.
For the past few months, the Americans have been very concerned that they could lose Abbas. The Palestinian president’s status among his own people is getting weaker by the day,
and demonstrations against him are turning violent. A quiet uprising of
sorts against him is already underway in the refugee camps, and it
erupts every so often. In some instances, there has even been an
exchange of fire between insurgent Palestinians and security forces. The
last thing Kerry wants to see is Abbas resign or be deposed and have
the West Bank slip into administrative and military chaos. He’s already
had enough problems like that.
The real drama is taking place behind the scenes on various fronts. Kerry met recently
with the leader of the Israeli opposition, Knesset member and Zionist
Camp head Isaac Herzog. While both sides deny they discussed the
political situation, it is quite safe to assume that they did not skip
over the topic.
Herzog is in the middle of advanced negotiations
to join the current government.
Netanyahu made him a very tempting
offer in which Herzog’s party would receive the Foreign, Defense and
Justice ministries. Herzog does want to join the government. He knows
that the position of defense minister (offered for just half a term, in
another year and a half) could help him overcome his image as a weakling
and give him that special something he needs to become prime minister.
Before he can join, however, he will have to convince his own party’s
Central Committee to extend his term as chairman until late 2017. That
is what Netanyahu wants in exchange for the deal. The prime minister is
not willing to forego all these strategic assets only to see Herzog
deposed a few months later and replaced with a new party chair who will
lead the Zionist Camp out of the coalition. If that happened, Netanyahu
would be exposed in every direction.
...
Kerry and the peace team he put together (which has since come apart)
are committed to achieving something. They have no interest in leaving
the negotiations in ruins. It is quite possible he would prefer that negotiations were renewed
after Herzog joins Netanyahu’s government and leads it to the political
center. Not only is Netanyahu’s current government incapable of
conducting negotiations, it wouldn’t last the first 15 minutes. Bringing
24 new Knesset members from the center-left into the coalition would
turn this government into something very different. I assume that Kerry
is kept abreast of the secret contacts between Herzog and Netanyahu and
is keeping his fingers crossed for them.
But there is another issue that is even more significant. On Sept. 2,
Al-Monitor revealed that in his meeting with Abbas on March 17, 2014,
President Barack Obama handed Abbas a proposal for a framework agreement with Israel.
This proposal was based on an earlier draft of a framework agreement
reached between the Israelis and the Americans. That agreement was the
outcome of intense negotiations between Kerry, Netanyahu and their
respective staffs, conducted over many long weeks via video
conferencing. The talks took place on an almost daily basis and lasted
for hours. They eventually resulted in a very volatile document in which
Netanyahu agreed to create a mechanism to rehabilitate the Palestinian
refugees. He even agreed to take in a limited number of refugees (to be
determined by Israel), as well as to the principle of the 1967 borders
serving as the basis for each state (with land swaps).
The one point that Netanyahu refused to concede was the status of
Jerusalem. The Americans inserted an especially explosive clause (making
Jerusalem the capital of two states) and presented it to Abbas.
The Palestinian leader has been true to form and has yet to respond
to Obama’s proposal. Kerry seems concerned that in any potential meeting
between Netanyahu and Abbas, this draft will be raised for discussion.
The ensuing explosion would be nuclear. There is no way Netanyahu could
survive politically once that happened. When the Americans informed the
Israelis about their changes to the draft, the Israelis responded with a
shrug. Netanyahu’s adviser, attorney Yitzhak Molcho, told the
Americans, “You can add whatever you want. The Palestinians will still
say no.”
So Netanyahu has already conceded the 1967 lines (1949 armistice lines) as a 'basis for negotiations,' has already conceded '100% land swaps,' has already conceded the 'right of return,' but hasn't yet conceded Jerusalem. The difference between Netanyahu and Olmert 2008 or Barak 2000 is... quite small.
Aren't you glad we elected a 'right wing government'?
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Abu Mazen, agreed land swaps, Barack Hussein Obama, Binyamin Netanyahu, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, John Kerry, Palestinian refugees, right of return, Yitzchak Herzog
Know your enemy: BDS aims to destroy Israel and not 'just' the 'settlements'
Here's an interview with
Omar Barghouti, holder of a Master's degree from Tel Aviv University and the founder of the BDS (Boycott, Divest and Sanctions) movement in the radical Leftist 972 Magazine. For those of you who still believe, against all evidence, that the BDS movement is 'only' targeting the 'settlements' and not Israel itself, perhaps this will convince you otherwise.
Barghouti, 51, refuses to respond to his accusers — he
maintains a boycott of the Israeli media. He was willing to conduct this
rare interview due to my Palestinian identity and under the condition
that it be published first in Arabic, on Palestinian website “Bokra” – although it is also being published in English here on +972 Magazine and in Hebrew on Local Call, where I am a blogger. Unified trilingual anti-Zionism at its best, I must add.
Barghouti explains his choice to not speak with the Israeli media and
the logic behind the more general call for boycott, divestment and
sanctions against Israel as a whole: “In every other situation of
sustained oppression, human rights groups call for punitive measures
against the state and its institutions, not just against a narrow
component of the state that is directly connected to the injustice at
hand. No one called for banning products of Sudanese companies producing
in Darfur in response to the Sudanese regime’s war crimes there. Sudan
as a whole was targeted.
“As Archbishop Desmond Tutu once said, Israel is put on a pedestal in
the West, and treated as if it were above international law. BDS seeks
to end this Israeli exceptionalism and criminal impunity. Israel must be
treated like any other state committing similarly egregious crimes.”
...
BDS calls for: an end to Israel’s occupation of Palestinian
and other Arab territories since 1967, including dismantling the wall
and colonies; an end to Israel’s system of racial discrimination against
its Palestinian citizens; and respecting the UN-sanctioned, fundamental
right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes.
“These three basic rights correspond to the three main components of
the Palestinian people: those in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank,
including East Jerusalem; those in the 1948 territory who live under
Israeli apartheid,
and those in exile”, Barghouti says. He insists that regardless of what
shape the political solution to the conflict takes – it must be based
on these principles.
For those of you who don't get it, the so-called 'right of return' would bring millions of 'Palestinians' who never lived here to live in what is left of Israel, after its separation from 'Palestine,' thereby overwhelming demographically what is left of the Jewish people in its ancient land.
Some BDS activists choose to boycott all of Israel, not
just companies or bodies profiting directly from the occupation. Why is
that?
“The artificial and untenable distinction
between Israel and ‘the occupation’ is political and ideological; it is
not based on practical, legal or moral considerations. It is Israel
that international law regards as the occupying power, and therefore, is
the party responsible for the construction and maintenance of not just
the colonial settlements, but also the whole occupation regime.
“Israel is also responsible for what even the U.S. Department of State has criticized as institutional, legal, and societal discrimination against Palestinian citizens of Israel, and such a system fits the UN definition of apartheid.”
But Israel’s deepest injustice, Barghouti argues, is the denial of
the right of return to Palestinian refugees. Those refugees, uprooted
and dispossessed in 1948, comprise 68 percent of the Palestinian people.
They, too, deserve equal human rights, he insists.
That ought to make it abundantly clear. The BDS movement is about destroying the State of Israel and not 'just' about reaching a 'two-state solution.' But then, if the last 15 years have shown us nothing else, they have shown us that a 'two-state solution' is about destroying Israel too.
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, BDS, Omar Barghouti, Palestinian refugees, right of return, two-state solution
Poll: 75% of Israeli Jews oppose 'Palestinian state' on '67 lines,' redivision of Jerusalem
A new poll indicates that
75% of Israeli Jews are opposed to a 'Palestinian state' based on the 1949 armistice lines and to the redivision of Jerusalem.
According
to the latest poll conducted on October 12-14, 2014, by
Shivukim-Panorama for the Jerusalem Center, 75% of the Israeli Jewish
public continue to oppose Israel’s withdrawal from the Jordan Valley and
the division of Jerusalem.
Moreover,
the rise of the Islamic State in the Middle East has made the Israeli
public even less ready for territorial concessions in the West Bank.
While 70% report that the rise of the Islamic State (ISIS) has not
affected their position, 17% say it has made them less ready for
concessions, while 5% say they are more ready for concessions.
Some
75% of Israeli Jews oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state if
it means an Israeli withdrawal from the Jordan Valley. A similar
percentage would oppose the replacement of the IDF with international
forces in the Jordan Valley. Notably, 52% of Israelis who identify with
“the left” oppose the replacement of the IDF with international forces
in the Jordan Valley.
Overall,
74% of Israeli Jews oppose the establishment of a Palestinian state on
the 1967 lines, while 76% oppose a Palestinian state if it means the
division of Jerusalem.
Full poll numbers
here.
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Israeli polls, Jerusalem, Jordan Valley, two-state solution
Boxlike thinking: Abu Bluff turns down 5x larger 'Palestinian state' because it's outside '67 borders'
'
Moderate' '
Palestinian' President
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen has turned down an offer for a 'Palestinian state' five times the size of Gaza, because it would have required him to
drop the '67 borders' (1949 armistice lines).
Egyptian president General Abdel Fatah A-Sisi has offered
Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas to cede 160 square kilometers
of the Sinai Peninsula adjoining Gaza to the PA, thus creating a
Palestinian state five times the present size of Gaza. In return, the PA
would stop demanding that Israel return to the 1967 borders.
The offer was revealed on IDF Radio.
A-Sisi reportedly suggested that Palestinian "refugees" be allowed to
settle in the new, much enlarged Gaza, which would be demilitarized.
The Palestinian cities in Judea and Samaria would enjoy autonomy and
be fully run by the PA, according to the plan, which would leave the PA
with even more territory than it would have if Israel ceded all of Judea
and Samaria.
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu was aware of the offer and the
United States gave a green light, according to the military radio
station's sources.
Abu Bluff turned down the offer.
A similar proposal was made by Israel's
Giora Eiland when Hosni Mubarak was in power, but at the time Egypt turned it down.
What's perhaps most significant here is the level of cooperation between Israel and Egypt. The Obama administration and the 'Palestinians' are probably tearing their hair out over it.
Oh yes, and that once again the mantra that there is 'no solution other than the two-state solution' is proven false.
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, Abu Mazen, Binyamin Netanyahu, Gaza, Giora Eiland, Palestinian state, two-state solution
Abu Bluff's fake ultimatum
'
Moderate' '
Palestinian' President
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen has threatened that either Israel agree to the borders of a 'Palestinian state' along the 1949 armistice lines, or he will withdraw 'security cooperation' and go to the International Criminal Court to complain about Operation Protective Edge.
Jonathan Tobin argues that
Abu Bluff is bluffing again.
First, it should be remembered that despite Abbas’s claims that
Israel has yet to put forward a map of where an acceptable Palestinian
state might be, the PA has already received several such maps and turned
each one of them down over the course of negotiations stretching back
to 2000. When former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert offered Abbas a map
pretty much along the lines he is demanding in 2008, he fled the
negotiations and wouldn’t return to the table for years. In the latest
round with the Netanyahu government during the past year, Abbas wouldn’t
negotiate seriously on any issue and again seized the first pretext to
break them off.
The reason for this behavior is that although Abbas sometimes talks a
good game about peace, he knows his public is not ready for a deal that
will recognize the legitimacy of a Jewish state alongside a Palestinian
one. So as much as he has put on a good show in recent years about
wanting a state, his goal has always been to avoid a peace deal or even
being put in a position where he would be forced to say either yes or no
to one.
Abbas does like the idea of going to the UN and the ICC since that
allows him to avoid making reciprocal agreements with Israel,
recognizing a Jewish state, and acting as if the future of the
Palestinians lies in cooperation rather than futile “resistance.” But he
also knows that the UN can’t give him a state.
As for the threat of Abbas ending security cooperation with Israel,
that’s a bad joke. While the Israelis do view any help they get from the
various PA security forces as useful, the main beneficiary of the
cooperation is not the Jewish state; it’s Abbas. As the revelations of a
planned Hamas coup against the PA uncovered by the Israelis proved, the
PA leader’s hold on his office as well as his personal security depends
on Israel’s good will.
So does that make it inevitable that Abu Bluff will go to the UN and the ICC? No - that was inevitable already.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Abu Mazen, Binyamin Netanyahu, Fatah, Hamas, International Criminal Court, Operation Protective Edge, United Nations
Abu Mazen: 'My way or the highway'
'
Moderate' '
Palestinian' President
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen has a '
new plan' that he plans to propose to US Secretary of State John FN Kerry. It sounds a lot like the old plans, except that it comes with a nuclear option.
According to Abbas, who spoke in an Egyptian television interview as cited by Haaretz, over the course of next week he will submit an "unusual" diplomatic initiative or proposal.
The PA chairman added that his "surprise" will not consist of a
declaration of war against Israel; Abbas's Fatah faction's "military
wing," the Al-Aqsa Martyrs' Brigades, already declared "open war" on the Jewish state late last month.
Instead, Abbas said it would be a diplomatic solution that he would
present during Kerry's visit to the region next week, after first
presenting it to the various branches of the Palestinian Arab
leadership, reportedly on Tuesday.
The US will likely not receive the proposal warmly, but it enjoys
wide Arab support according to Abbas, who said he would insist on its
implementation. He added that it addresses the international and
internal spheres of the conflict.
It is possible that an appeal against Israel to the International Criminal Court, which Hamas recently signed up to join, might be part of the international initiative; such a move would leave the PA and Hamas open to trial as well.
Along those same lines, Abbas's plans may involve a recently
proposed UN Security Council resolution which would place the PA in
charge of Gaza, and return Israel to peace talks based on the 1949 Armistice lines.
Of course, there's nothing here about what the 'Palestinians' will give. Nothing about 'end of conflict.' Nothing about dropping the 'right of return.' Nothing about demilitarization. Only territory.
If Abu Mazen's plan is not accepted, here's what he plans to do:
What could go wrong?
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Abu Mazen, Fatah, Gaza, Hamas, Middle East peace process, Palestinian Authority
Shabak confirms it was Jews
The Shabak - General Security Service (now known as the Israel Security Authority to the outside world) is now confirming that Jews are being held in connection with the kidnap and murder of Mohammed Abu Khadr.
ISA Statement Regarding the Abduction and Murder of Muhammad Abu Khdeir
(Communicated by the ISA)
In the wake of intelligence and operational information, the Israel Police and the ISA, this morning (Sunday, 6 July 2014), arrested several Jewish suspects regarding the 2 July abduction and murder of Muhammad Abu Khdeir from Shuafat.
The
suspects are being questioned at an ISA facility. All other details
regarding the investigation are under a judicial gag order.
But give Prime Minister Netanyahu credit for
drawing the proper distinction between Israel and the 'Palestinians.'
Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu said Sunday that the
Palestinian Authority (PA) must locate the terrorists who abducted and
murdered three Jewish teens on June 12, just as Israel located the
murderers of Arab teen Mohammed Khder of Shuafat in a few days' time.
Netanyahu was visiting the Frenkel family in Nof Ayalon. Their son,
Naftali, 16, was murdered by Hamas terrorists along with Eyal Yifrah,
19, and Gilad Sha'ar, 16, by Hamas terrorists who are on the run.
"We will carry out the full extent of punishment with the murderers
who carried out this shocking crime, which deserves every denunciation
and condemnation,” he said about the murderers of Abu Khder. “These
murderers do not belong in Israeli society.”
"We do not distinguish between [Arab] terror and [Jewish] terror,” he added.
Don't hold your breath. And even if the 'Palestinian Authority' happens to arrest the kidnappers and murderers of Frenkel, Yifrach and Shaar, don't bet on them
being punished.
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Binyamin Netanyahu, kidnapping, murder, Palestinian terrorism, terrorism
Left seethes: Building permits issued in 'east' Jerusalem neighborhoods
The Left is
seething over the issuance of 550 building permits in the Jewish neighborhoods of Neve Yaakov, Pisgat Zev and Har Homa in 'east' Jerusalem.
The newly-issued building permits include 386 units in Har Homa, 136
units in Neve Yaakov and 36 units in Pisgat Zeev, according to AFP.
Issuing permits is one of the last stages before construction begins,
which means building is likely to start in the coming weeks, according
to the far-left Peace Now NGO.
A spokesman for the group expressed his anger at the decision.
"We are talking about building permits, which is really the final stage," spokesman Lior Amihai told AFP.
"It's a shameful decision, at a shameful time. A government that wants a
two-state solution would not issue those amount of permits for east
Jerusalem neighborhoods."
And you thought that '
everyone knows' that all the Jewish neighborhoods of 'east' Jerusalem are going to be ceded to Israel in a 'final status deal' as part of a 'land swap'....
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, East Jerusalem, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, Palestinian state RIGHT NOW syndrome, Peace Now, right of return, two-state solution
Delusional, blind or just plain stupid?
Every time she opens her mouth,
venom for Judaism and religious Jews comes pouring out. This time was no exception.
Speaking to law students at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, Livni
accused “radicals” of sabotaging the peace process. She also called on
Bennett not to preach to her about Jewish right to the land of Israel.
"On my way here I heard the speech of another minister in the
government, which sounded patriotic - a strong army, a people holding on
to their land,” she said, mocking Bennett.
"The argument is not an argument about a right,” declared Livni. “No
one will preach to me about who believes more about the right of the
people of Israel to the land of Israel. I believe that the people of
Israel have a right to the entire land of Israel, but the argument is
not about this issue. The question is whether the Zionist vision comes
at the price of a Jewish democratic state.”
She continued, "Part of the problem is that the average politician is
split between those who elected him - members of a party’s central
committee and ideological organizations which take control of the
parties to promote a specific agenda which is usually more radical than
that of voters - and the general public. That’s how we find ourselves
waking up once a week to read headlines about annexing the Jordan Valley.”
"The ministers are not stupid - they understand that this harms the
State of Israel, its security, that we are currently in the midst of a
process that deals with maintaining our security. But they play the
game, because they owe the radical groups within their party. So why not
also propose a bill that would forbid us from negotiating, just because
Miri Regev wants to gain a few more votes from her own party?” charged
Livni.
“Those who do not make the distinction between isolated settlements
and settlement blocs are those who will ultimately send us back to the
‘1967 borders,'" she claimed. "This makes me angry because it’s deceit -
they are trying to claim that there are those who are concerned over
security and who are speaking in the name of Zionism and the land of
Israel, and the rest do not.”
"I'm angry because this is not just about political differences -
this is a case where a minority imposes its opinion on the majority for
decades,” said Livni.
In his speech earlier Tuesday, Bennett said that the words “1967
borders” have been used to conceal the true weight of the concessions
being demanded by the Palestinian Authority (PA).
Still trying to figure out why Bennett agreed to go into a government with her in the first place...
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Middle East peace process, Naftali Bennett, Tzipi Livni
Zany Zehava: 'Palestinians' more important than Iran
Meretz's Zehava Gal-On gives conclusive proof that she's part of Israel's loony left and not part of its sane left. Gal-On told UN Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon on Wednesday night that solving the 'Palestinian problem' is
more important than stopping Iran from developing nuclear weapons.
"The fear of a nuclear Iran and the enrichment of uranium that is
obviously not only for purposes of peace is understandable, but instead
of threatening a unilateral attack on Iran, Prime Minister [Binyamin]
Netanyahu should commend [the international community] for making
diplomatic efforts to prevent Iran from obtaining nuclear weapons, while
protecting Israel's security," Gal-On told Ban, referring to
Netanyahu's speech at the UN earlier this week.
Gal-On also pointed out that "Iran is not only Israel's problem; it is the whole world's problem."
The Meretz leader called for Netanyahu to join international diplomatic efforts.
Instead of using his speech to discuss Iran,
Netanyahu should have explained how he plans to reach a final-status
agreement with the Palestinians, because "the continued occupation" is
Israel's biggest problem, Gal-On added.
"Even though most of
Netanyahu's government doesn't want an agreement, 77 MKs support a peace
treaty with the Palestinians on pre-1967 lines," Gal-On stated, asking
Ban to help Netanyahu "cross the Rubicon on the way to a peace treaty."
There is very little on which 77 MK's can agree this day, and you can bet that there are not 77 MK's - and probably not 27 - who support a 'peace treaty' with the 'Palestinians' on the 1949 armistice lines. What a bunch of....
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Ban Ki-Moon, Iranian nuclear threat, Palestinian state, two-state solution, Zehava Gal-On
'Palestinians': US letter guaranteed our preconditions, Europeans published guidelines to entice us to talks
'Palestinian' chief
negotiator bottle washer Saeb Erekat claims that the 'Palestinians' would not have returned to the 'negotiating' table without a
letter of assurances from the United States that all of their preconditions would be met.
In a lengthy interview with Nazareth-based A-Shams radio, Erekat said
that the US had assured Palestinians in writing that talks would
recognize the pre-1967 lines as the basis of a Palestinian state; would
deal with all core issues (Jerusalem, refugees, borders, security and
water); would take place within a six- to nine-month timetable; and
would not allow for any provisional or interim solutions before a final
status agreement was signed. Erekat also said that an American-Israeli
agreement existed regarding settlements, but did not elaborate on its
contents.
(The Palestinians long-time preconditions for resuming talks were
that they negotiate Palestinian statehood on the basis of the pre-1967
lines; that Israel freeze settlement building; and that pro-Oslo accords
Palestinian prisoners be set free. Israel agreed to a phased release of
104 prisoners, but rejected the other two conditions.)
Erekat also claimed that the European Union’s new directives outlawing all EU cooperation with settlements and other Israeli entities over the 1967 lines were part of a deal reached with Europe in exchange for returning to negotiations
He noted that the Palestinian Authority was currently holding talks
with Latin American countries, China, Russia, Japan and the African
Union to adopt similar sanctions toward settlements.
“This is an accomplishment,” Erekat told the Israeli radio station.
“We would not have returned to the table without a written document
confirming these points.”
...
The Obama administration has so far refrained from revealing the
contents of American letters of assurance reportedly delivered to both
parties ahead of talks, and has not confirmed sending any such letters.
US Secretary of State John Kerry has demanded that negotiating parties
maintain complete silence regarding the progress of talks, even including the precise location of meetings.
But in his interview, Erekat blasted the negotiating tactics of the Israelis.
Read the whole thing.
It sounds like there were a lot of promises made to the 'Palestinians' without telling Israel. I don't trust Obama and I don't trust Kerry. This situation could yet be a bigger disaster than it already appears to be.
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Barack Hussein Obama, John Kerry, Middle East peace process, Palestinian terrorists, Saeb Erekat, settlement freeze
Abu Mazen about to back out of 'peace talks'?
On Tuesday, 'm
oderate' '
Palestinian' President
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen suddenly canceled a meeting with his Fatah faction that was to plan for the 'second round' of 'talks' with Israel on August 14, and
flew off to Saudi Arabia to meet with King Abdullah bin Abdel
Aziz.
No reason was given for the cancellation of the meeting. And Abu Mazen may not meet with King Abdullah until Sunday, such that he could have both held the meeting and met with the King.
So what's going on?
However, sources in Ramallah said that the meeting
could take place after the Muslim feast of Id al-Fitr, which begins Thursday and
ends on Sunday.
The sources said that Abbas may have called off the
meeting due to growing opposition in the PLO and Fatah to his decision to resume
the peace talks without a settlement freeze and Israeli acceptance of the
pre-1967 lines as the basis for a two-state solution.
PA officials have
condemned recent Israeli plans to continue building housing units in east
Jerusalem and some settlements in the West Bank.
Abu Mazen is looking for Saudi backing to (a) back out of his agreement to accept only the 'terrorist release' without the other demands or (b) to back out of the talks, and in each case not to be blamed by the Americans.
If Abu Mazen backs out of the talks now, the streets are likely to explode and the US Congress is likely to severely restrict the Obama junta's ability to aid the 'Palestinians.'
Hmmm.
If he's going to do this, he should at least do it before we release any terrorists. We are scheduled to release terrorists on the 13th, which is next Tuesday.
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Abu Mazen, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, Middle East peace process, Palestinian terrorists, Saudi King Abdullah, settlement freeze
The value of an American commitment
Former Foreign Ministry legal adviser Alan Baker sent a letter to US Secretary of State John Kerry this week, reminding Kerry that any US guarantee that the upcoming 'negotiations' would be based upon the
1967 lines 1949 armistice lines would
violate an explicit written commitment from George W. Bush to the State of Israel.
The group
quotes from US president George W. Bush’s letter to Sharon on April 4, 2004,
which it said was given as a political quid pro quo, in return for Israel’s
withdrawal from Gaza.
According to that letter, “As part of a final peace
settlement, Israel must have secure and recognized borders, which should emerge
from negotiations between the parties in accordance with UNSC Resolutions 242
and 338. In light of new realities on the ground, including already existing
major Israeli population centers, it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome
of the final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the
armistice lines of 1949, and all previous efforts to negotiate a two-state
solution have reached the same conclusion.”
These commitments were later
affirmed by a large majority of the US House of Representatives, and – as Baker
and Fuchs wrote to Kerry – was “also given legal affirmation as part of an
Israeli governmental decision and attached to the disengagement implementation
law of October 27, 2004.”
Baker, who wrote the letter with fellow attorney Yossi Fuchs on behalf of the Legal Forum for Israel, also pointed out that the Oslo Accords specifically made no reference to the 1949 armistice lines.
“In the various documents comprising the ‘Oslo Accords’ (1993-99) the PLO and
Israel agreed to conduct negotiations on the issue of ‘borders.’ The term
“pre-1967 lines” has never been a factor in these agreements, nor has it figured
in other accompanying documentation such as the 2003 US sponsored ‘Performance-
Based Roadmap to a Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian
Conflict.’”
We all know, of course, that as soon as the Obama junta took power, they
reneged on the commitments contained in the Bush letter.
American Secretary of State Hillary Clinton claimed on Friday that there
is no record of the Bush administration having agreed to Israel keeping
the 'settlement blocs'.
Hillary says
the Bush administration never agreed to Israel expanding West Bank
communities; insists there is no record of 'any informal or oral
agreement' to that effect. The Israelis say the US position was laid out in a 2004 letter from Bush to then Israeli premier Ariel Sharon. Clinton rejected that claim, saying any such US stance was informal
and "did not become part of the official position of the United States
government." OK now we are back to Clinton word-parsing time.
The letter was even
endorsed by Congress.
Well, not only does the letter exist, it even got a Congressional endorsement shortly after it was written in 2004.
The
Bush Administration clearly understood that the borders of the two
states would NOT look like the 1949 armistice lines (the so-called
“Green line” and never the “1967 borders”), and referred back to UNSC
Resolution 242 which called for Israel to receive, “Secure and
recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force.” There was
wisdom in the formulation, “Any final status agreement will only be
achieved on the basis of mutually agreed changes that reflect these
realities.”
And far from being the work of a single man, or
single administration, Congress took up the Bush letter in June 2004,
passing H. Con. Res. 460 by vast margins in both Houses by both parties:
Resolved by the House of Representatives (the Senate concurring), That Congress–
1.
strongly endorses the principles articulated by President Bush in his
letter dated April 14, 2004, to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon
which will strengthen the security and well-being of the State of
Israel; and
2. supports continuing efforts with others in the
international community to build the capacity and will of Palestinian
institutions to fight terrorism, dismantle terrorist organizations, and
prevent the areas from which Israel has withdrawn from posing a threat
to the security of Israel.
If an allied, democratic government
cannot rely on continuity in the word of an American President for
policy specifically supported and endorsed by the Congress of the United
States, on what can that – or any other – government rely?
Someone ought to ask Secretart of State Clinton that question. She was
the one who claimed she 'couldn't find' the letter, even though she was
in the Senate when that resolution was passed.
Hmmm.
Clearly, the Obama administration is breaking a commitment made by President Bush to Israel. Of course, we all know that the Obama administration regards George W. Bush as illegitimate, so that's not so surprising.
While Baker and Fuchs' letter was a prerequisite to other action, it ought not to be the end of mention of the Bush letter. It is clear that any agreement - if one is ever reached - between Israel and the 'Palestinians' will be dependent upon US guarantees And any such agreement will also have to be approved by Israel's voters in a referendum.
One would hope that in any campaign over a referendum, it would be pointed out repeatedly that no one can count on anything said by the United States and that in the United States, one administration's commitments are meant to be broken by the next administration just like in any other banana republic. Sad but true. Even if Obama is replaced (whether in January 2017 or by impeachment) we cannot be sure that another President as wicked as Obama will not arise and ignore American commitments to Israel.
America doesn't have friends, it has interests. It doesn't have commitments, it has suggestions. What could go wrong?
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Ariel Sharon, Barack Hussein Obama, Bush letter, Gaza expulsion, George W. Bush, Hillary Clinton, Judea and Samaria
Government referendum law will not stop giveaway of Judea and Samaria
Facing an ultimatum from Jewish Home leader Naftali Bennett, the government plans to push through a bill turning the referendum law into a 'basic law' that has constitutional status. But before you all go praising Bennett for his brilliance in forcing Prime Minister Netanyahu's hand, please consider the law's
very limited effect.
Because the legislation only deals with sovereign land, the government
will not have to hold a referendum to sign a treaty giving parts of
Judea and Samaria to the Palestinians. However, if a peace agreement
includes parts of Jerusalem or land swaps, it would require a vote.
So the government can give up every last inch of Judea and Samaria so long as they don't give up land in Jerusalem, but they can't swap the Arab towns in the 'triangle,' for example, for land in Judea or Samaria, without passing a referendum.
Something is really wrong here.
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Binyamin Netanyahu, Naftali Bennett, referendum law
Hey John - It ain't over 'til it's over
A senior aide to '
moderate' '
Palestinian' President
Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen is claiming that the 'Palestinians' have not yet agreed to sit down with the Israelis, and that they are awaiting 'clarifications' from US Secretary of State John Kerry.
Interior Minister Gideon Saar, who may not know a whole lot more about what was agreed than I do, is claiming that
Israel did not agree to negotiations based on the
1967 borders 1949 armistice lines, nor did it agree to a 'settlement freeze.
'
But the 'Palestinians' are claiming that they received a
written commitment from Kerry to negotiations based on the 1949 armistice lines. Of course, Saar's claim and the 'Palestinian' claim are not contradictory.
Palestinian Authority
President Mahmoud Abbas agreed to resume peace talks with Israel only
after U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry gave him a letter guaranteeing
that the basis of the negotiations will be Israel's pre-1967 borders,
two senior Palestinian officials told the Associated Press on Saturday.
A Western official, however, later denied that the '67 lines would be the basis of negotiations.
The Palestinian officials, both of whom are
close to the Palestinian leader and privy to internal discussions, said
the U.S. letter also stipulated that both sides are to refrain from
taking any steps that would jeopardize the outcome of the talks. Israel
is not to issue new tenders for Jewish settlements in the West Bank,
while the Palestinians are not to pursue diplomatic action against
Israel at any international organizations, the officials said on
condition of anonymity because they are not authorized to brief the
media.
The talks with Kerry were about to collapse,
and the letter came as a lifeline in the last-minute bargaining," one of
the Palestinian officials said.
But other PA officials were not so sure Abbas had received such a written guarantee.
"Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas
is going to resume negotiations based on verbal promises. He has no
guarantees that a Palestinian state will be formed on the basis of the
1967 borders, that there will be a settlement freeze or that our
prisoners will be released," a senior official in Ramallah told Israel
Hayom on Saturday.
Arab media outlets meanwhile quoted an
official in the Palestinian Authority president's inner circle, who said
the return to peace talks was made possible only thanks to a plan,
delineated in a personal letter from Kerry to Abbas, which had Abbas and
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu make significant concessions
regarding their preconditions, without having to announce them publicly.
Some reports even quoted senior Palestinian officials as saying that
the letter contained a guarantee from Kerry that the peace talks will be
based on the 1967 lines, something which Jerusalem has denied.
A senior Palestinian source also told i24News
that Kerry threatened to suspend aid unless the Palestinians agreed to
renewed talks with Israel.
And then there are the terrorists being held in Israeli prisons. Israeli media is reporting that 85 'Palestinians' will be released starting in 4-6 weeks. That includes all of the 'Palestinian' terrorists being held in Israeli prisons since before the 1993 Oslo Accords (the 119 number you hear bandied about includes Israeli Arabs and common criminals). These are people with
lots of blood on their hands, most of whom are serving multiple life sentences.
On the other hand, a 'Palestinian' minister has told the Associated Press that
Israel will release 350 'Palestinians' over the next several months. Again, no contradiction in terms.
What could go wrong?
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Abu Mazen, Binyamin Netanyahu, final status negotiations, John Kerry, negotiations without preconditions, Palestinian prisoners, Palestinian terrorists, settlement freeze
Resumption of 'negotiations' not yet a done deal
The New York Times reports that the resumption of 'negotiations' between Israel and the 'Palestinians' is
not yet a done deal (Hat Tip:
Memeorandum).
In announcing Friday that Israelis and Palestinians had established “a
basis” for resuming direct peace negotiations, Mr. Kerry included a
caveat. “If everything goes as expected,” he said, chief negotiators for
each side will convene in Washington “within a week or so.”
That, apparently, was a reference to the prisoner deal, negotiated in a
series of hurried telephone calls with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
of Israel on Friday evening as Mr. Kerry was eager to get home but
determined not to leave empty-handed after six visits in four months.
It remained unclear on Saturday how many Palestinian prisoners were to
be released and when, though it was unlikely to happen before the first
meeting in Washington. It was also not clear whether the vote required
was of Mr. Netanyahu’s full cabinet or a smaller circle of top ministers
known as the security cabinet, both of which meet regularly on Sundays;
Mr. Netanyahu has secured the support of several key ministers.
And some of the deal's terms have started to leak out.
The formula Mr. Kerry negotiated, officials said, involves the United
States’ making a declaration about the borders and settlements, and
recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, that Mr. Netanyahu and
President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority can distance
themselves from while still negotiating.
The Palestinian political leadership expressed dissatisfaction with that
formula on Thursday, but when it became clear that Israel would not
budge further, the focus on Friday turned back to prisoners, an issue
with profound emotional resonance on both sides. Palestinians consider
the men in Israel’s jails, particularly those serving since before Oslo,
prisoners of war. Israelis call them terrorists. Some have been
convicted of multiple murders, and the families of their victims have
already made passionate public appeals against the release.
“Releasing terrorists in order for there to be negotiations and a
meeting in Washington in a week’s time — we’re getting nothing in
return,” Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon complained on Israel Radio.
“They’re not in prison for traffic violations. They’re major terrorists
who have murdered, some with their own hands. They’ve kidnapped
soldiers, buried them alive, shocking stories.”
Mr. Netanyahu’s office refused to discuss the deal on Saturday. Saeb
Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said he had “committed to John
Kerry and President Abbas to shut up for 48 hours until we finalize
everything, but things are looking good.”
If the US actually makes a statement that we should go back to the 1949 armistice lines, we should be all over that one. That's outrageous and would cause permanent damage.
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Middle East peace process, negotiations without preconditions, Palestinian terrorists
Kerry making full court press as Bennett threatens coalition crisis
US Secretary of State John Kerry has
extended his ticket in Amman hoping to bring about the 'resumption' of 'negotiations' between Israel and the 'Palestinians.'
US Secretary of State John Kerry was due to travel to the West Bank
to meet Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Friday, US and
Palestinian officials said, in a last-ditch effort to clinch a renewal
of peace talks with Israel.
Kerry met Palestinian negotiator Saeb
Erekat in Amman on Friday and had been consulting Israeli officials by
telephone, a US official said, but did not say if a breakthrough was
near.
A State Department official in Amman said Kerry would go to Ramallah in
the afternoon to see Abbas, but did not disclose his proposals to revive
peace talks that broke down in 2010.
The 'Palestinians' feel 'pressured' to make a decision (after all these years), so they've done what they learned best from the West:
They've formed a committee.
After two separate meetings,
Palestinian officials said they decided to send top negotiator Saeb
Erekat to meet with Kerry "and inform him that the PA requires
guarantees regarding the general borders," PLO official Wasel Abu Yussef
said.
Yussef said Erekat would also ask Kerry for
more clarifications on what Israel expects from the negotiations, adding
that the Palestinians did not want to reject Kerry's efforts to restart
the peace talks outright.
Another Palestinian official who was present
at the meeting said the committee members decided they did not want to
be "pressured into making a decision."
The Palestinians have decided to form a
committee to further review Kerry's proposal. Secretary-General of the
PLO's Executive Committee Yasser Abed Rabbo, who will head the
committee, told Israel Hayom that Abbas might meet with Kerry, as well
as with King Abdullah of Jordan, again, before making his final decision
on the matter.
"We greatly appreciate U.S. Secretary of State
John Kerry's efforts and tenacity but his current proposal does not
bode well for the future of the negotiations," Fatah spokesman Amin
Maqbul said in a statement.
According to Maqbul, the proposal lacked the
"proper incentives" for the Palestinians to resume talks and failed to
meet "Fatah's demands for a full and immediate suspension of all
settlement expansion, the release of Palestinian prisoners who were
jailed prior to the Oslo Accords and basing the negotiations on the 1967
borders."
Maqbul's statement stressed that "unless provided with explicit guarantees, the Palestinians will not resume the peace talks."
The Prime Minister's Office has denied that Israel has agreed to base the negotiations on the 1949 armistice lines (which are commonly referred to as the 1967 borders), but that hasn't stopped members of his coalition from
preemptively attacking any such deal.
“Bayit Yehudi under my leadership will not be a partner, even for
a second, in a government that agrees to negotiate on the basis of the 1967
lines,” he said. “Our capital Jerusalem is not and never will be
negotiated.”
Bennett issued the threat even though he knew that Netanyahu
had denied a Reuters report that he had agreed to American understandings that
1967 lines would be the basis for talks.
Sources in Bayit Yehudi said
that despite Netanyahu’s denial, Bennett could not ignore that the armistice
lines were on the agenda.
“Naftali had to reassure his constituency that
he has red lines,” a source close to Bennett said. “He had to make his position
clear, in case someone believes he would actually be a part of a government that
would negotiate on that basis.”
Hours before Bennett issued his threat,
opposition leader Shelly Yacimovich again pledged her Labor Party’s support for
Netanyahu’s peace efforts in the event that Bayit Yehudi would threaten to leave
the government.
It would be bitterly ironic (and sad) if Netanyahu went to talks based on the 1949 armistice lines because Bayit Yehudi insisted that Yair Lapid's Yesh Atid party should be in the coalition rather than the Haredi parties (who would have gone along with saying no).
Meanwhile Likud's Zeev Elkin has a
blunt message for Netanyahu.
Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Ze'ev Elkin said Friday to establish a
Palestinian state on the 1967 borders would be "suicidal".
"A
negotiation in which you first say what you are willing to give up ...
is not the kind of negotiation that leads to good results in the Middle
East," Elkin told Israel Radio.
What could go wrong?
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Abu Mazen, Binyamin Netanyahu, John Kerry, Middle East peace process, Naftali Bennett, Palestinian terrorists, Saeb Erekat, settlement freeze, Zeev Elkin
Obama calls to pressure Netanyahu
President Hussein Obama called Prime Minister Netanyahu on Thursday to
pressure him once again to accept the 'Palestinians' conditions for renewing 'talks.'
"The President encouraged Prime Minister Netanyahu to continue to
work with Secretary Kerry to resume negotiations with the Palestinians
as soon as possible," the White House said, noting the leaders also
talked about security issues in Egypt, Iran and Syria.
A senior
State Department official said Kerry would consult both sides again on
Friday - it was not clear whether that would be in person or on the
telephone - before going home.
The US State Department on Thursday played down reports that an
agreement was at hand, saying there were currently no plans to announce a
resumption of Israeli-Palestinian talks.
"It is appropriate and
encouraging that there is such a serious debate about these issues," the
senior US official said in a brief emailed comment as the Palestinian
discussions continued. "We understand that there are many strongly held
views and appreciate efforts to find a basis to move forward."
Kerry has not even met Netanyahu while he's been in the region, and it should be clear by now to everyone that it's the 'Palestinian' side that has to give and not the Israeli one, and that's why Kerry has been spending all his time with the 'Palestinians.' Kerry has squeezed Israel dry, while the 'Palestinians' have yet to give on anything.
What could go wrong?
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Abu Mazen, Barack Hussein Obama, Binyamin Netanyahu, gestures, John Kerry, Middle East peace process, negotiations without preconditions
Report: Kerry to announce resumption of 'peace process' on Friday
A report in the London-based pan-Arabic daily al-Hayat claims that on Friday, US Secretary of State John Kerry will announce the
resumption of the 'peace process.'
Citing sources at the Palestinian embassy in Amman, the report stated
that there has been significant process between Kerry and Palestinian
Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.
On Wednesday evening, Kerry
urged Israel to carefully consider the 2002 Arab League peace
initiative, in a comment that could presage this initiative becoming
part of the terms of reference for restarting Israeli-Palestinian
negotiations.
"Israel needs to look hard at this initiative,
which promises Israel peace with 22 Arab nations and 35 Muslim nations -
a total of 57 nations that are standing and waiting for the possibility
of making peace with Israel," he said in Amman, where he met officials
from Arab League member countries and Abbas.
The plan, put
forward by Saudi Arabia at an Arab League summit in Beirut in 2002,
offered full recognition of Israel but only if it returned fully to the
June 4, 1967 lines, including on the Golan Heights and in east
Jerusalem, and to a "just solution" for Palestinian refugees. Softening
the plan three months ago, a top Qatari official raised the possibility
of land swaps in setting future Israeli-Palestinian borders.
...
The League officials expressed "appreciation to President Barack Obama
and Secretary of State John Kerry for their efforts and their commitment
to achieve peace" and also "their commitment to achieving a just and
comprehensive peace in the Middle East in cooperation with the United
States and with all relevant parties." Neither US nor Palestinian
officials have given details of the discussions between Abbas and Kerry,
who is making his sixth visit to the region since he took office in
February.
Israeli officials declined to comment on the matter until after the PLO leaders make their decision.
The 'good news' is that so long as Kerry doesn't come here, it's not likely that we're being asked for more 'concessions.' The bad news is that we have made far too many 'concessions' already.
What could go wrong?
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Abu Mazen, Binyamin Netanyahu, John Kerry, Middle East peace process, Saudi plan, two-state solution
State Department urges 'take it or leave it' plan as MK's realize 'Palestinians' at fault
Senior officials at the US State Department are urging Secretary of State John Kerry to put a '
take it or leave it' plan on the table.
Some in the State Department are concerned that Kerry is
being dragged into blind alleys by the two sides, expending too much energy on
detailed questions about how many Palestinian prisoners Israel would release
before and during the talks, and exactly where a settlement freeze would be
imposed.
According to this school of thought, these arguments could go on
forever and simply wear Kerry down. Instead, Kerry should simply lay down a
formula that would indicate that the talks were to begin with the baseline being
the June 4, 1967 lines with mutually agreed land swaps, and a Palestinian
recognition of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people.
This way,
both the Palestinians and Israel would have to give the other something, and
whatever side was not willing to do so would be pinned with the blame for the
talks’ failure.
I wonder which side would say 'no' faster....
In the meantime, at an event sponsored by the Leftist Geneva Initiative, Yesh Atid MK Yaakov Perry admitted that it's the
'Palestinians' fault there are no negotiations. Perry is a long-time supporter of the Saudi plan, which would have Arab states recognize Israel in return for its agreement to commit suicide.
“At the current time, we have to be honest and say that it seems the
obstacle to renewing talks is on the Palestinian side,” he declared. “I
have to say, I’m sorry about that.”
He explained, “At a time when the Prime Minister of Israel explicitly
declares that he is prepared to return to the negotiating table without
preconditions, and the American Foreign Minister invests all his energy
in attempts to restart the process, and the Quartet is sparing no
effort to build cooperation and an economic framework that will serve as
a basis and support for the diplomatic process, at a time when there is
majority support both in the Knesset and in the Israeli public for
moving the peace process forward – I can’t understand why the
Palestinian Authority continues to refuse to come back to the
negotiating table and give the process a real chance.”
Perry immediately balanced his criticism with an expression of
sympathy for PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. “I am not discounting the
difficulties and complications facing the Palestinian Authority Chairman
as he returns to the negotiating table, both politically, within the
PA, and against Hamas,” he said.
Abbas must also face “the Palestinian public’s deep fear and growing
doubt due to the many years in which [the process] has been frozen,” he
added. However, he said, “there is reason for serious concern that the
failure of the current attempt to restart negotiations could have
serious implications for both sides, in terms of security, politically,
and on the international stage.”
Despite his criticism of Abbas, Perry reiterated his support for the
Arab Peace Initiative, also known as the Saudi Initiative, which
promises that Arab states will normalize their ties with Israel if
Israel will withdraw from Judea, Samaria (Shomron), the Golan and
eastern Jerusalem, including the Old City and Temple Mount. The
initiative also demands an agreement regarding the “right of return” –
the Arab demand that millions of descendants of Arabs who fled pre-state
Israel be allowed to “return” to Israel.
“The Saudi Initiative is one of the currently existing paths the
state of Israel could take to solve the conflict, and it requires
serious thought,” he argued.
“Of course, we cannot accept the principles of the initiative exactly
as they are… But they could definitely be a basis and a starting point
for negotiations, and point out the direction we need to take,” he
continued.
Perry is a member of the coalition.... What could go wrong?
Labels: 1949 armistice lines, Abu Mazen, Binyamin Netanyahu, Israel is a Jewish state, John Kerry, right of return, Saudi plan, State Department obsession with Israel, US State Department
