Who caused the 'peace talks' to collapse?
Two different articles claim that the '
Palestinians' and the
Americans, respectively, purposely brought about the collapse of the 'peace talks.' This is from the first link
from JCPA's Jonathan Dahoah HaLevi, who claims that the 'Palestinians' blew up the talks as part of a strategy of gradually accreting the indicia of statehood.
- In
March 2014, Saeb Erekat, the head of the Palestinian negotiating team,
prepared a 65-page document that surveys the diplomatic process and
offers a list of recommendations for the PA to achieve Palestinian
sovereignty in the territories demarcated by the 1967 lines. PA Chairman
Mahmoud Abbas has recently implemented some of these recommendations.
- The recommendations include submitting a request
to immediately join the Geneva Conventions; declaring the impossibility
of extending the negotiations after the end of the nine-month period on
April 29, 2014; and opposing the Israeli proposal that the settlement
blocs become part of Israel in any final agreement.
- The plan also includes activating bilateral
committees with Russia, the EU, and the UN, and cooperating with the
monitoring committee of the Arab Peace Initiative, to muster support for
the Palestinian anti-settlement position; urging the states of the
world to uphold the European Union’s guidelines regarding settlement
activity; and escalating the peaceful popular struggle against
settlements and the [security] fence.
- The PA’s latest moves reflect the long-term
strategy Abbas has been implementing, which involves using diplomatic
means to obtain international recognition of a sovereign Palestinian
state along the 1967 lines without the Palestinians having to make
concessions on the fundamental issues of the conflict, particularly the
refugee issue and what is called the “right of return.”
- The signing of the 15 international conventions
is part of a gradual Palestinian move to statehood which, unlike a
unilateral declaration of statehood, does not occur with one move. Abbas
has previously made political moves in defiance of the United States
and Israel without fearing the pressures and threats directed at him, as
in his November 2012 appeal to the UN General Assembly for an upgrade
of the PLO’s status to UN nonmember observer state. Now, too, he feels
confident in his ability to take unilateral steps without incurring
serious damage.
- The Palestinians believe they can use the
diplomatic-legal arena to overcome Israel’s power and gradually subject
it to diplomatic and economic pressures to unilaterally withdraw from
the West Bank in a way similar to Israel’s unconditional withdrawal from
Gaza in 2005.
Read the whole thing.
Meanwhile, the Washington Free Beacon's Adam Kredo blames it on the Americans, saying that the White House has had a secret campaign to
scapegoat Israel for the 'talks' failure.
Multiple sources told the Washington Free Beacon that top
Obama administration officials have worked for the past several days to
manufacture a crisis over the reissuing of housing permits in a
Jerusalem neighborhood widely acknowledged as Israeli territory.
Senior State Department officials based in Israel have sought to lay
the groundwork for Israel to take the blame for talks collapsing by
peddling a narrative to the Israeli press claiming that the Palestinians
were outraged over Israeli settlements, the Free Beacon has learned.
These administration officials have planted several stories in
Israeli and U.S. newspapers blaming Israel for the collapse of peace
talks and have additionally provided reporters with anonymous quotes
slamming the Israeli government.
The primary source of these multiple reports has been identified as
Middle East envoy Martin Indyk and his staff, according to these
insiders, who said that the secret media campaign against Israel paved
the way for Secretary of State John Kerry to go before Congress on
Tuesday and publicly blame Israel for tanking the talks.
“The Palestinians didn’t even know they were supposed to be
abandoning negotiations because of these housing permits, which are
actually old, reissued permits for areas everyone assumes will end up on
the Israelis’ side of the border anyway,” said one senior official at a
U.S. based pro-Israel organization who asked to remain anonymous
because the Obama administration has in the past retaliated against
critics from inside the pro-Israel world.
“Then Martin Indyk started telling anyone who would listen that in
fact the Palestinians were angry over the housing issue,” the source
said. “Eventually, the Palestinians figured out it was in their interest
to echo what the Americans were saying.”
We've known for a long time
what a shmuck Indyk is, haven't we? He's also a member of the board of the
New Israel Fund. Back to Kredo.
One former Israeli diplomat familiar with Indyk’s tactics said that
he is a crass political player who has a history of planting negative
stories about Israel in order to undermine the Netanyahu government and
bolster his hand in the talks.
“I’ve seen this before and see his fingerprints,” said the source,
who referenced a separate story two weeks ago in which U.S. government
sources implied that newly installed Israeli Ambassador Ron Dermer was
not performing his job effectively.
“It’s certainly in Indyk’s interest now [to undermine the Israelis],
but this was a game he also used to play when he was ambassador twice,”
said the former diplomat. “This is part of Indyk’s playbook.”
“There was only one person who would do this kind of thing and it’s Martin Indyk and his staff,” the former diplomat added.
Another Washington-based source familiar with the talks said that
Kerry’s peace team has a track record of trashing Israel anonymously.
“It’s one of the worst-kept secrets in Jerusalem that Kerry’s team
leaks anti-Netanyahu quotes and claims to the Israeli press—not that is
should be a mystery why Israeli reporters based in Israel keep producing
anti-Bibi quotes from ‘American officials,’” the source said.
“But just imagine the outrage if the roles were reversed and Bibi had a team on the ground in D.C. trashing Obama to the Washington Post on background,” the source said.
Maybe we should... Oh, wait. They'd probably declare Dermer persona non grata if we did that.
Read the whole thing.
Labels: Abu Mazen, Binyamin Netanyahu, Gilo, Martin Indyk, Middle East peace process, Ron Dermer, scapegoat, settlements
Germany may cancel sale of 6th submarine to Israel
YNet reports that German Chancellor Angela Merkel is so angry over Israeli plans to build in the Jerusalem neighborhood of Gilo that Israel's contract for a
sixth Dolphin class submarine is in jeopardy.
Germany is "reconsidering" its decision to sell Israel a sixth Dolphin class submarine, Yedioth Ahronoth reported on Wednesday.
According to the report, the move was prompted by the tensions between German Chancellor Angela Merkel and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Merkel's frustration over the new housing plans approved in east Jerusalem.
Top political sources said that Merkel was irked with Netanyahu, who "gave her the impression that he would be willing to suspend settlement expansion in order to push the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks."
Israel's recent approval of 1,100 housing units in the Gilo neighborhood in Jerusalem led Merkel to announce that Netanyahu "cannot be taken seriously and has no intention of complying with the basic terms needed to renew the negotiations with the Palestinian."
Merkel and Netanyahu shared strident words following the decisions, and relations between Jerusalem and Berlin have been strained since.
Defense officials expressed concern over Berlin's intention to suspend and possibly cancel the submarine sale: According to foreign media reports, the new Dolphin was slated to join Israel strategic fleet.
Earlier in 2011, Germany announced that it would grant Israel a €135 million aid package to build its sixth submarine. German funding has been a significant part in the creation of the Israeli Navy's submarine crops.
The Navy currently has three Dolphin class submarines, and is expected to receive two new ones, currently under construction in Germany. According to foreign media sources, the new submarines will be equipped to carry nuclear warheads.
You will recall that the 6th Dolphin was a
bribe to prevent Israel from protesting too loudly against German trade with Iran. If Germany now cancels the deal, Israel is not without weapons to fight back. The fact that the successor to the Third Reich maintains $4 billion in annual trade with Iran doesn't exactly look pretty and can be exploited. Germany is Iran's
top trading partner and has pointedly
refused to do anything to change that situation. They seem to be downright
infatuated with the Iranians.
And the 'Palestinians.' What could go wrong?
Labels: Angela Merkel, Dolphin class submarines, Gilo, Jerusalem construction, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel
Take Obama's condemnation of Gilo seriously
Isi Leibler writes that the Obama administration's condemnation of Jewish building in Gilo is
unprecedented, and that the response should be furious.
We must not underestimate the serious implications of the US administration’s fierce condemnation of a routine municipal approval for construction of 1100 homes in the Jerusalem suburb of Gilo.
Although our government must find a solution to avoid trumpeting bureaucratic announcements for long-term building projects in Jerusalem, it is crucial that the global community understand that Gilo is not a settlement outpost. For 40 years, nobody other than Arabs has challenged the fact that Gilo belongs to Jewish Jerusalem. It is a 100 percent Jewish-populated suburb of southwestern Jerusalem, located minutes from the heart of the city. During the second intifada it was under sniper fire from terrorists located in the neighboring Arab suburb of Beit Jala. Gilo is as much part of Jerusalem as the suburbs of Rehavia or Katamon. To deny that Gilo is part of Israel is akin to denying that Tel Aviv is part of Israel.
...
It is to be expected that the US government may criticize or have occasional differences with us. But during such a sensitive period, the vicious public condemnation of Israel over construction of homes in its own capital is hardly how one would expect the US to behave towards an ally. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who as a senator had supported recognizing Jerusalem as the capital of Israel, even went so far as to accuse Israel of being “provocative.”
Immediately following Netanyahu’s endorsement of the Quintet’s plan to renew peace talks, newly appointed US Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta made barbed comments that Israel was “isolating” itself and implied that it was to blame for the deterioration of relations with Turkey and Egypt.
Not surprisingly, the Europeans interpret such remarks as encouragement to intensify their pressure against us. EU Foreign Policy Spokesperson Catherine Ashton demanded that Israel revoke the construction permits. The French Foreign Minister followed suit. Even German Chancellor Angela Merkel joined the pack, informing the media that she condemned Netanyahu and “raised doubts over the Israeli government’s readiness to begin serious negotiations with the Palestinians.”
Despite his charm offensive toward President Obama, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu responded that the future of the Jewish suburbs of Jerusalem had never been influenced by outside parties and would not be subject to such in the future. He noted that substantial Arab construction plans had been simultaneously approved.
The US administration’s passive stance as the Europeans continue pressurizing us is therefore highly detrimental. Especially as the Palestinians believe that in return for US opposition to their efforts at the UN, they can leverage the Obama administration to extract further unilateral concessions in their ongoing campaign to dismantle the Jewish state. Hopefully most Americans who have become increasingly enraged by the one-sided pressures against the Jewish state will not accept Obama’s UN speech as the last word on the matter.
Indeed.
Labels: Barack Hussein Obama, Gilo, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel
Mighty Barack has struck out
Leo Rennert reminds us of another lesson that Palileaks has taught us: Just how badly
Barack Obama struck out.
With the Palestinians being that flexible and pragmatic about Jerusalem, the question arises why, given this progress on the private negotiating track, Obama would, in his first try at Mideast diplomacy, put all his chips on pressuring Israel to institute as the first order of business a permanent building freeze in these same Jewish neighborhoods in East Jerusalem.
Since the Palestinians already signaled that they would agree to leave them under Israeli control in a permanent peace agreement, why would a President of the United States insist on demanding concessions from Israel on an issue that the Palestinians already had written off as not a big priority and, in fact, completely unnecessary in their pursuit of Palestinians statehood?
Since Israel would retain these neighborhoods anyway, what was the great urgency under Obama to put them front and center on the U.S. agenda?
As it turned out, Abbas -- while already having written off these neighborhoods in his private negotiations with Israel -- felt naturally compelled to be at least as tough on Israel as Obama and publicly seconded the U.S. demand for a total freeze of Jewish neighborhoods in Eastern Jerusalem.
The result was an embarrassment for both the U.S. and Abbas as a result of an ill-advised, quixotic initiative by Obama the first time out of the Mideast diplomatic box. By raising the temperature over Jewish areas of East Jerusalem, Obama set off a chain reaction of totally unnecessary tensions with Prime Minister Netanyahu, who stood firm and insisted that Jewish neighborhoods in Israel's capital were not going to be on the negotiating table -- especially since these were the same neighborhoods Abbas already had abjured in private.
It took many months to repair a totally unnecessary rift between Washington and Jerusalem. In his first time at bat in the big Mideast diplomatic league, Obama struck out spectacularly -- as Al-Jazeera's trove of leaked documents makes amply clear.
I happen to believe that Rennert is right and that the 'Palestinians' did concede all (or nearly all) the Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem. In fact, that was reported long before the Palileaks documents came out. But if that's the case, why are the government and the City of Jerusalem
still afraid (even this week!) to approve building projects that are across the armistice line?
Hmmm.
Labels: Barack Obama, East Jerusalem, Gilo, Jerusalem construction, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, Politics, World Politics
Seething on the Left over new housing units in Gilo
Israel's hysterical Left is seething over a
1,400-unit housing project in the southeastern Jerusalem suburb of Gilo, which is slated to advance in the approval process next week.
A plan to build 1,400 new housing units in Jerusalem's Gilo neighborhood located beyond the Green Line, will be discussed next week and is expected to be approved by the city's local planning and building committee, reported Army Radio on Sunday. If approved, the plan will then be submitted to the District Committee.
According to Peace Now Secretary-General Yariv Oppenheimer, the plan is one of the largest to be established across the Green Line, one that is even bigger than the Ramat Shlomo and Har Homa plans that triggered a great uproar last year and raised tensions in relations between Israel and the United States, reported Army Radio.
With respect to Ramat Shlomo, that's a lie. The Ramat Shlomo plan is for 1,600 housing units. The Har Homa plan is 980 units. It would be nice if these people at least got their facts straight.
In any event, 1,400 units is far from the largest project in Jerusalem - 'east' or 'west.' The original Ramat Shlomo in the early '90's was over 2,000 units, and I believe that Har Homa was even more.
"We are very concerned, especially from the international reaction that would further harm the already eroded position of the State of Israel," Army Radio quoted Oppenheimer as saying.
Oppenheimer couldn't give a damn about the 'international reaction.' If he did, he wouldn't be trying to orchestrate it.
Jerusalem Council member Meir Margalit (Meretz) said that "the plan is a more serious and dangerous step than all the previous plans for construction beyond the Green Line."
Holy hyperbole Batman. I would have thought that a huge construction project beyond the 'security fence' would have been considered 'a more serious and dangerous step than all the previous plans for construction beyond the Green Line' by these people.
"This is a confirmation of the death of the peace process," Margalit told Army Radio.
The 'peace process' has been dead since September. You just figured that out now?
And to give you some idea how quickly things move in Jerusalem....
The housing plan passed the necessary steps quickly, since the idea first came to light in July 2008.
Although it will take time before construction begins on the housing units, discussion of the plan by the local committee signals a step toward the goal, Army Radio said.
If anything, Army Radio is even more Leftist than the government-owned Israel Radio. As a rule, they won't accept anyone - certainly not for on-air programming - who has Right wing political views. Sounds like they're making a mountain out of a molehill, doesn't it?
Officials from Jerusalem's City Hall emphasized Sunday morning that the plan was brought forth by private entrepreneurs and was promoted by the Jerusalem Development Authority.
"City hall continues to advance the new buildings for Arabs and Jews according to the plan's outline," the officials said. "New construction in Jerusalem is essential to the development of the city, and regardless of that, the local committee is committed to discussing any plan that is submitted to it, according to the law."
No comment.
Maan
adds:
The project, planned by private firms, could take close to four years to complete because of the difficulties of building on the steep slopes on the outskirts of the West Bank city of Bethlehem.
Four years is average here once they start building. They take forever to do anything. Probably because they use cheap, Arab labor.
Labels: Gilo, Jerusalem construction, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, Ramat Shlomo
Call Eli Yishai: What happened to 'immediate construction in Jerusalem'?
Shas leader Eli Yishai has announced that his party's two representatives in the 'security cabinet' will
abstain from a vote to take place on Tuesday or Wednesday to extend the 'settlement freeze' imposed by the government last year. According to current head counts, if the two Shas representatives abstain, the extension will pass 7-6. Therefore, in effect, it is Yishai who is causing the 'settlement freeze' to be extended, much as he may try to deny it.
Yishai claims that he will only do so in return for a letter from President Obama (has anyone seen it?) committing to, among other things, "immediate construction in Jerusalem," which has been explained in the media to include 'east' Jerusalem, i.e. Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem beyond the 1949 armistice lines. If Yishai is true to his word, he ought to be investigating
this.
Two committees dealing with construction in the Jerusalem area have taken off the agenda a plan for 1,300 new housing units in the Gilo neighborhood, which falls beyond the 1967 Green Line border.
The decision to delay discussions on the plan apparently comes in response to a request from the Prime Minister's Bureau, which is concerned about sparking a fresh crisis with the American administration over building in Jerusalem. The decision also comes as Netanyahu seeks to win cabinet approval for a new settlement construction freeze proposed by Washington.
The American administration has previously criticized Israeli building policies in East Jerusalem, which the Palestinians claim as a future capital. President Barack Obama personally expressed displeasure at the plan for Gilo, saying that, "This kind of activity is never helpful when it comes to peace negotiations."
If Obama is to issue a letter in the next 48 hours committing to "immediate construction" in all of Jerusalem, including the Jewish suburbs that are across the armistice lines, then why should he object (and why should anyone be afraid of him objecting) to the discussion and voting upon a construction plan for Gilo?
Unless, of course, when Obama writes Jerusalem, he only means those parts of Jerusalem that were Israeli controlled prior to 1967, in which case we have to wonder what Yishai is getting in exchange for his abstentions.
Labels: Eli Yishai, Gilo, Jerusalem construction, Jerusalem is the capital of Israel, settlement freeze
