Abbas tells Obama envoy he's adamant on settlement freeze

As an outside person, I can say that Barry Zornberg is correct. True peace can only be made by the warriors. Abbas has never been strong enough to make peace and never will. The Messenger did not wish cowards to rule. He wished the strong to lead. Abbas should resign and leave room for a strong leader to make peace.

I too believe in peace. It has been too long and with too much blood that we have fought against ourselves. Abbas does not truly wish peace. He gives in to Hamas too much. We need peace now, with or without Gaza.

L: "The requirement is to withdrawl to "mutually agreed secure borders", not the green line or any other line." Untrue. It says nothing about "withdrawing to mutually agreed secure borders". It says this: "Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;" That is: it clearly says withdrawal FROM occupied territory, not withdrawal TO borders. Res 242 therefore could not care less what the "status" of that line of withdrawal is i.e. if the territory is "occupied" then the IDF must "withdraw" from it. It is only when Res 242 comes to talk about "Termination of all claims or states of belligerency" (i.e. only AFTER Res 242 has dealt with the necessity of an IDF withdrawal) that the "status" of the boundaries becomes of concern to Res 242.

You say freedom of movement isn't a basic right during war. First of all it's not a war its an OCCUPATION that has been there for over 40 years. please dont be naive and call it a war. and secondly, you only commented on freedom of movement but what about everything else? you dont talk about the people getting kicked out of their homes and having their lands uprooted. Thats just the tip of the iceberg. I dont know if you've ever been there but i suggest you see what people go through on a day-to-day basis. Its obvious that blind followers like yourself dont have peaceful intensions and dont question these situations. What is the moral justification of violating every kind of human, social, political, economical rights and imposing force on a whole nation against their will?

* Settlements: Yes the Oslo Accords might have not explicitly conditioned anything about settlements but they did say that would be determined in final status negotiations. meanwhile Israel under Natenyahu accelerated the growth and building of settlements. Its about intensions and that certainly doesnt say we want peace ot says we will milk whatever we can out of this so when final stats talks come we will say its irreversable. and again you're still ignoring that they are ILLEGAL UNDER INTERNATIONAL LAW. So they are illegal and morally unjustified.

the cushion covers look nice... another talk fest in nice surroundings... Winter is coming in Gaza/Palestine... Palestinians in the West Bank have been turfed out of their homes onto the foot paths...

"Clinton said in Jerusalem on Saturday that this demand was not a prerequisite for renewing peace talks." Then she is lying: Israel, the PA, and the USA all signed the Road Map in 2003, and it clearly states that a) a settlement freeze occurs in Phase 1 b) negotiations takes place in Phase 2 c) NOBODY goes to Phase 2 until EVERYBODY completes Phase 1 She. Is. Wrong. And. Abbas. Is. Correct.

I agree with Barry Zornberg, and applaud him for his humor. Abbas has no intention of negotiating. If it wasn't the construction, he would have another excuse. When will the world realize the truth? Next time, he will claim that he can't negotiate because of the color of the rugs in the room......

How many times does it have to be said. It's the settlements... stupid. Netanyahu must commit to a settlement freeze to bring Abbas to the table. No Palestinian economic agenda, no double-talk, no scurrying around the main issue. If negotiations don't work, Bibi can always return to settlement building. This is not rocket science, it's certainly not as painful as passing a rectal stone... is it. How many votes do the settlers in Hebron actually carry, any way. A real peace dividend would secure a legacy for Bibi... he or his father can only dream off.

Abbas has finally foud his spine ! David

" Also the resolution affirms that other issues should be addressed like water passages, movement....etc (basically all the basic rights of human beings which Israel`s occupation is preventing the population from having." "Freedom of movement" isn't a basic human right during a war.

me: "There has never been a condition to stop all settlement activity for negotiations to take place in the past." NSM: "There was something called Oslo accords that you should check out." The Oslo accords don't have a condition calling for the cessation of all settlement activity for negotiations to take place in the past. Buy a clue.

Sir, None took RMap seriously and none implemented it- instead of fighting terror in WB and Gaza, PA lost Gaza to clearly terror organization- Hamas. It was PA responsibility not to have it and the breach of their obligations under the Rmap. Israel of course was not in a hurry to implement it either. The document is dead now.

The US backs Israel and vetoes the sec.council resolutions. If the US put a harder stance it would happen

I just don't get it. If the road map was a security council resolution, and the quartet was supposed to oversee it implementation then why aren't they? Where is the accountability? where is the enforcement? Both sides agreed to it, the world needs to make sure it happens by all means necessary, weather it be sanctions international forces or what ever. What is the point of resolutions if they not enforced!

Thank God Israel already has a beautiful, vibrant, sparkling homeland of her own for the Jewish people. Meanwhile, it's ten years since Arafat walked out on his negotiations. Abbas wants to make it twenty.

because AIPAC is the only identity who dictate American Foreign Policy!

As I recall during the 1948 war, when Israel was invaded bby Arab armies, Jordan took over ZSamaria, Judea and Jerusalem and tried to eliminate all signs of the Jews who had lived there. Synagogues were demolished, cemetery headstones were uprooted and used for roads and latrines, the Kotel became a latrine. Jews were expelled or killed. In 1967, Israel asked Jordan to stay out of the war Egypt and Syria were waaging, but Jordan joined in and Israel retook the lands that had been assigned to her under the partition agreement. Now everyone is caling those land "occupied." Yes, they were occupied by Jordan for 19 years. Now they are back in the hands of the people to whom they were originally assigned. Only Jerusalem, under the 1947 partition. was to be internationally administered -- a situation which lasted about a year before the Jordanian invasion, under a British officer.

Does it entitle Israel to engage in land expropriation? As long as the PA refuses to come to an agreement about the border, Israel is entitled to occupy all the land it took in 1967, ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW.--Lawyer You are correct; Israel can legally occupy the conquered territory. But I do not see anywhere in 242, an entitlement to expropriate the Palestinian lands and displace the occupants to settle Israeli citizens. I assume that Israeli settlement activity (not occupation) was triggered by the PA ?s failure to acquiesce to Israel?s demands by a certain date. What was that date, and where can I find it in 242?

The rest is governed by Hamas. There are virtually no local Arabs under Israeli occupation. "life is good" as Abba Mazen said.

"As long as the PA refuses to come to an agreement about the border, Israel is entitled to occupy all the land it took in 1967, ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW." It only means that there are no borders to be determined you're right but it doesn't mean ENTITLED to, that was a wrong use of the word especially coming from a lawyer (if you are one). Also the resolution affirms that other issues should be addressed like water passages, movement....etc (basically all the basic rights of human beings which Israel's occupation is preventing the population from having. we can discuss exact wordings and meanings but dont neglect the fact these are people we're talking about not some cattle or inferior beings. They have been neglected of basic rights for decades and that IS MOST DEFINITELY ILLEGAL under international law and the eyes of the rest of the world.

"There has never been a condition to stop all settlement activity for negotiations to take place in the past." There was something called Oslo accords that you should check out. Israelis kept, in fact increased, building settlements in the 90's which was an obstacle to final status (opportunist moves of the occupier). and either way, the settlements are illegal under international law and the Geneva convention. instead of just claiming something didn't happen and end it there why dont you present some facts and reasoning. when you say "Israel offered in the past" you dont realize that you're drawn into this world of 'Israel the sweetheart makes generous offers and the crazed Pals reject it'. you probably dont want or believe in peace but if you did you'd know that peace is not some business deal from the one with power to the one without, it should be based on justice and those settlements are not justified and will not allow any viable Palestinian state. A fact not an opinion.

If Abbas vanished tomorrow, no one would even notice or care.

I have some respect for Israeli society, particularly the liberal, tolerant, secular, ethnically mixed aspects of it - though these seem to be on the retreat these days. I have no respect for the ghastly apartheid mess Israel has created on the West Bank, with Jews-only settlements getting better treatment in almost every respect than their downtrodden Arab neighbours who don't even have a free government they can vote for, and can't even travel anywhere without Jewish permission. It's an absolute disgrace that Obama continues to fund this apartheid regime by paying for the tanks, guns and bullets that maintain it.

Good! I believe my settlement can sustain a freeze for the benefit of creating the beginning of real dialogue out of mutual respect. If this "settlement bloc" becomes accepted by both sides, the delay in growth will be worth it all. Unilateral annexation and shows of "power" are not an option!

"As long as the PA refuses to come to an agreement about the border, Israel is entitled to occupy all the land it took in 1967, ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW." That's exceedingly unlikely. Laws of occupation are supposed to relate to a temporary holding of land until the conclusion of a peace treaty. Thay do NOT relate to the holding of land for over 40 years and the construction of an apartheid regime favouring the civilian settlers of the occupying power. Israel has so comprehensively abused its position as occupying power that it no longer has any right to be the occupying power. Kosovo demonstrated that even a sovereign country does not have unlimited right to abuse minorities and Israel is most definitely not sovereign in the West Bank.

The land does NOT belong to the zionists to do what they want. Legal because it is in according to Israeli law? The occupier has no LEGAL right to dispose at will of other people land. The only law on property that applies here is either Roman Law as applied by Bysantium (Eastern ROMAN Empire) ('Law and Life in Rome, 90 BC - 212 AD, J.A.C. Prof at Cambridge, 1967 Thames and Hudson, pages 140-144) at least until 1453, Or Islamic Law as applied by the Ottoman Empire after that. After WWII modern International law. The Palestinians DO NOT HAVE TO PROVE THE LAND IS THEIRS. If all the above is not pertinent enough and you wish to refer to Golda eeir ridiculus story, now believed only by some of you, there is the well known institutin of USUCAPIO, which in case of lack of other documents, allow one to acquire DOMINIUM by (a fixed number of years) of use. What are your ckaims to possession? The Bible? Well you should PROVE the content don't you, lawyer??? in which court of law?

Abbas is correct. Occupants OUT!

is he not the one wanting a state? can he have a state without negotiations? i, like "s," prefer working for peace and a lsating peace. abbas seems to prefer what is usually referred to as "honour." let him keep his honour, and let him be adamant. such attitude will only push further into the future a palestinian state.

less well known by equallly happening.

In Jerusalem Hillary showed appreciation for Israel's "unprecedented concessions" on the settlements expansions. In Morocco Hillary claimed that although Israel's offer to "show restraint" in settlements expansions falls short of U.S. expectations and preference, this is "unprecedented concessions" on the part of Israel. "Show restraint" is Obama's fallback line for cowering to the Israeli intransigence about "settlements construction freeze". Obama is the cowering flip flop, and Hillary is the messenger.

By repeating the demand and becoming increasingly inflexible, Abbas has shown that the Palestinian leadership doesn't want negotiations or statehood. They want to retain power and the illusions they have generated themselves. There is no doubt Israel will dismantle some settlements in a real peace deal, but the rift with Hamas and Fatah shows that the Palestinian people are not, and probably cannot be united, with such a diverse range of people "representing" them. Obama's and Mitchells clumsy attempts to force an Israeli freeze, tilt the equation to the point it is useless. Obamas support in Israel is minimal and he has only succeeded in strengthening the right wing, exactly the opposite of what was needed. Tilt. Restart. New Game. Learn from the mistakes, atleast.

resolution 242 was specifically worded not to require Israel to withdraw from all land occupied after June 1967. The requirement is to withdrawl to "mutually agreed secure borders", not the green line or any other line. As long as the PA refuses to come to an agreement about the border, Israel is entitled to occupy all the land it took in 1967, ACCORDING TO INTERNATIONAL LAW. All the critics seem to forget that the pals have never confirmed any of the agreements which they have signed so there is no obligation for EITHER side to abide by them. The violence may have stopped by the good cop (Abbas), although I even doubt that, but it certainly hasn't stopped by the bad cop, (Hamas et al). Arafat and friends actually saved Israel from giving away too much with their intransigence. Now they will get less and in future even less.

In Jerusalem she showed appreciation for Israel's "unprecedented concessions" on the settlements expansions.

"As usual the Palestinians are always looking for something for nothing" It's Israel breaking the law. It's Israel occupying and colonizing Palestinian territory.

Finally he's got the message. He must say and do what his people want, not what Israel and the US want him to do!

" settlements and 2 state solution not compatible" Except, there is plenty of room for a Palestinian state outside of the 3% of territories Israel has offered in the past.

"Abbas is right, it`s not a new condition," Yes, BS, it is. There has never been a condition to stop all settlement activity for negotiations to take place in the past.

"Not only was Israel supposed to have already stopped building settlements, they were supposed to have withdrawn from existing ones. " What planet are you on? It certainly isn't Earth.

As usual the Palestinians are always looking for something for nothing

Wow! What a shock to find out that Abbas has once again refused to go to the bargaining table! Could it be because he represents about 20 people? Could it be because he has no control (giving him the benefit of the doubt) over Hamas? No.....he won't negotiate because already started construction projects are being finished! This is a joke, is it not?

More of that Bush legacy getting in the way of Democrats! Hamas is acting to control rocket fire from Gaza and no suicide bombings. It wasn't supposed to happen that way. The only violence seems to be in areas not under Palestinian Authority control, but under Israeli control. And now Israel is supposed to carry out it's Phase One obligations, too. How did that happen?

Israel has the power, economic and military. Netanyahu is prepared to say whatever is necessary to placate for the short-term, but settlement building will go on regardless. Obama and Hillary need to understand that Abbas cannot sacrifice any land that interferes with a contiguous Palestinian nation evolving. Anything less results in a state that will not be governable. If settlement construction does not stop, a single state is the solution. Then let demographics and world distrust of the Israeli nation take its normal course.

...I think for tomorrow's letters to various officials we'll point out the number of colonists that have been illegally transferred to the West Bank in the years since Israel agreed to Road Map. In between continued lobbying against that pitiful H. R. 867 of course.

Not only was Israel supposed to have already stopped building settlements, they were supposed to have withdrawn from existing ones. There was a window of opportunity at the creation of the past Palestinian unity government ... Violence had stopped. Reform was being implemented, but then Israel changed the terms. They want recognition first...renunciation of resistance first, then talks...but they demand that Palestine enter without preconditions. Road Map: Phase I (as early as May 2003): End to Palestinian violence; Palestinian political reform; Israeli withdrawal and freeze on settlement expansion; Palestinian elections.

It is a big lie that Israel wants peace and 2 states....while it is fiercely resisting the US and world regarding settlement construction. Time for the other nations of the world to put pressure on the US, because without unconditional US support Israel is isolated and will come to the table.

"We do not put conditions for resuming negotiations, but we want the talks resumed on the basis of the provisions of the road map, which stipulates the cessation of all forms of settlement activity in the Palestinian territories," [Saeb Erekat] said. For all your love of the Roadmap, perhaps you would be better served to have at least read it: "Phase 1: Palestinian leadership issues unequivocal statement reiterating Israel’s right to exist in peace and security and calling for an immediate and unconditional ceasefire to end armed activity and all acts of violence against Israelis anywhere. All official Palestinian institutions end incitement against Israel." Are you willing to lead with this, Mr Erekat?

After Oslo, Israel stalled short of Final Status talks, and started a massive expansion of settlement activity. With Abbas Olmert dragged his heels, while continuing to expand settlement activity. When Netanyahu came in, he demanded talks start again at the very beginning and expanded settlement activity. When Obama asked for a settlement freeze, Netanyahu told him NO and expanded settlement building. Is there a pattern of behavior upon which any sane person would count? No matter what, Israel expands settlement activity. So long as Israel does not at least FREEZE settlement activity there is no reason why any sane person would think that it had serious negotiations in mind. The only problem with this whole record is that at no time has Israel been honest. It has always stated it was interested in negotiating a peace agreement while acting to expand it's appropriation and settlement of the land in question.

It looks like there is absolutely no incentive for Israel to stop settlement activity. The US cannot be bothered to pressure Israel, the only thing the Palestinians can do it whine about the lack of progress in the so called peace process, and Israel continues the status quo. Why don't the Palestinians play the "one man, one vote" card as at threat to Israel and the US?

NO pal leader wants to be the one who makes peace with Israel. This would mean giving up rights like the right of return, and land in the West bank. Abbas does not want to be remembered as the man who "gave it all away". So he will continue to make outragious demands on Israel that no other leader including himself has made before. Sharon was right when he pulled out of Gaza. We must do the same with the West bank... Simply anex any land we wish for our selves... and leave the rest for the pals... Let Israel play the bad guy... (the world is convinced we are already...) This way no Pal leader has to be the one to accept peace with Israel and ipso/facto they get thier state by default... though the real joke is, (Palestien) will be far smaller then they would have achieved if they simply sat down and agreed to compromise on some of thier positions.

Palestine has already given 80% of its ground since 1948 and recognized that only 20% belongs to them. Through colonization, the "Israeli" leadership intends to grab more for two reasons: 1- to create facts on the ground 2- to derail the peace process in an attempt to point the finger at the occupied for the failure of achieving a comprehensive resolution to the conflict. In the end, the strategy will fail. It is always when the regime is turning into its most reactionary form that it ends up disappearing. Remember French Algeria and the Apartheid Regime?

What on offer by Netanyahu does not worth it, do not even bother staring dead end negotiation form start.

The mask has publicly fallen off for the umpteenth time ! But, will the Left see the true face of Abbas ? Doubt it !!

it would a disaster to start talks before the freeze. how could any israeli government deliver the giving back of the west bank, dimantling stettlements and other compromises if they cannot just freeze construction while the negotiations take place. another round of failed negotiations would harden all parties for anothe decade or 2.

This is not over settlements--they will continue regardless. This is over something else--maybe the Jordan Valley and/or Jeruselem. No reason to negotiate if they are not negotiable is probably the thinking.