Netanyahu, Obama talk Mideast peace, Iran nuclear standoff
U.S. President reiterates 'unshakable commitment to Israel’s security' in phone conversation; Abbas to visit Europe next week as Quartet deadline on resumption of talks draws near.
By Barak Ravid and Natasha Mozgovaya Tags: Middle East peace Barack Obama Benjamin Netanyahu Iran nuclear Iran Mahmoud Abbas PalestiniansPrime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and U.S. President Barack Obama discussed recent developments in the Mideast peace process as well as the West’s continuing standoff with Iran in a phone conversation on Thursday.
 |
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, left, meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama in New York, September 21, 2011. |
| Photo by: Reuters |
The talk came amid recent Jordan-mediated attempts to revive talks between Israel and the Palestinian, with Netanyahu’s envoy Yitzhak Molcho and top Palestinian Authority negotiator Saeb Erekat meeting in Amman.
On Tuesday, the White House announced that Obama will host King Abdullah II of Jordan at the White House next Tuesday, in an effort to advance a negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians.
According to a White House statement, Obama and King Abdulla II will discuss "a broad range of bilateral and regional economic and security issues during their Oval Office meeting," including their "shared goal of a negotiated peace between Israel and the Palestinians."
On Thursday, the White House reported the premier discussed recent developments with the American president, saying the two leaders “reviewed the recent meetings between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators in Amman and the President reaffirmed his commitment to the goal of a comprehensive and lasting peace in the region.”
“The two leaders also discussed recent Iran-related developments, including the international community’s efforts to hold Iran accountable for its failures to meet its international obligations,” the statement added, saying that Obama “reiterated his unshakable commitment to Israel’s security, and the President and the prime minister promised to stay in touch in the coming weeks on these and other issues of mutual concern.”
Meanwhile, White House spokesman Jay Carney was asked repeatedly in a briefing Thursday whether the U.S. administration can say "unequivocally" that Israel had nothing to do with the assassination of the Iranian scientist on Wednesday.
"Obviously we don't speak for any other country", Carney replied. "We had nothing to do with it. This has been expressed by officials at a variety of levels of the U.S. government. And we condemn the act of violence in Iran, but we're not speaking for any other country when we make statements like that.
When pressed further whether President Obama addressed this issue in his phone conversation with the Israeli Prime Minister, Carney said: "It's part of their regular communications on bilateral and regional issues. The subjects were many, including the Middle East peace process, developments in the region, including in Iran. But I won't get more specific than that".
Referring to ongoing efforts to revive Mideast peace talks, State Department spokesperson Victoria Nuland said the U.S. administration doesn’t want to push the sides to adhere to the strict deadline outlined at the Quartet statement.
"Although this January 26th date has been out there, we do not want to see it be a rigid sort of straitjacket which chills the atmosphere", she said, adding that the date “was a proposal made by the Quartet. It was illustrative of what we wanted to see happen.”
“So it's really incumbent on the parties now to do the hard work to fill out the rest of the game plan through 2012. We don't want them or anybody else to get so fixated on the date that it chills the mood. We want them to keep going on the hard work that they're doing together,” she said.
The top U.S. official added that Washington doesn’t accept the claim it "outsourced" dealing with the conflict to Jordan, saying the U.S. “intensively involved with both sides", Nuland said.
"The president himself spoke to Prime Minister Netanyahu today. We are doing our best to play our role, to encourage this effort. The Jordanians are obviously playing a vital role. But what's most important is that in that room, the parties are talking to each other. And it's also frankly a good thing that they're talking to each other without having to have all of us sit with them.”
Also Thursday, a spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas told the official Palestinian news agency WAFA that Abbas was to embark on a tour of Europe next week, with a meeting scheduled with U.K. Prime Minister David Cameron as soon as Sunday.
Abbas’ planned tour to the U.K., Germany, and Russia comes as a Jan. 26 Quartet deadline for the resumption of peace talks looms nearer, and following remarks by the Palestinian president concerning “measures” the Palestinians would take against Israel if this most recent attempt to revive negotiations fails.
Speaking last week, Abbas said that if Israel accepts the Palestinian conditions, “we will go to negotiations.” He said the Palestinians have set a Jan. 26 deadline for talks to resume. “After that date, we will take new measures. These measures might be hard,” Abbas added.
Mr. Abbas said no decision has been made yet. But Palestinian officials have said they are considering resuming their push for UN membership as well as ways to isolate Israel at the United Nations, such as a new resolution condemning Israeli settlements in the West Bank and east Jerusalem.
Why Facebook Connect?
Comment on Haaretz.com articles with your Facebook login, and share your thoughts on your own wall.
- Latest
- Most Viewed
- Most Rated
- Open all
Ok people there is only 1 Bibi, an he can not do everything at once, he has to spread it out on the calender, so give him some time to work an he needs some rest too , ok.
The minority native Jews along with Christian and Muslim Palestinians are the closest connection to the ancient Jews. The ancient Jews are made of the Israelite immigrants and the indigenous Canaanites and Philistines who converted to Judaism. After Saladin (the Kurdish Arab leader) won the battle against the Crusade in Jerusalem, he renamed the land to Palestine (Philistine in Arabic) in remembrance of the indigenous people who were neither Arabs nor Jews.
Abdullah is coming to Washington next week to brief Obama on those talks, so politics insists that Bibi must get a go first; Obama is an equal-opportunity President, after all.....
What if the Palestinians disagree with her and decide that January 26 is a rigid straightjacket which considerably heats up the room? I can't believe the banality of this person's statements. Here we are, the strongest country in history and one of the most educated in the world today and our executive branch cannot insure that its spokesperson can utter something a little better than trash.
Missing is only the nobel prize for Netanyahu.He certainly thinks he has deserved it a long time ago.
What is needed from Israel, if it really wants to build up mutual confidence and peace is stopping the wars all together? Israel is so obsessed with showing its strength and military superiority that it does not even consider sitting on a table with Hamas trying to find a peaceful solution with the Palestinians, and immediately stop settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
Is he afraid? Not kosher / helal enough for him? Too busy? No grand speech occurs to him? Like Supertram said: Take a jumbo, 'cross the waters, and violá, your are in Israel and Palestine. Maybe you'l learn something by actually seeing the place, the people, not via phone call, reciting that much shaken, worn-out piece of paper that says: "...the unshakable commitment to Israel’s security". Haaretz, will you be so kind and post -let's say- just ONE of my posts at least, for a change?-
showing unconditional support for the last colonial brutal regime and at the same time try to start another war.
How cliche. there are 39 muslim countries. There CAN be ONE Jewish state.
The problem with the peace process: the "unshakable" support of the U.S. for Israel.
The signs are there. Obama is not going to be a transformational President but even AIPAC and the most determined Zionists are not going to be able to stop the tide. The Palestinian narrative is finally breaking through and Israel, as it is presently constituted, is doomed. The US will eventually walk away from Israel. In fact, educated, young and fair minded Israeli Jews will probably also walk away from the apartheid state.
Abbas' PLO avoids meaningful negotiations by putting obstacles in front in the form of unreasonable conditions. Israel could do the same. For example, Jerusalem must remain undivided capital of Israel is one condition or that Israel must retain control of ALL Jewish communities over the imaginary green line or that the PLO must agree to be demilitarized. These are most likely are going to be in the final agreement anyway, so why not also make them preconditions? The PLO refuses to negotiate and this illustrates how they are THE obstacle to peace.
It is obvious that Israel *wants* all those things, and so I agree with you: Molho should have the courage of his convictions and actually SAY that those are the only outcomes that are ever going to be acceptible to Israel. So what's stopping Israel, other than it's understanding that the entire world would recoil in horror once it takes off its mask?
If pictures can tell, you have Bibi looking in control, in charge, and Obama frustrated , sweating.
Israelis do not want to negoatiate borders. They have always ignored that Palestinians are living where they are living. Israelis have always only asked support from foreign masters, from the Turks, from the British and then from the Americans. So, all these foreign tribes decide on the fate of the Palestinians? Have you ever heard of the right of self-determination. It is 2012 and you cannot ask people just to accept occupation, humiliation and to keep quiet. This is South Africa over again!!
thank you. abbas and company have no plans for peace
I feel compelled to rectify that taking the 1967 borders as baseline for negotiations is not an Arab, but a worldwide demand, and that includes the US president.
The US and Israel did their best to eliminate the biggest enemies of Iran, Saddam and Taliban. Now Iran is acting freely in the region (from Tehran to the Israeli borders thru Iraq, Syria and Lebanon). So, do the US and Israel have right to complain on this situation or is there any other interesting plan (like initiation of the battle of Armageddon – because there is not any other reasonable explanation to me).
And Iran's terrorism, in Lebanon (1982-1983), Argentina (1992, 1994), and elsewhere, predates both invasions led by the USA and NATO.
Election year wars are an extremely dangerous gamble for those pushing for them. Republican losses at the polls would probably be massive since they suddenly would have to reverse all their rhetoric. And since they are already on record in opposition to paying for any kind of government.. And with just a twist or two of words, Israel might just find it necessary to actively work to build Palestine and demolish almost all post 67 settlements. Careful what you wish for, Bibi. You might get it, but at a price. And you may have to commit troops to nation-building in Iran for decades.
I thought to recognize his signature.
Too many and too frequent. It's time for Israel to understand that Americans know what's going on and they are not happy.
I mean what an accomplishment this would be for the Obama administration to bring a peaceful resolution to this everlasting conflict between Israel and the Palestinians. It's unfortunate though that many people monitoring for years this ongoing Middle Eastern dispute have no faith that a reasonable settlement agreement between the two adversaries is possible in the near future. But that's been the habitual commentary on a yearly basis!
King Abdullah is the true leader of palestinians. The other purpoted leaders are imported from other countries. Arafat was imported from Egypt. You can fill the gap for Abbas... Any othe leader in history besides those two...?
Every time Obama opens his big mouth he embarrasses the nation. I don't mean the people in the nation althoug I am sure that a lot of them are embarrassed too. I mean that Obama trashes America's long standing values. We don't support occupiers and oppressors and we certainly don't give them an "'unshakable commitment".
From the beginning Abbas was not a man of war and seems not to have the stomach for physical struggle, not even Gandhi-like. Since becoming President, Abbas showed preference for diplomacy, which is a good trait except that Abbas is incredibly inept in that too. Asking for UN membership right away, instead of first asking the GA for recognition as a state, was a big, foolish mistake. The application for membership had to be submitted to, and approved by, the Security Council, which was sure to fail because of a certain US veto. Abbas should have instead requested the GA to approve his independent state based on the 1967 borders, which he surely would have gotten, and become a non-member state observer in the UN. Membership could come later, as Israel's did about a year after Independence. This would have enabled the internationally recognized state of Palestine to join UNESCO and other international bodies. But most importantly, it could join the ICC, and have every Israeli official involved in settlements indicted on a war crime, which would have forced the end of the settlement enterprise. It would have opened the way to sincere negotiations with Netanyahu because the latter would not have had anything to gain from a delay. Now, after delaying peace talks for years in favor of a diplomatic step which was certain to fail, Abbas is giving up his demand to freeze settlement construction, which will allow Israel to drag peace talks for ever. What do you call a man proceeding on Plan A, which is certain to fail, while not preparing a Plan B to continue with???
From all appearances, Iran is a rational state, acting responsibly. As Mossad chief Pardo said, Iranian nukes do not pose an existential threat to Israel, and therefore to the West in general. Therefore, the US believes it should not go to war to stop Iran's nuclearization. Since it is desirable to not increase the number of states having nukes, the US will continue to help by "threats." But Israel should know that there will be no actual US action. And if Israel acts alone against Iran, the US will not intervene on her behalf. It will be a private Israeli affair. If Israel chooses to reveal this to the world, too bad, because then Iran will probably nuclearize quickly. Israel is now developing a "second strike" capability (via submarines), and this is sufficient to protect her against any feared surprise nuclear attack.
I'm sure that Israel has already figured this out as we all have. The American public would not be amenable to another war. On the other hand, by consistently stating we have Israel's back, we put ourselves in an awkward position. Once the election is over Obama won't care what was said in the p past.
Not so fast my friend, He will be impeached if he moves against Israel, take it to the bank.
If you mean that Obama will not help Israel to meet its security needs then I disagree with you. If you mean that Obama will work for Palestinian statehood then I agree with you. In doing so he will,of course be "standing by" Israel by helping it to rid itself of an illegal occupation and by beginning the path of returning the State to a country which we Jews can respect and be proud of.
Mr Obama, you have to say and do as you are told by Israel and their government ministers. Your Congress and Senate works for them and if you do not follow their commands, you Mr President will be looking for another job. Simple
I wonder if Mr. Abbas realises that recently a Temple era seal was displayed to the public, archeologists continue to dig up breathtaking proofs of the ancient and never-severed connection between Jews and all the Land of Israel. This time, the find is a 1,500 year old tiny stamp discovered near the city of Akko, bearing the image of the seven-branched Temple Menorah. Again proof that there were no Muslims no Palestinians in the region at that time time because the Quran had not even yet been written.
You have a very simplified view of archeology sir, but it's okay
This is all new to me .......I did not know that the true fact is that the City of Jerusalem was captured by the Saracens . Between 684-691 A.D. the mosque, the Dome of the Rock, know in Arabic as Qubbat As-Sakhrah, was constructed on the location of the two ancient Israelite Temples .
Temple era seal? It was found at a site that was predominently Christian from the 5th or 6th century - aduh. And of course there WERE no Muslims there at that time - aduhhh. Just Christian and Jews...many of whose descendents would convert to Islam when it DID arrive in the region later on...ahem. And proof there no Palestinians there? Well I guess at THAT time they wouldn't have been using that name - now would they...since they were ALL related of common ancestry. The need to distinguish themselves as indigenous never really rose until the Zionists arrived and began trying to dispossess them of their land with fallacies of them being Arab newcomers to land that had been handed down to them through the centuries since the Roman occupation led to many of their brethren fleeing to other places. How odd, don't you think, that their neighbors of common descent who were Jewish were embraced by the Zionists...while THEY were being dispossessed? That little seal means absolutely NOTHING!
what happened to the non Jewish indigenous peoples that had resided in Caanan for over 2500 years? did all of them disappear? did they vanish? did they die? what about the 200,000 Jews that stayed behind at the end of the second temple era, what happened to them ? answer? Palestinians.
If you go back 5000 years there's no evidence of Judaism either, but that doesn't negate the Jewish connection to the land. You cannot deny the fact that the Arab population of what is now Israel and the occupied territories was over 90% at the turn of the 20th century, and most Jews living there are immigrants from either Europe or the rest of the Middle East. The people living there before the 2nd Aliyah were mostly descended from locals who converted to Islam and adopted the Arab culture and language. They did just appear one day and proclaim their right to the land, they've lived on it since prehistory.
...and sitting with Obama, on live camera in front of the world, Bibi claimed the Netanyahu stamp linked him and all Jews to the ancient Israel.
Also you comment about the pals says a lot about who you really are. What is it to you if they call themselves Palestinian, Post-Jordan Arabs, Martians, Goombas, The 'Other' Arabs, or anything else. Do these people exist...can I see them. Do they breathe and live on the land? Were they there 100 years ago, 200 yrs, 1000yrs...does it really matter what they call themselves?
The comment is contradictory: It says "If you go back 5000 years there's no evidence of Judaism...", then later the comment is: "most [the contradiction] Jews living there are immigrants from either Europe or the rest of the Middle East". AFAIK, there have been Jews living in Israel continuously since the beginning of Judaism, the number depending on how many fled persecution to the diaspora, (eg, at the beginning of the Christian era), and how many were killed in massacres. Doubtless many also converted to Islam, and according to a recent online article, seems most Palestinians - both Muslim and Christian, probably have DNA which shows their forbears were Jewish, and there are also the Druze and Samaritans - a branch of Judaism.
The British did, hah, a "Muslim Arab" king who derives his legitimacy from the dead British empire, what a mediator he is..