TP: "If facts on the ground are irrelevant then where is the logic in the PA insisting on a total construction freeze in the settlements as a PRECONDITION to any further negotiations?" In no particular order: Israel agreed to a total freeze in 2003, and its subsequent refusal us therefore a demonstration of "bad faith". It is pointless negotiating with someone who refuses to be bound by their signature. If Israel can continue construction during the negotiations then that is an powerful incentive for Israel to drag out the negotiations indefinitely i.e. the longer it can delay then the more the "facts on the ground" will alter in its favour. Conversely, if there is a freeze then there is a powerful incentive for Israel to cut the crap and clinch a deal, because that deal will be the only way to "unfreeze" what has been "frozen". All perfectly logic, if you actually bothered to think about it from Abbas' point of view.
Hello user Logout | profile
You have watched of 10 articles
After Amnesty report on detention centers, Iraqi PM orders investigation (Reuters)
from the article: Olmert's negotiator: Full Mideast peace impossible