Powered by WebAds

Tuesday, January 25, 2011

Elliott Abrams on Palileaks

Elliott Abrams, who was present at the negotiations for much longer and at a later stage than was Amjad Atallah, also confirms that the Palileaks documents are accurate in general, although he warns that they may not be 100% accurate in every detail.
First, some of the papers seem inaccurate to me, going solely by memory. They put into people’s mouths words I do not recall them saying in meetings I attended. This is not shocking: written records of meetings can be inaccurate even when there’s a serious effort at accuracy. Moreover, Palestinian officials reviewing the documents after the meetings may have “improved” them, putting words in their own mouths (rather in the way our own members of Congress can “revise and extend” their remarks to improve them) or with less friendly objectives putting words in the mouths of others. Or, I may have missed parts of meetings or simply not be recalling accurately. But I would not take every one of these documents as necessarily 100% accurate.
Abrams also notes why the documents have surprised many 'Palestinians' (in Israel, we've been exhorting the 'Palestinians' for 17 years to prepare their 'people' for compromise if they really want peace), and notes that much of what is in Palileaks is solutions that were proposed but were never agreed upon.

Read the whole thing.

Labels: , , ,


At 5:14 PM, Anonymous Anonymous said...

I have a great time reading it. Thank you for sharing.


At 10:36 PM, Blogger NormanF said...

The Palestinians have never made concessions! It appears the author of the Palileaks transposed the Palestinian and Israeli positions. Abu Bluff was as surprised as every one else by the reports of alleged Palestinian generosity. If that was ever true, there would be peace today.


Post a Comment

<< Home