Netanyahu: Palestinians are dodging direct Mideast peace talks
Palestinian President Abbas has conditioned a move to direct negotiations with guarantees regarding security, borders of a future Palestinian state.
By Jonathan Lis and Haaretz Service Tags: Israel news Mideast peace Mahmoud Abbas Benjamin NetanyahuThe Palestinian Authority is determined to sabotage attempts to upgrade the ongoing proximity Middle East peace talks with direct negotiations, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said Monday, adding that direct talks were the only way to ensure Israel's security interests.
 |
Benjamin Netanyahu speaking during the weekly cabinet meeting at his Jerusalem office, July 25, 2010. |
| Photo by: AP |
Continuing previous efforts to encourage direct talks with Israel that took place during his stint as president of the European Union that ended one month ago, Spanish Foreign Minister Miguel Angel Moratinos will meet with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in Amman this Tuesday.
Abbas has recently indicated he will resist United States pressure for face-to-face peace talks with Israel for now, saying indirect negotiations must make progress first.
The Palestinian president has said that he wants the indirect negotiations to produce results on the issues of the security and borders of a future Palestinian state to be founded alongside Israel on land captured in 1967.
Speaking at the Knesset's Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee on Sunday, Netanyahu said that as far as Israel was concerned, "direct talks can commence as early as next week," adding that Israel had an "understanding with the Americans that we must move into direct negotiations immediately and without further delay."
However, the prime minister claimed that the PA has responded to its invitation to direct talks with an "effort to evade this attempt."
"If anyone had any doubts regarding the Palestinians' reluctance, it is now crystal clear," Netanyahu said, adding that the PA were "stalling direct talks and relying on the Arab League for support."
The PM argued that while the Palestinians claim they are interested in moving peace talks forward, they in fact were using every excuse to delay any progress, saying that first "they said it was the [settlement] freeze, now it's the borders issue."
"No doubt such negotiations would be difficult, but they would also be desired," the PM said, adding that only through "direct talks can we raise our security demands and interests regarding the issues."
The prime minister also suggested that the attempt to sabotage the move to direct talks was not only conducted by the Palestinians, saying there are "parties who are not enthusiastic both internationally and in Israel," perhaps hinting at leading opposition party Kadima.
"Unfortunately, not all those parties are found outside Israel, and I'm not referring to my colleagues from the right-wing parties of the coalition." He refused to elaborate, but did say that "if you invite me to the subcommittee, things will get very interesting."
Regarding future security arrangements, Netanyahu said that the "arrangements reached with the Palestinians must be such as to withstand any changes in the political and security Middle East map."
"The Palestinians must hold firm even if an eastern front develops, as was the case, for example, before the fall of Saddam Hussein's regime," Netanyahu said, reiterating that any security arrangements with the Palestinians must "stand the test of time."
"We won't compromise security," the premier said, "and that's why the U.S. administration has been notified of our security needs."
On the subject of the West Bank settlement construction freeze, the prime minister said he had not intention to extend the 10-month moratorium, saying "the slowdown was limited in time: It has not changed and that's how it will be."
Referring to his recent meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington, Netanyahu said his talk with the American president was "frank," adding that Obama has announced that the sides were ready for direct talks."
Over the weekend, Abbas heard in turn from German Chancellor Angela Merkel, British Prime Minister David Cameron and Italian Prime Minister Silvio Berlusconi.
Each called on Abbas to announce this Thursday, at the Arab League foreign ministers' summit in Cairo, that he is ready to move to direct talks. All three leaders promised to support him and to head off any Israeli foot-dragging during the talks.
In his address to the Knesset committee on Sunday, Netanyahu also mentioned his conversation with President Obama regarding Israel's nuclear ambiguity policy, saying that "there was an impression among the international community that some shift had occurred in the U.S. position regarding Israel's policy, and it was important to me that the President of the United States would stand firm against that impression and return to clearly re-affirming the traditional U.S. position."
"The president stated that there is no change on this issue," Netanyahu said, adding that he felt President Obama recognized "that Israel is in a special position due to its size, due to the threats it faces, and due to its history."
"That is, Israel is in a special position and different from other countries. It is clear to all that Israel must be able to defend itself against the combination of threats it faces," Netanyahu said.
The prime minister added that the nuclear issue was a central subject in his conversations with the U.S. president, saying that "if someone in the international community believed that Israel's standing had deteriorated, now it is clear that this is not the case but rather the contrary."
The prime minister's comments regarding the U.S. policy toward Israel's supposed nuclear program came in the wake of the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty review conference held in May, which called on Israel to agree to international inspection of its nuclear installations, and to the holding of an international conference for a nuclear-free Middle East.
The conference's final document was passed despite Israel's strong protests to the Americans.
In talks since the conference, the Americans made it clear that that decision had been a "mistake." In an effort to clarify the administration's stance on the Israeli nuclear question, it was determined that - in coordination with Israel - the full details of the high-level understandings between the two sides, reached during the 1960s, would finally be revealed.
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
Since 1948 the palestinians & their arab friends made it abundantly clear they don't want peace with israel. How it could be different for abbas to day when it was impossible for arafat before him; to sign peace with israel ! If abbas is one of the none existing 'moderates' that israel can trust, then why abbas is not showing his intentions and prefer himself not to 'talk' and expect others to talk on his behalf ?! That begs the question: Is abbas a coward by not talking or he has nothing to say than what the other so called palestinian leaders have always been saying for many years now ? The palestinian leader who wants peace with israel is not being born yet. Blaming israel is the only principle policy of the palestinians failed diplomacy. It was failed before abbas and it will keep failing . Blaming israel is the best one can expect from abbas. Peace is never what the palestinians are think about ! Blaming israel is becoming boring ! And so is abbas not talking ! Neyhanyahu must not wait for some one who is not talking !
So...they drag out their stupid remarks about the USA, Australia et al. None of which are STILL illegally acquiring territory by war. They blabber on about the US / Mexico, when the US legally annexed Texas etc. It's almost as if any reality must be ignored at all costs. No fact checking. No knowledge. Just blind obedience to the Hasbara BS. It's hilarious...they're so ignorant they don't even know when they're screwing up for Israel. I doubt many have even bothered to read the proclamation on the declaration of a Jewish State.. (mainly because it can't be found on any informative Israeli sites bar one and that ISN'T the Israeli Govt, who should at least be educating it''s citizens, but prefers not to) ///“…. within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. ” //
The intention for wanting to have a permanent peace is not there as long as settlements expansion are allowed and there is no self governance for Palestinians
why is abbas avoiding peace talks? doesn't he want a homeland? doesn't he want independence from muslim leaders 'owning' him? doesn't he care about his brothers and sisters being oppressed by hamas in gaza? doesn't he care about "palestinians" in settlements OUTSIDE of israel across the middle east? doesn't he care about the future of "palestinian" children? or is his desire to murder innocent arabs, christians, and jews not satisfied yet?? i think the other muslim religious leaders are pressuring him to stall.... abbas makes too much money stalling to work for peace his predesessor yassar arfat was a government emplyee his whole life and retired with 1.3 billion dollars.... think that might be a good incentive?
He is an expert at dodging on every issue or responsibility that comes his way , so yes mr Netanyahu why not accuse the Palestinian of it , may be the stupid ones will beleive you...
Have u ever heard a Muslim telling the truth to infidels? never! it's in the Koran.
I have no kind words for Netanyahu or the rest of the one-eyed knesset.They are with out remorse, compassion and guilt.The processes of indoctrination used by Israeli parents must be highly effective to produce generations of Israelis who appear to lack the very essence of humanity. However, the unrest and turmoil which for decades has characterised the middle east has to be laid at the feet of the US and the all powerful jewish lobby which for decades has determined US foreign policy.Without US interference the playing field would have been levelled, after all this was basically the reason the US gave for for approving Pakistans acquisition of nuclear weapons--A level playing field. Unfortunately, the concept of a level playing field does not exist when it involves Israel and Iran. It is my opinion, that the jewish lobby in the US (using Israel as a tool) intends to slowly over run the entire M.E. and thus ensure Americas thirst for oil in the future.Why else spend trillions on overarming Israel.Security !! Where do the threats come from? Surely not from a bunch of Arabs refered to by Israelis as rodents or better still scum of the earth. America sees OIL and Israel sees a jewish world.
It does not matter!!! It is not the Palestinian's land. It is Israel's, given to them by divine right and in the war's that the ARABS started and LOST!! There is no reason for the country of Israel and land!! If all of the Arab countries really want the Palestinians to have land, grant them some land out of the HUGE territories of the Arab lands, not the miniscule country of Israel!! The only reason they want that land is because they want to wipe out the country of Israel, no other reason!!!
They did not get it in '48, they do not get it now. Israel is here to stay!
Israel has a tendency to say one thing and do the opposite, look how many times they have they have sabotage the peace process. They blame the Palestinians for waiting on the Arab league for consultations, this is no different from the Israeli crying to the US.America do not hand Palestinians big welfare cheques like israel gets from US taxpayers. How could Israel possibily wnat peace, when they keep expanding settlements, the Palestinians do not have a peace partner ion Israel.
Hardly a credible source
PM Netanyahu is showing Israel's willingness to reach a suitable solution for both sides and instead of seizing it what does PA do? It squirms. But the question is: why (if its sole interest is to serve the Palestinian people and finally offer them a home)? PA: enough with procrastinating, dodging, stalling for it serves no one's interests (let alone your people's).
Netinyahu advocates a non-state for the Palestinians, with only half of their rightful territories. He demands negotiations based on pre-ordained outcome, no defense forces for Palestinians. Israel maintains control of airspace etc etc, Israel keeps territories illegally acquired and illegally annexed. None of which add up to a viable state.
Israel occupied the West Bank and Gaza during the 1967 war. Since then they have taken 42% of this territory for colonies for their own people. The Palestinians have little or no power with which to negotiate with Israel. They cannot even guarantee a supply of raincoats for their security forces without israel's approval. Israel in contrast is a powerful state with unconditional US support, which allows them to act with impunity, ignoring international law. There is no point in Abbas turning up for face to face talks with the Israelis who are very much divided on whether they are prepared to give the Palestinians a viable contiguous state (as reported regularly in Haaretz). If Israel is not prepared to give minimum commitments to Abbas, he should not enter into direct talks. I believe that Netanyahu is only stringing him along for a show for the Americans and Abbas should not play his game.
Then rot in your refugee camps.
What value are any substantive negotiations without including Hamas? Any deal done with Abbas won't hold if Palestinians don't feel represented.
What exactly has he delivered. 1,Destruction of more houses in East Jerusalem 2, His Foregin Minister the nightclub bouncer is trying to shove responsibility for Gaza to the EU or Egypt. 3, Israel is in the middle of creating a vote of loyalty that will cause thounds(tens of) Palestinians to lose their citizenship. Or how about Netanyahu declaring that East Jerusalem is not on the table or that the Jordan valley will stay with Israe. Get real nutandyahoo---it is you that fears peace. It would put a kink in your zionist racist Greater Israel project. We allknow by now. We have watched you for a long time and your audience is growing exponentially. The gig is up.
What's the point, otherwise? Israel makes commitments. The Palestinians make commitments. The Palestinians are held to their commitments. Israel is allowed to ignore her commitments. Of course the Palestinians aren't about to fall for that again.
Direct talks are a trap for the Palestinians. Bibi will offer nothing...at least nothing remotely acceptable from the Palestinian point of view. They will refuse. And, in a replay of what happened with Arafat and Barak, the Palestinians will be held responsible. There is no point in direct talks until some basic agreements are reached.
But then, he's a Zionist so the truth has never crossed his crusty lips.
There is actually nothing to really say that has not been said. This is the same old Zionist lieing, conning, deceiving, malicious bullshit that Israel has been doing since the beginning of time, which is (by the way) the cause of hatred toward Israel and Zionist militant violent Jews.
Israel is dodging the issues of permanent borders, settlements and IDF presence. Netanyahu continues a game of casting blame while being an obstructionist to a just resolution of the conflict. Lack of good faith is being met with lack of trust.
Mr. Netanyahu, I saw the video you made boasting how you conned the US and other people over the Oslo accord. And you are criticizing the Palestinians? Admit it, you are a rabid Zionist who will do and say anything to achieve the Zionist goal of taking Judea and Samaria, even destroy people. Where does Transcendental Law, the Ten Commandments, fit in your thinking? Does it matter that good Jews are condemned for your actions? Sir, in my opnion you are amoral, functioning outside the bounds of God's morality. Your not alone as I look at AIPAC and the majority of the American government. "Maybe today" but I wouldn't want to meet God with you and your ilks baggage.
I hate to say it, but the time has come for all Israelis to be held accountable. Why? They are the ones who keep voting Likud, keep shouting about the Holocaust, and Israel's security and their love for Israel, 90% plus support for Gaza Blockade... Blockade...concern for others
Israel is dodging the issues of permanent borders, settlements and IDF presence. Netanyahu continues a game of casting blame while being an obstructionist to a just resolution of the conflict. Lack of good faith is being met with lack of trust.
Is there no end to the automatic lock step support for the Palestinians. Israel is avoiding the issues by calling for direct talks about them? Does that really make sense in your world?
Bibi: Keep your propaganda going. It might be good for you but not for Israel.
Isn't it clear that Ahmadenijad is calling the shots in Gaza, Lebanon, Syria and in the Palestinian Authority? The PA's rhetoric is identical to that of Ahmadenijad's Iran. Threaten, bring everything to a crisis level and then offer an olive branch; negotiations. Keep the world busy guessing..it is simply a ploy! Ahmadenijad has probably promised Israel's neighbors that there is no need to make peace... "keep dragging your feet"...say and do anything to stall a peace process... because soon, very soon,we ((Iran) will try to destroy Israel". And finally, Ahmadenijad has probably promised to divide Israel, the West bank and Gaza between Hamas and Fatah, not the Arabs and the Jews.
How will the Iranians destroy Israel without also destroying the Palestinians? I guess you believe the weather girl threatens the weather when she makes a prediction. All the Iranians have done is predicted the downfall of the Zionist regime in Jerusalem. A) A regime is a government B) Jerusalem is not in Israel, it has never been legally annexed to Israel.
if you ask the americans to give back 3 millionim squere kilometrim to MEXICO, WHAT WILL BE THE ANSWER,NO NO NO ,land captured during war belongs to the winner,
'Land captured during war belongs to the winner.' That's almost invariably not so. The winner withdraws in exchange for concessions. Like you should. Recognition of the 1949 cease fire lines as Israel's borders, for example.
Land may no longer be gained through war. This was one of the principles adopted by UN treaty to render war useless as a tool for expansion,
If you ask Americans to give back America to the Indigenous people, what do you think they will say?
Not a single inch.We won those wars and will not give away what we won by blood spilt at the time. In any case,Mexico has enough space and more. Bad enough when they cross over bringing all the drugs,and MAFIOSI TYPES ...
The Manifest Destiny Days are over. It is doubtful that the land ceded to the US by Mexico is wanted back. It would include several hundred million gringos who don't want to be Mexican. Just as Israel faces the dilemma, so would Mexico. Land includes the inhabitants. Just as it did when acquired by the US by whatever means it was acquired, including purchase.
Pays to check your 'facts'
Mr Netanyah: everybody knows that you want to stall and buy yourself more time until Obama is longer president. While "directly negotiating" you would be stealing more Palestinian lands in E. Jerusalem and expanding the illegal settlements in W. Bank/E.Jerusalem. This what you had done before during your first tenure as prime minister in the late 1990s. Stop wasting our time and fooling yourself and the entire world. One democratic bi-national state is the ultimate conclusion to Israeli rejectionism.
It is people like the above writer who show how much hate most of these people here have for Israel. They will never give legitamacy to a Jewish State in Israel. By the way, Arabs in Israel live better than Arabs in Arab Countries. Do you think any Iaraeli Arab would want to move to a Palestianian State if there ever is one? I say no chance.
Originally, the land that is now Israel and Jordan was supposed to become the homeland of the Jews. Then the British decided to give 80% of it to the Arabs and it became Jordan. On top of that, there was supposed to be the next partition that was rejected by the Arabs in 1948. Why didn't the Arabs set up a Palestinian State when they controlled these territories between 1948 & 1967? Now they claim they want it for a state. I hope they real realize one day how much their leadership has betrayed them.
Unbelievable. No, 18's point should be read, and re-read.
Let's recap here: Israel's "freeze" was a sham and never included Jerusalem. Israel refused to make any progress whatsoever in the indirect talks. Israel won't even set a simple framework for the direct talks (this is a critical element in any negotiations) to avoid being pinned down. Israel wants to start the talks ALL OVER AGAIN and throw out all previous talks between them. So who is avoiding "peace" here?
Abbas demands a U.S. commitment on borders of a future state before he agrees to talks with Israel. What a joke. Isn't the very purpose of negotiations to determine what the borders will be? Whoever heard of making guarantees about the final outcome BEFORE one negotiates. Clearly abbas has no interest in compromise but in making demands to which he expects the US to pressure Israel into implementing. This isn't a peace process but an extortion process. Anyway the arabs referred to as the "palestinians" have no right to any part of Israel.
Anytime a bunch of Israelis support something (there is no liberals in that country) you know the whole thing is a sham
The Arabs demand Israel honors ALL aspects of its previous agreement UN242 or go back to the unilaterally declared jewish state and sovereign borders enshrined in UN181.
He forgot that the PLO only talks about peace, and never intend on making any.
Prove to the world that Bibi has any intention to give up any land or water illegally held by Israel. What "promises" does he make? Why in "god's " name should any country with nuclear weapons which denies the fact have any right to demand anything from any other country. Bibi is bogus and the world knows it. Obama has caved, and Israel already owns the US Congress.
Bibi gave land way under OSLO II, wye accords, Hebron protocols and would have given more if he had not lost the elections.
Bibi gave land way under OSLO II, wye accords, Hebron protocols and would have given more if he had not lost the elections.
For a long time, Israel said it has no partner, it has no partner. This is the same tactic. Netanyahu tries to find what the Palestinians will reject because he doesn't want peace, he wants settlements and settlers. He is not sincere. Why aren't the indirect talks good enough? If the indirect talks have not been good for Palestinians what makes anyone in the world think direct talks with a government that won't continue a real freeze on settlements will do anything. Netanyahu admitted he wanted to destroy Oslo. Why do you think Rabin was murdered? Because of people like Netanyahu. Rabin knew the kind of person Netanyahu was. He is a fanatic, a hateful man.
I can;t understand how or why people who have passed the age of puberty cannot fathom for themselves why Abbas can Never conclude a peace agreement with Israel......a) He has Amr Mussa & his gang.waiting on the sidelines b) He looks back & sees that Hamas have drawn their swords from their sheaths. Now ask yourselves who wants to see Dead Man Walking !?
Read no 18 and 27. Says it all.
grant you a nation-state called Palestine, why wouldn't you rant the Jews whose nation-state is Israel recognition? After all, the rest of the world has done so, including the United Nations? And if you want to live in peace from the signing of a peace treaty for ever thereafter as you claim,, why do you refuse to consider a peace treaty the "end of the conflict"? This conflict is not Netanyahu's or Abbas's. It is a conflict that commence in 1920 when gangs of Arab terrorists began to attack in an organized way the Jewish community of the country. That was a long time before Abbas or Netanyahu were born... Now it is time to make peace, but the two points mentioned above appear to stand in the way. It is time we ask the Muslim-Arabs, local and regional, to respond to both positively, without ifs, ands or buts, and to do so now.
Israelis are not gods. You need to get over yourself. Maybe the UN should partition Israel the same way they partitioned Palestine. Then we will see if the Israelis accept the partition in the same way that they said the Palestinains should have.
Natallie, When the UN partitioned Palestine in 1948, the Arabs would have had more land than any agreement with even the 1967 borders. They did not accept that. Their leadership failed them then as it does not. You know as well as we all know tieir leadership wants all of Israel, nothing less.
...the Balfour Declaration. It continues with the rejection of the San Remo Conference, 1920; the League of Nations decisions, 1922; the Peel Commission of 1937; the United Nations resolution, 1947; Israel peace offer of 1948; the refusal to set up a state with Jerusalem as its capital between the years 1948 to 1967; the Begin/Saadat offer, 1978; the Barak/Clinton offer, 2000; the Gaza First offer, 2005; the Olmert/Bush offer of 2008; and now they reject the Netanjahu's invitation for direct talk, 2009/10. This pattern of rejections is indicative of what the real intent and motive of the Muslim-Arabs: Israel demise, nothing more and nothing less.
Under the UN Partition Plan, Israel would have got 55% of the land; this included the best areas of arable land and for water. It was grossly unfair to the indigenous Palestinians and they were right to reject it. However, Israel was determined from the beginning to have it all. Ben-Gurion 1938 - "we will abolish the partition of the country.. and expand to the whole land of Israel."
in 1947
in fact, the Palestinians have never in the entire history of the region been able to declare Sovereign Independence. They have always had parts of their territory under the control of some other entity. INDEPENDENCE means independent of ANY other control. http://wp.me/pDB7k-jA
The Arabs rejected partition before the fighting started in 1947/8. If they accepted, they would have had more land than they claim they want now. Why didn't they declare a state in the West Bank and Gaza between 1948 and 1967? It was controlled by Arab entoties - Eagypt and Jordan.
Sit in the same room and talk, one must wonder what are you so afraid of, Abbas..
The real danger for Israel these days is that rulers sich as netanyahu totally fail to see how much the world is fed up with Israel's occupation of the West bank and East jerusalem, and its never ending development of illegal settlements that are deeply out-of-fashion in the West, where colonialism has long ended.
Sit in the same room and talk, one must wonder what are you so afraid of,Netanyahu ..
In an October 6, 2004, interview with Haaretz, Dov Weissglas, Sharon's chief of staff, declared: "The significance of the [Gaza] disengagement plan is the freezing of the peace process... When you freeze that process, you prevent the establishment of a Palestinian state and you prevent a discussion on the refugees, the borders and Jerusalem. Disengagement supplies the amount of formaldehyde that is necessary so there will not be a political process with the Palestinians." As if we're all blind to the major holes and contradictions in the ongoing Israeli perversion of the facts.
Isreal hasn't used good faith in the indirect talks and the Palestinians would be foolish to support Israel's insistant to going to direct talks. As reported by the Palestinians and by George Mitchell to Congress the Israelis have not responded to ANY questions asked by the Palestinians during the so called indirect talks. Having a dialog about how to establish a two state solution was the stated purpose of the talks and Israelsaid it would negotiate in good faith. The Palestinians wanted a US observer to see just what the Israelis would do - the Israelis refused to negotiate or even talk and answer ANY questions about borders or security and stated that anything that had been discussed and generally agreed to in the past was no longer valid meant that Oslo was well shall we say maybe or maybe not something the Israelis were willing to consider. So Israelis take a couple of days and figure out why you can't be forth coming........
Seems yours is Bibi.... What has come out of these so called talks during the past 20 or 30 years. What have you got to offer Bibi? Israel does not want peace and that is the bottom line.
It is easy to speculate that Obama does not want to get tough with Israel before the November elections. Could he have a private agreement with Abbas to hold out until after the elections at which time the real peace effort would begin? If so, it will be Bibi who receives the pie in the face while his government collapses around him. The current Israeli government will never make peace. This means that they must be forced out before the real peace effort can begin. Until then Obama will be cosy with Israel. This is all just a pleasent daydream at the moment, but who knows? It would be nice to see Obama emerge from this peace fiasco with brains, backbone, and morality all intact!
It is about time that America has stood up to Israel. Israel has used its military might to do whatever it wants. Israel settlements within Palestinian territory are clearly illegal. Americans are getting sick of backing an ally who acts so arrogantly. Lets see how tough Israel is without America’s support.
No one in the world is seriously expecting any changes in US policy during election time. Not even Netanyahu. So he continues his rhetoric to keep the right happy. When the time comes, Netanyahu will unleash his real compromises.
It's obvious that alot of you who are against Israel don't know what the bible says on this matter. First of all the land doesnt belong to the Israelis or the Palestinians, it belongs to Yahweh; the God of Abraham, Isaac and Jacob. Not to Abraham, Ishmael and his descendants. According to the bible, everything that were seeing now is fulfilling prophecy. I dont believe that the world leaders wake up every morning and look into scripture to see what needs to be fulfilled next. These things were foreseen not just hundreds of years but thousands of years ago. For all the countries to be lined up against Israel the way are, including Turkey (one of Israel's closest allies in the middle east), is just another fulfillment (Ezekiel 38). And Israel according to this scripture doesnt have any allies, that's when Yahweh Himself will come to her rescue. So I ask, does Israel really need the support of the US or any other? Once they realize who their biggest Supporter is, they'll be just fine.
Tony, love to see it happen BUT America is not the independent nation it once was.There is little doubt that the jews control US foreign policy so the Israeli will continue mucking around until they have built across palestine.
It's not just about elections. What Obama realized, in the wake of the hysteria that followed his giving Netanyahu the cold shoulder in March, is that getting 'tough' on Israel is counterproductive. It strenghtened, rather than weakened Netanyahu's position inside Israel and the US. The siege mentality flared up, and Israel's supporters in the US slammed Obama for not caring about Israel's security. Israel is not a normal country, and, for the large part, its population is incapable of seeing the situation objectively. They see all Arab attempts to defend themselves as aggression, and their own aggression exclusively as self-defense. Until the US sponsored missile shield is implemented and Israel has no longer any excuse to present illegal expansion as legitimate security concerns, getting tough on Israel will only deepen the conflict and prevent dialogue.
Please do tell us more?
palestinians know what they want! Bibi is a Joke
It is obvious that the Palestinians want nothing less than all of Israel. Why didn't they establish a state from 1948 until 1967? The answer is obvious.
It is not possible to talk to a PM like Netanyahu who says something and acts the complete opposite. Netanyahu cannot be trusted.
...with Israel for a simple reason: it knows that in such talks - unlike talks with talks with Obama/Clinton/Mitchell - it will be asked to meet two simple requests, but because of conceptual understanding of the Arab Israeli conflict it can't. The first demand will be to accept Israel's right to be, to exist as the nation-state of the Jewish people. This demand is one test to the acceptance by the Muslim-Arabs, finally, of Israel's legitimacy based on historic, ethical and legal rights. The second demand is that any peace treaty reached and signed by the parties will be considered the "end of the conflict". This is yet another simple test to find out whether the Muslim-Arabs view a peace treaty as an end of the on-going conflict which commenced in 1920 or only a stage in the implementation of the goal etched in the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Charter of eliminating Israel and erasing all traces of Jewish life in the Land. So far the these leaders have followed that which Arafat before them has done. They have evaded these two demands while he, based on the Oslo Accords, was asked to erase from the PLO's Charter those parts referring to Israel's demise. But instead, he placed the Charter in a "deep freeze" while those parts are still there, and more importantly in the hearts and minds of his followers. Thus, true to their cause as stated in the Charter of the PLO - the organization that was set up by the Arab League, not by local Arabs, in 1964, three full years before the Six-Day War and before the disputed territories came under Israel's control in a defensive war... - the local Muslim-Arab leadership has failed the test of accepting Israel's legitimacy and the test of finally helping to bring the conflict to an end, which they refuse to do.
The beauty is that once Israel has the Palestinians recognize Israels right to exist as a Jewish nation on the land once belonging to the Palestinians, Israel can renege on their part. Once said, this cannot be unsaid. Afterward, Israelis Jews can feel a little happier knowing that their victims have blessed Israel.
No other country has ever claimed a 'right to exist'. They exist, and that's it. Why is that not enough for Israel? Because they don't believe in their 'right to exist' themselves? Their victims have to grant it to them first?
What can the palestininans lose with this? It is clear for them that refugees will not be let in into Israel It is clear to them, that Israel demands full recognition of jewish rights to statehood Palestinians could simply say, "we recognize the jewish right to the pre 67 borders" If they just utter that, more than half of israel population will support the palestinan cause and the whole world as well. If that means nothing, why the palestinians dont do it. They have much more to win going positive than negative. However, they dont do it because the conflict is a matter of principle. The principle is that the Jewish state should not be recognized. The other way around, the principle for Israel then is that a palestinan state should never be founded. At most an autonomy. Fair enough.
The PA has no problem recognizing Israel's right to exist according to the 1967 borders. Even Hamas recognizes these borders and has accepted them in any peace process. All Abbas is waiting for is for Israel to define it's borders... So who is not recognizing who in this scenario?
It's the strongest bargaining chip for the Palestinians - granting Israel the legitimacy it doesn't have according to international law. How else can they expect Israel to respect international law with regard to recognizing the pre-67 borders? http://www.informationclearinghouse.info/article23883.htm
arabs have historically rejected the very idea of israel. now after 62 years a majority have come around and signed on to the two state solution based on the 67 borders. (saudi plan) This is the deal, but Israel believes it can coerce palestinians to drop the price and negotiate on the basis of zero. Israel however starts negotiations with A: settlement blocks, B: Control of Jerusalem. C: Security arangements on Jordan River. D: Demilitarized Palestine. E: Access to Palestine Airspace. F:Access to Communications Network. All of these are completely unnaceptable, Palestinians do not have to sit down and talk about this rubbish. Better keep the pressure on Israel to come around to the 67 borders, then they can talk.
Looks to me like the Palis are trying to coerce the Israelis into accepting a starting point, not the other way around. "Israel however starts negotiations with A: settlement blocks Yes, on disputed land. Also, Israel has proven that it will dismantle settlements for peace (i.e. gaza); so going into negotiations with settlements that could be disbanded is not an obstacle. B: Control of Jerusalem. Probably not. Barak offered East Jerusalem to Arafat in 2000. Arafat rejected and responded with violence. C: Security arangements on Jordan River. The deal is land for peace. If Israel's security is not on the table, then Palis are offering Israel nothing. D: Demilitarized Palestine. The deal is land for peace. If Israel's security is not on the table, then Palis are offering Israel nothing. E: Access to Palestine Airspace. There is no other way to land a plane in, or take from, Israel. A peace agreement would likely give Palis rights over Israeli airspace for the same reasons. F:Access to Communications Network. I don't know what this means, but I assume that you mean Israel should not have access to a communications network.
"...a majority have come around and signed on to the two state solution based on the 67 borders." So when Abbas says, in Arabic, that all "these "negotiations" are simply a prelude to acquiring ALL Palestine, you're calling him a liar? of
"on disputed land" Israel is the only country who disputes.. "Israel has proven that it will dismantle settlements for peace " Israel still occupies Gaza...(and the West Bank and illegally claims territories acquired by war by 1949/50. The rest of your post = a non-independent state
The biggest threat to Palestinian statehood is the Palestinian leaders reliance on an league of "brethren" that have done nothing to assist them but have rather used the Palesitnian people as pawns for their own political agendas. In another episode of bad decision making by the Palestinians, once again they feel the need to back up such choices with a vote of confidence by the Arab League. The Palestinians seek independence from Israel, while being wed to the Arab world that instigated the predicament they're currently in.
I think your opinion is the one of the silent majority.
Perhaps you mean OCCUPATION must end.. Just as the British Mandate (occupation) had to end in order for Israel to declare independence from the non-state entity of Palestine.
The Arab states have acted according to the letter of the law. Israel has not. http://wp.me/pDB7k-ki
The future Palestinian state`s borders are defined before the talks. That`s why it`s called negotiations, to discuss what to do, no to talk on what is decided.
and he does not deserve that form of evasion. Everyone knows what an agreement has to look like. He wants to go back to zero, perhaps to the Herut platform of the 1940s.
There is no point in peace talks at all. Perpetual war. BTW, how do you know what another man is thinking?
By his actions. Simple, yes? Bibi is the master chamelion. He is living proof that the quantum particle follows the path of least action. Salaam/Shalom
so you think Barak offered the moon to Arafat as in his so called "far reaching psoposals". Here is what Schlomo Ben Ami --his FM had to say on the mater and Baraks modu Operandi. "Tactical shortcomings were by not,of course, a Palestinian monopoly.Barak and his team were full of them.For example, the Prime minister was too slow to grasp the centrality of the issue of Jerusalem at this conference and was therefore unprepared for the far reaching concessions that were required.Nor were Barak,s bargaining positions on the territorial issue reasonable enough to be seen by the Palestinians as credible.To start as he did, with a proposal of a Palestinian State on 66 per cent of the West Bank in order to offer later at Camp David 87 per cent and not reject out of hand Clinton,s proposals at the summit of 91 per cent Was an indication to the Palestinians that he did not really have red lines.Baraks negotiating tactics were a standing invitation to the Palestinians to keep the pressure on the Israelis and never say yes to what Barak liked to call his "Generous Proposals". The question of Israel,s unreasonable point of departure for negotiations with potential Arab interlocaturs, whether Palestinians,Syrians or Egyptians, is of far reaching significance.Israel,s unrealistic bargaining positions failed to convince the Arabs of the seriousness of her professed quest for peace and only invited them to never accept an Israeli offer as final The Israeli internal discourse on the price of peace has therefore always been an excerise in wishful thinking and self deceipt, not least of course with regard to the Palestinian question. Schlomo Ben Ami---Baraks FM from his book,"Scars of War, Wounds of Peace" pages 250/251.
Bibi's coalition was about to fall apart when he was pushed into a temporary settlement freeze. If he was serious about peace, his coalition would have collapsed by now. The fact that they are silent shows that Bibi has briefed them that it is just more peace fakery to gain concessions from Obama. Anyone with a brain can comprehend this, including Abbas. He can be excused for not wanting to play the stooge in Israels peace games.
Natallie, I just have to take my hat off to you (I don't own a hat, but for you, I'll buy one)! Every time I read your comments, they are intelligent, well thought out, logical, commonsensical and to the point! KUDOS!!
Her comments are based on truth and reality... her comments are also unbiased.
Exactly that's why she's here.
History is full of rabble rousers & the multitude that follow the 'leader' Even a country thought to have been advanced,meaning Germany,stooped to the lowest levels of beastliness
Well, we all have our flaws
It is clear Abbas is weaseling his way out of talks. Neither country has secure borders and Abbas wants guarantees in advance of his borders without having to negotiate for them. Touch cookies for Abbas. Either he sits down and talks or he gets what he has always had a missed opportunity. The peace train is leaving the station and will not be back again. Climb on board and see where the peace train goes, its the onloy game in town and the only way to get a state. Negotiate for it do not run away each time
PA cannot have borders as it is not defined yet, let alone being recognised. Instead, what could become its land is in a continual theft by Israel. Israel on the contrary has stated unilaterally its independence more than 60 years ago, and still has its borders not defined, almost certain on purpose as the Zionists dreams of a greater Israel. So comparing both is beyond comprehension and smells as an aim to mislead the world. Maybe that is the typical Zionist style of communication?
I know logic is un-bearable for some folk..never the less, give it a try, it beats the Hasbara everytime... http://talknic.wordpress.com/
http://wp.me/pDB7k-tM // “…. within frontiers approved by the General Assembly of the United Nations in its Resolution of November 29, 1947, and that a provisional government has been charged to assume the rights and duties of government for preserving law and order within the boundaries of Israel, for defending the state against external aggression, and for discharging the obligations of Israel to the other nations of the world in accordance with international law. ” // in order to be recognized...
Abbas and his spin doctors cannot act without permission from the sheepdogs of the Arab League and the shepherd in Riyadh ,the same old story too many sheep but too few sheepdogs trying to control billions of sheep?
The Palestinians seek progress in negotiations, however that can be achieved since the status quo is clearly unacceptable to them. Israel, on the other hand gains by standing still for the current state of affairs is more than acceptable to it. Between occupied and occupier, it is the latter that is happy with the status quo.
And it's Abbas who's evading them. How does that fit in with your thesis? Or is your mind already made up, and I shouldn't bother you with the truth?
Only to go back to zero, to scratch everything that might already be consensus and to achieve nothing: THAT is what Bibi wants: failure that he can blame on others.
Sure he does. It's called public relations. He wants talk and talk and talk. What he doesn't want is to change rhinos.
before the negotiations have even begun? Are you prescient? Haven't you considered other possibiloities, such as Abbas being afraid of talks because he's afraid of the concessions he will have to make?
I hope Netanyahu will continue dodging until Mubarak dies. Probably this year. He will then have no partner of "peace" at all. Israel's future seems dark and bloody. Without Mubarak, Jordan will break diplomatic relations with Israel that was forced on it. It might also change it's course totally under pro iranian pressure. Iran, after Egypt's demise on the international arena, will take over the lead of the Islamic World and will be joined by most of the other Islamic/Arab nations.. Guess where Israel's future will end? I am really eager to see that day coming!
i agree that things wouldn't be great for israel in the scenario you describe. Too bad you don't seem in the least bit saddened by the possibility of a fundamentalist country leading the "Islamic/Arab nations." Its ironic you don't even notice how tragic it would be for this segment of the world population to go down this path. One other beautiful example of how anti-israel propagandists care more about israel going down, than about Arabs/Muslims flourishing...
How much further will Israel sink itself before realizing that the only chance at survival IS a two-state option due to demographic challenges alone (agreed upon by analysts from all parts of the political spectrum)? Surely, the Arabs will have more zeal to fight back invaders than occupiers will have to occupy over a period of time as well. It's anyone's guess as to what Likud thinks they have up their sleeve that will somehow allow Israel to blindly take more possession of land before a world that can't even stand it's policies any longer.
And a wholesale departure from military and arms producing ends.
That's the whole point of coming to negotiate. To meet another party half way. If Abbas is pretty much saying everything he demands BEFORE coming to negotiate, then what exactly does the believe the negotiation is for? This is just the same old crap. The Arab League decide for a Palestinian asspiration, not Abbas. And here I thought that Zionism was a dirty word when Arab Nationalism has been behind Palestinian Statehood to add to their already massive Middle East collection. Abbas does not negotiate from outside the negotiating table, only from the inside. If you don't like it Abbas? Continue to impoverish and deceive your people for another 62 years.
before negotiations...
one could accuse Israel of the same: refusing to negotiate on what it claims as its indivisible capital, settlements, the right of Jews to settle anywhere and the "need" for settlements to grow. From a Palestinian perspective, this leads to a state in name only. More han that, your last sentence is tantamount to a "take it or leave it and suffer" stance. What's the point in negotiating with people like you?
... there were no Palestinian goodwill gestures at all, on the contrary. You are not working for peace, but for the perpetuation of the conflict. In bad faith.
I have never seen meetings set up between two parties without setting up an agenda or some issues to discuss. Bibi is making cakes without sugar by asking for direct peace talks without any "clear references or plans". Ironically, the problems are clear as much as the sun at noon time. But Bibi keeps claiming and arguing that the Pals are not in favor of peace talks. Well, the Pals want peace that gives them back their rights in Jerusalem, borders, security, resources, etc..which are the things that would deter Bibi from setting any plans for any meetings. Let him eat the sugarless cake by himself. The Pals have been suffering from occupation for a long time and it doesn't matter to wait some more time for a "more open" (I hope) Israeli government other than Bibi-Liberman coalition with which plans and references can be settled down. For me, what Bibi is asking is arguing and showing himself as the Jew saver when saying "Jerusalem is our eternal capital..." and the like.
for the Jews, at any rate...
The pals used to be Jordanian until presently. And the so-called pals have no rights in Jerusalem because the so-called pals only surfaced after June 1967
|If the Palestinians are rewally from Jordan then all the places they come from should be in Jordan ?.
Jordan granted all Arab inhabitans of WB Jordanian citizenship.
Playing the card of pretended previous assurances about security and borders in order to start direct talks is disingenuous at best. Only through direct talks the Palestinian side can eventually test the good or bad faith of the Israeli government (and viceversa). This deliberated obstruction of serious peace talks makes ANY progress toward peace a priori impossible. Once more we see the Palestinian uncompromising and rejectionist attitude at work, hidden behind excuses and diversions.
Rejectionism? Remember how all this was coined? Indirect talks will be the baby steps leading up to direct talks. Abbas has been running in full stride while bibi is still in his diapers rolling around on his belly. He can't handle the baby steps yet you think he is ready to walk. No one is fooled except you Israel's being spoon fed this garbage...
I do not know what is wrong with Palestinians. Palestinians said that thay want to have a state yet they do not want to talk with the party involved. what a shame of diplomacy. They preferred indirect talk, no way, it is not done. Palestnians must talk directly with Israel unless if Palestinians belief that they (Palestinians) are lying and that they are deceIving the world. How can they ask for promise to freeze this and that before direct talk? this is diplomacy in anti clock wise.
Doesn't the almighty great enlighten 'progressives' of this world realize that the goal of the idol worshipers is to dominate or perform genocide on the Jews. Not peace, not 2-states, not equal-rights.
get your nose out of that stupid bible
you won't, or can't, answer the point. So, what do you think is going to happen after the "Right of Return" is negotiated, which I seriously doubt will happen, or forced onto Israel by the UN? hm?
the fondamental question of who is occupying and settling the land of the other and denying Gazans human and other rights.
then it is indeed a crime that the Palestinians refuse to inter into direct negotiations with Israel. That is the only way of resolving the issues you mention. So instead of wasting bandwodth and the Talkback editor's time in useless condemnations of Israeli policy, come down instead on the side of direct negotiations.
and you will discover who is wasting bandwidth.
going from past experience abbas is 100% correct in demanding some commitment from israel before getting down to talks. israel has used every trick in the book to undermine the pals... no longer
os that, within the framework of direct talks, all problems between Israel and the Palestinians will be dealt with with the object of finding solutions.
Before sitting down face to face discussions. Abass thinks he can dodge the meeting,by involving the Arabs states or whomever. This a ludicrous behavior.
The Palestanians are victims of grand theft - hence how can they negotiate with the thief in good faith? The thief needs to return the stolen goods first and then maybe just maybe they can sit and have a cup of coffee with the thief (after carefully making sure the thief doesnt steal the coffee).
Today's Palestinian only appears after the six-day war in 1967. So nothing is stolen from them. Arabs said no to their own state in 1937 ->
all it takes is for israel to state that they will agree to a pal state within the 67 borders with mutally agreed minor land swaps... in return the pals agree... they already have... to recognise israel and its right to live in security. agree to this then all that remains is the hows and whens etc. if israel thinks it can legitimize the land grab.. the theft of water .. annexing jerusalem ... then forget peace.
There has never been an international border between Israel and WB, only an armistice line who was only a line between armies. So the border of 1967 never existed.
Interestingly, when Barak and Arafat were negotiating for peace, at one point Barak basically told Arafat that he could have everything he demanded. Borders, east Jerusalem, independence, the works. Arafat walked away from the table at that moment, and would only come back with the demands the right of return. Obviously the right of return is a dealbreaker, as it would essentially be used to flood Israel with palestinians, to the point that none of the infrastructures would be able to handle.
the Palestinians will never gete anything.
You act as if you know the deal...if handing over a few blocks of E Jerusalem, ensuring control over Jordan valley was Israel's idea of deal..I am glad Arafat said NO
I am sure Mr Abbas will be comfortable negotiating from the original UN partition lines then, those that Israel claimed as soverign in their declaration of independence.
The pals wanted to race for pink slips and they lost, and now they want to say “hey we were just kidding” ”we would not have taken your land if you lost” There was no land theft The UN partitioned this land into an area for the pals and an area for Israel. The Pals refused this idea and instead with the help of surrounding armies they bet their land and attacked in an attempt to kill the Jews and take all the land They lost. And every time they tried since 48 they have lost. Yet you call them the victim
I remember the debate about the shape of the table that was to be used by negotiators at the "Paris Peace Accords".
The Pals have no interest in securing a peace deal.
You're not fooling anyone.
You mean the one in which 5,000,000+ Arabs are moved to Israel?
Throwing insults and claims of cowardice is not the way to get Abbas to the table. Just say something publicly about accepting some principle for the establishment of borders. You said you were willing to take a political risk, Bibi. This is your chance. You could also whisper it to George Mitchell, if you don't want your coalition partners to know. He'll whisper it to Abbas.
But I want to talk to Bibi...I am stating this publicly...I can talk anytime anyplace unconditionally...why is he avoiding me...foot dragging...never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity...ad infinidum
By entering direct negotiations with Abbas, Netanyahu will be taking a political risk. Isn't that enough for you? Abbas is too cowardly to take such a risk.
"By entering direct negotiations with Abbas, Netanyahu will be taking a political risk." No, not if his intention is to enter direct negotiations quickly so that he can quickly scupper them. Abbas wants some assurance that this is not Netanyahu's intention and, judging from Bibi's past behaviour, I'd have to say that Abbas is quite right to insist...
Enter the negotiations and SEE whether they are scuppered. Meanwhile, Abbas scuppers the talks by not engaging in them.
Abbas is just showing who is the Boss. He will ask Bibi on his way out to put the trashcan in the hallway and Bibi will do it without thinking ! The Palestinians already have a state ! ... only it is occupied by a Zionist freaks-show. We will have justice (with the help of Allah). If the security of ONLY Israel is at stake by direct negotiations > Abbas will not comply. Enough of this !! Salaam.
The format for reaching the "direct negotiations" stage was agreed to when Israel and the PA agreed to the Road Map. Netanyahu refuses - flat out refuses - to carry out his part of the Road Map but he insists - stridently - that Abbas has to enter into direct negotiations anyway. If Abbas does then he is agreeing with Bibi that the Road Map is trashed. Well, so sorry, but Abbas wants something in return for letting Bibi slip that noose, and he is right to so insist. He's not running a charity, SDHD....
Format and process are meaningless without a concrete substance. haggling over format and process is an effective strategy to block any progress. Both sides are guilty of of exploiting superficial subjects. In the meantime these tactics only serve the preservation of the Israeli coalition and the continued stewardship of Abu Mazin. we the people on both side of this divide my lull ourselves to think that we matter, but in the final analysis we are no more than little cogs in the wheel.
I think its a normal question how when borders are defined they can be secured .