If this story is correct, the 'peace processors' may as well pack up and go home. 'Moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud AbbasAbu Mazen has ruled out an end-of-conflict clause. It's inconceivable that Israel will sign any agreement that makes any significant concessions without such a clause.
The report, which first appeared on Israel Channel 2 News based on American and Israeli sources and was reported by The Times of Israel, stated that Abbas had given three unequivocal rejections to the U.S. president:
Specifically, the report said, Abbas rejected Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s demand that he recognize Israel as a
Jewish state. He also refused to abandon the Palestinian demand for a
“right of return” for millions of Palestinians and their descendants — a
demand that, if implemented, would drastically alter Israel’s
demographic balance and which no conceivable Israeli government would
accept. And finally, he refused to commit to an “end of conflict,” under
which a peace deal would represent the termination of any further
Palestinian demands of Israel.
Instead, Abbas stated that his goals in the negotiations were limited
to “working for a solution that is based on international legitimacy
and also the borders — the 1967 borders — so that the Palestinians can
have their own independent state with East Jerusalem as its capital and
so that we can find a fair and lasting solution to the refugee problem.”
...
Skeptics of Palestinian intentions have long turned to the first two
rejections — made consistently by Palestinian leaders over the years —
as proof that PA leaders had never negotiated in good faith, using the
talks as a ploy to legitimize later violence and bolstering the
international movement to delegitimize Israel. Yet with the third
rejection — No to an “end of conflict” clause — it becomes difficult to
understand what the point of talks was in the first place. By stating
from the outset that negotiations will not bring a termination of the
conflict, Palestinian leaders remove nearly all the incentive for
Israeli compromise. Indeed, the absence of an end-of-conflict clause is
widely seen as one of the main failings of the catastrophic 1993 Oslo
Accords.
Thanks Obama and Kerry. We know that you'll pressure Israel to sign anyway. What could go wrong?
It's come to this: Kerry thanks Abu Mazen for staying at the table
This moment has to rank right up there with President Obama bowing to King Abdullah. In fact, in some ways it's a more undignified moment for the United States, because although Kerry doesn't hold Obama's rank, Abu Mazen doesn't come up to Abdullah's big toe.
Let's go to the videotape.
Of course, we all know the real reason why Abu Mazen is staying in these talks.
But in case you haven't reached that realization yet, here's the key sentence in Kerry's statement:
I think the interests are very similar, but there are questions of
sovereignty, questions of respect and dignity which are obviously
significant to the Palestinians, and for the Israelis very serious
questions of security and also of longer-term issues of how we end this
conflict once and for all.
Translation: The 'Palestinians' won't compromise because to do so would injure their Muslim 'respect and dignity' (yes, the same reason that there are so many 'honor killings' among Muslims). And by the way, they also refuse to give an end-of-conflict assurance even if they get all their other purported demands.
78% of Israeli Jews: 'Palestinians' won't see peace agreement as end of conflict
The monthly peace index for August is out, and to me this is the most striking finding.
Peace Agreement as End of Conflict: 78% of Jewish
respondents do not believe that the Palestinians would truly see the
signing of a peace agreement as marking the end of the conflict, while
20% do. 48% of Arab respondents do not believe so either, and 44% do
believe the peace agreement would mark the end of conflict.
The report was headlined "Majority of Jewish, Arab Israelis Believe Two-State Solution Is Possible," and that was because of these two findings:
Two-State Solution Is Not Dead: 54% of Israeli Jews
disagree with Minister Naftali Bennett's assertion that the two-state
solution is dead, while 41% agree with him. 58% of Israeli Arabs also
disagree, and 32% agree.
Peace Agreement to Prevent a Binational State: 48%
of Jewish Israelis agree with Prime Minister Netanyahu's statement that a
peace agreement is vital to preventing Israel from becoming a
binational state without a Jewish majority in the foreseeable future,
while 45% disagree. Among Arab Israelis, 34% agree with Netanyahu's
assertion, and 50% do not.
Perhaps if the question had been phrased that the 'two-state solution' is dying rather than dead, the results would have been different. Perhaps the closeness of the agree/disagree margin on Netanyahu's statement that a peace agreement is 'vital' indicates that most Israelis don't believe that a peace agreement is going to happen, and in light of the end of conflict result I cited, most of them don't want it to happen either.
When Yasser Arafat seemingly renounced terrorism at a press conference in Geneva in December 1988, we wanted to believe him. We signed the Oslo Accords in 1993, brought him and his minions from Tunis to Gaza and Ramallah - only to find that he had by no means abandoned terrorism.
In May 2000 we decided to unilaterally leave the South Lebanese security zone and abandon our allies, the South Lebanon Army, hoping that after the Israeli withdrawal Hezbollah would cease terrorist activity against Israel. We hoped it would become just another Lebanese political party, and we would have peace on our northern border. These hopes were in vain. Not only did Hezbollah not abandon terrorism against Israeli civilians, but the unilateral withdrawal was advertised by Hassan Nasrallah as a Hezbollah victory and perceived by the Palestinians as a sign of Israeli weakness. This in turn led to preparations for the second intifada.
The second intifada was launched shortly after Ehud Barak offered Arafat, at Camp David in July 2000, the most far-reaching concessions ever proposed by an Israeli government. These concessions were rejected, and what followed was a wave of terror which brought suicide bombers into the streets of Israel and led to the death of over a thousand Israeli civilians.
The Israel Defense Forces' entry into Judea and Samaria put an end to it. We uprooted 8,000 Israelis from the Gush Katif settlement bloc hoping that this would further the peace process with the Palestinians. Instead, Hamas took over the Gaza Strip and rockets started raining down on the towns and villages of southern Israel.
As they fell, Ehud Olmert conducted negotiations with Mahmoud Abbas, offering him everything Barak had offered Arafat. In addition, he agreed to a partial return of Palestinian refugees. That too was rejected.
And so it went, one disappointment after another. As the saying goes, "Fool me once, shame on you; fool me twice, shame on me." Israel has been fooled not once, not twice, but at least five times in a quest for peace that has gone nowhere.
Could it only be wishful thinking on Israel's part that has allowed the Palestinians to make fools of it time after time? Obviously there are other motivations at work - such as the feeling that we have no choice but to give in to pressure from the "international community" and offer concessions that would end this conflict once and for all. This is further reinforced by the Israel-bashing that is going on in much of Western Europe. Maybe this is a chance to become a respected member of the "international community," no matter what the cost.
Or perhaps this is the opportunity to end the "occupation" and rid ourselves of the Palestinians living in Judea and Samaria. They may not be better off after we withdraw, but who cares? That, after all, is their business. And those Israelis who live in the shadow of the "demographic" demon, and do not want a single Arab added to the roster of Israel's Arab citizens, will agree to almost anything to prevent such an eventuality.
So now we have Mahmoud Abbas. He is a reformed terrorist who proclaims his desire to establish a Palestinian state by peaceful means. Is this not the opportunity that we and most of the rest of the world have been waiting for? He rejected Olmert's offer, but maybe we can sweeten the pill.
There is only one problem. Abbas is not capable of fulfilling the two basic requirements Israel would demand in any agreement involving significant territorial concessions: First, that the agreement would constitute the end of the conflict and that no further Palestinian demands would be made of Israel. And second, that the territories ceded would not become bases for terrorist activities against Israel.
Abbas cannot fulfill these requirements, and he knows it.
Nor does he want to fill them. 'Abbas' wants to destroy the Jewish state. Just like his predecessor. But he's too dependent on American money to make that desire as obvious as Hamas makes it.
Nusseibeh: Let Obama propose a solution and the people vote on it
Sari Nusseibeh, who is the President of al-Quds University, is one of the few 'Palestinians' who might (emphasis on might) believe in a two-state solution, at least as a temporary measure. He has come up with a plan to force feed such a solution to us.
Al Quds University President Sari Nusseibeh, a longtime proponent of a two-state solution, says he recommended to President Barack Obama that the United States introduce a "vision" for a deal that would be put to a plebiscite vote for Israelis and an electoral vote for Palestinians. "So if the Israelis are asking for a two-state solution on such-and-such basis, they could say, 'Yes, if the Palestinians say yes,' and likewise in the other direction." He believes the populations on both sides would support a two-state plan presented by the United States, although he sees such a move--or any progress at all--as unlikely in the current climate. However, he adds, if there is no forward movement, Palestinians should press to be absorbed into Israel, where even if they do not have the right to vote, they would otherwise have full civil rights "so they could actually live freely, travel freely, work freely, have the rights that humans beings are entitled to have under any kind of system of democracy government."
That excerpt is actually a summary of a much longer interview with Nusseibeh that appears at the URL I linked above. Why won't this work? Let me count the ways....
1. Obama doesn't know enough about the region to propose a workable solution.
2. If what Obama proposes is enough to satisfy the 'Palestinians,' the Israelis will vote against. After four years of intifada and 8,000 rockets from Gaza, there are very few people here who would vote for anything close to what Ehud Barak offered Yasser Arafat in 2000 (which the 'Palestinians' turned down because it wasn't enough!). When Ehud Olmert made his offer to Abu Mazen in 2008, Abu Mazen should have taken it, because he will never see an offer like that again from Israel.
3. If what Obama proposes satisfies Israel (and probably even if it doesn't), the 'Palestinians' will vote against it. Survey after survey shows that it's not just the leadership that's unwilling to compromise - it's the 'Palestinian people.' Any solution with an end of conflict clause, with no 'right of return,' and with less than 100% of Judea, Samaria and 'east' Jerusalem going to the 'Palestinians' is not going to be enough. Perhaps the 'Palestinians' would have made some small territorial compromise two years ago. But since Obama decided to be more 'Palestinian' than the 'Palestinians' by insisting on a 'settlement freeze' in all of Judea, Samaria and 'east' Jerusalem, they're not going to compromise any more.
4. There is no way a fair election will be held in Gaza under Hamas rule.
5. As to the notion of granting the 'Palestinians' civil rights, any solution that allows them to travel freely without being searched is an invitation for another suicide bombing campaign. There is no way Israel can agree to that.
I am an Orthodox Jew - some would even call me 'ultra-Orthodox.' Born in Boston, I was a corporate and securities attorney in New York City for seven years before making aliya to Israel in 1991 (I don't look it but I really am that old :-). I have been happily married to the same woman for thirty-five years, and we have eight children (bli ayin hara) ranging in age from 13 to 33 years and nine grandchildren. Four of our children are married! Before I started blogging I was a heavy contributor on a number of email lists and ran an email list called the Matzav from 2000-2004. You can contact me at: IsraelMatzav at gmail dot com
