Jordan and Egypt accuse Israel of 'derailing' peace efforts

What are you mumbling about??

Don't bother to write until you answer the questions I had posed

1. the settlements were not the core, but have become so. Unless Israel commits itself to abandoning all settlements upon establishment of peace, the settlements clearly represent facts on the ground. 2. How can you look yourself in the mirror and claim settlements are anything but land grabs? Even though a zionist, you must maintain SOME standards.

i50 YEARS, That's the amount of time it will take to have peace in this region. Syop bluffing the people !

this conflict is only going to be resolve by military force.

"[T]he palestinians are unwilling to make any compromise." They have already compromised down to 22% of their original country, so what is an appropriate compromise? 0%? No control of their coastline? No control of their airspace? No control of their water? It would appear that the only appropriate Palestinian "compromise" would be total capitulation.

"On my planet, during the Clinton negotiations, the Palestinians were offered over 97% of the territories." Did you see the Time Magazine map of Palestinian Bantustans that were the reality of that offer? 97% was only on your planet.

"[T]he United Nations PARTITIONED Palestine into two States, Arabs refused theirs, preferred to attack Israel...Let`s assume for the moment that your neighbor says he wants you to concede half your lawn to him, how fast will you jump to do it??" Indeed! From your own mouth.

"A demand for stopping all construction of settlements as a precondition for talks is unacceptable to the International community, and he had better come to grips with that reality." A cessation of settlement construction is exactly what the international community wants. It is the Netanyahu regime and its supporters (and Hillary Clinton) who need to come to grips with reality.

We keep on hearing what Abbas "WANTS" What is he "OFFERING" in exchange?? So far it seems that it's gimee gimme, never a word of what he's willing to give It's like dealing with a small brat demanding more candy

Too true, it is not the USA`s job or business. The UN, the only legal arbiter of such matters, already decided the boundaries. They even drew a map back in 1947. These remain the legal boundaries." Yup, Boundaries which the Arabs promptly disregarded when they attacked the Jewish State in 1948, contrary to the provisions of the UN Partition "This was totally irresponsible advice to give to an acquisitive nation like Israel" Israel was perfectly willing to stay within here share of the Partioned Land, it was the Arabs that didn't want to

Let's review the facts, not your fantasy version There was a TWO STATE SOLUTION, "UN PARTITION PLAN", which the Arabs rejected when they attacked Israel in May 1948, they had a chance for the own state and tossed it away, attempting to steal the Jewish State The settlements didn't come into being until the 1967 war, which was two wars after the 1948 In order for Israel to protect itself from further Arab invasions, settlements were built where and when required Think of it as the forts in the Old American West, built to protect the peaceful inhabitants against attacks from the hostiles

"Everyone must make concessions" For one, Israel returned Gaza, rocket fire into Israel increased There was a two state solution (UN Partition), which the Arabs dumped when they attacked in May 1948 Can you, at this time, state any concession the Arabs have made? Forget the Saudi Peace Plan, that wasn't a concession that was an Ultimatum, which I've already explained to you

"Israel's intransigence" - talk about the pot calling the kettle black. This is another one of those sneaky little memes that the pals seem so adept at injecting into the media dialog somehow unnoticed by the general public, yet producing an overtly misleading spin on the situation that is blindly accepted by the media and the global population.

That was a real Israel-centric view of the world. "We are not the ones to say where other nations should draw lines between them..." Too true, it is not the USA's job or business. The UN, the only legal arbiter of such matters, already decided the boundaries. They even drew a map back in 1947. These remain the legal boundaries. "...that will assure each the greatest security." Wrong, borders cannot ensure security. There is anyway no natural border, like a mountain range or great river, between Israel and Palestine that could do so. One side's quest for security through more land simply means less security and land for the other side. "It is clear, however, that a return to the situation of June 4, 1967 will not bring peace." Wrong. Peace does not depend on borders either, it comes from agreements between neighbours, shared interests and mutual restraint. Wrong axiom = wrong conclusions. This was totally irresponsible advice to give to an acquisitive nation like Israel.

If Israel really wanted a 2-state solution, it would make no financial or political sense to go on building settlements over the Green Line that will just have to be vacated sooner rather than later. If what it really wants is all the land from the sea to the river, with the Pals concentrated in some isolated bantustans, then it will always for an excuse to go on building. The first permits a 2-state solution, the second doesn't. The issue is therefore a key litmus test of Israel's intentions and sincerity. (That's why the Road Map specified a total freeze on settlement building, including natural growth). Israel having ignored and reneged on that commitment, the settler population has increased already from 360,000 to nearly 500,00. Gives a pretty good hint of Israel's intentions and duplicity. Abbas should not budge one inch until this issue is firmly nailed down and settlement building finally - and verifiably - halted.

is that it's ALL based on the KNOWN fallacy of clinton's statement about israel's "unprecedented concessions" over settlement construction.

Instead of name calling and trying to blame Israel, Jordan and Egypt shoudl come up with THEIR idea of a peace plan. But I doubt if they will b/c the best plan would involve them taking responsibility for Gaza and the West Bank, or at least sharing the responsibility with Israel. No, they would rather sit on the sidelines and call people names.

Did the arabs made one step towards peace? O yes they just initiate the UN debate on Gaza.

Peace has nothing to do with setlments or land!!! it has to do with Arab view point that is not ready yet to accept Israel.

should mind their own business. They should stop meddling in Israel's internal affairs. And they should stop instigating the Islamist-Jihadist thugs in usurping Israel's liberated historic homeland of Judea and Samaria.

In 2009: - 5.4M Jews and 1.5M Palestinians (Moslems and Christians) in pre-67 Israel; that?s 20% Palestinians - 5.9M Jews and 5.4M Palestinians in all of historic Palestine; that?s 48% Palestinians In 2017: - 23% Palestinians in pre-67 Israel - 50% Palestinians in all of historic Palestine In 2063: - 31% Palestinians in pre-67 Israel - 60% Palestinians in all of historic Palestine In 2097: - 38% Palestinians in pre-67 Israel - 67% Palestinians in all of historic Palestine We are a solid majority in pre-67 Israel for generations to come. We begin to be a minority in all of historic Palestine by 2017. Maybe it is us who must be terrified that there are no peace talks and that there is no peace on the horizon. Peace NOW!!! (maybe)

negotiate over what? when there is a dispute, all parties stop their activities to negotiate. you want to negotiate while grabbing more of the pie. there will be nothing left at the end. tell us gina, assume the two parties complete negotiations in good faith: how in your view peace can be achieved? what will the outcome be?

They can't get beyond blood and religion. What a terrible combination. And why would we think that countries whose moral failings are enormous, who have serious problems, and have historically used Jews as scapegoats, can do anything but deliver harm.

"We are not the ones to say where other nations should draw lines between them that will assure each the greatest security. It is clear, however, that a return to the situation of June 4, 1967 will not bring peace."

". . . withdrawal should take place to secure and recognized boundaries, and these words were very carefully chosen: they have to be secure and they have to be recognized. . . It was not for us to lay down exactly where the border should be. I know the 1967 border very well. It is not a satisfactory border, it is where troops had to stop in 1948, just where they happened to be that night, that is not a permanent boundary . . ."

Those who think they are should read what the framers of res 242 say about it. "UN Security Council Resolution 242 calls on Israel to withdraw only from territories occupied in the course of the Six Day War - that is, not from 'all' the territories or even from 'the' territories. Ingeniously drafted resolutions calling for withdrawal from 'all' the territory were defeated in the Security Council and the General Assembly one after another. Speaker after speaker made it explicit that Israel was not to be forced back to the 'fragile and vulnerable' [1949/1967] Armistice Demarcation Lines."

soon we'll outnumber you. time's up.

negotiate over what? when there is a dispute, all parties stop their activities to negotiate. you want to negotiate while grabbing more of the pie. there will be nothing left at the end. tell us gina, assume the two parties complete negotiations in good faith: how in your view peace can be achieved? what will the outcome be?

We now know the real source of the recent flooding in Israel. It is the Crocodile Tears of Netanyahu for the peace process with Palestine; and Lieberman's for peace negotiations with Syria.

In 2009: - 5.4M Jews and 1.5M Palestinians (Moslems and Christians) in pre-67 Israel; that?s 20% Palestinians - 5.9M Jews and 5.4M Palestinians in all of historic Palestine; that?s 48% Palestinians In 2017: - 23% Palestinians in pre-67 Israel - 50% Palestinians in all of historic Palestine In 2063: - 31% Palestinians in pre-67 Israel - 60% Palestinians in all of historic Palestine In 2097: - 38% Palestinians in pre-67 Israel - 67% Palestinians in all of historic Palestine We are a solid majority in pre-67 Israel for generations to come. We begin to be a minority in all of historic Palestine by 2017. Maybe it is us who must be terrified that there are no peace talks and that there is no peace on the horizon. Peace NOW!!! (maybe)

"Jordan and Egypt should encourage Abbas to negotiate" - Gina Why? They begged Israel to negotiate and Israel ratcheted up settlement activity. Netanyahu said 'no peace, no way." The message was very clear. He met with Obama. He came back to Israel and declared total victory over Obama. He stated there would be no haalt of settlement expansion, that Obama had given in totally and would serve Israel's orders concerning Iran. We have seen Netanyahu increase settlement activity, demand that all previous negotiations be trashed and that all start over at the beginning . Obama is concentrating on Iran and supplicating on the peace process. Gina, you are not paying attention to reality. Netanyahu wanted to destroy any hope of peace and has. Even the ever hopeful Abbas understands it is over. Palestine not only has no partner for peace, it doesn't even have an honest broker in Obama.

is that it's ALL based on the KNOWN fallacy of clinton's statement about israel's "unprecedented concessions" over settlement construction.

for a Palestinian homeland.

'Jordan & Egypt,accuse Israel of derailing peace efforts' That's a LIE ! These Arabs think that everything must go their way.If not they start hooting,screaming,& shouting. See what they are doing to us. See ! Gome Help Us ! Help ! Help!

"PA hurts pal image" Not at all. They gain respect for showing that they are not going to the negotiating table with no better reason than having Obama and Clinton smile.

The settlements are a violation of Internatinal law. This is clearly stated in the 49th article of the Fourth Geneva Convention. UNSC resolution 465 specifically calls the Settlements "Invalid" and demands that Israel removes them. Israel is obligated to stop the settlements even in the so-called Road Map. Obama lost all credibility when he caved in on his original demand that Israel stop all the settlements. If Obama doesn't have the courage to stand up to Netanyahu than these attempts to get the peace process going are doomed to fail. Netanyhau has played Obama for a fool and that is exactly what occurred. These visits by Mitchell and Clinton are nothing but a waste of time.

The Egyptian elite is desperately struggling to maintain power and Israel/Jews is an easy card to play. In any case, it won't work, they'll soon be gone. The Jordanian elite too hopes to score points with their poopystinian populace by playing the Jew card.

"...this Administration is doing what all US Administrations do i.e. when Israel digs in its heels the Americans run away from THAT fight and decide its much easier to strong-arm the Palestinians instead." And this would be the SAME Johnboy who was assuring everyone only two days ago that the US could no longer be counted on to cover for Israel in the SC vis-a-vis the Goldstone report because of the problems this would cause it in terms of world opinion??? (Not to mention your earlier posts this year warning Israel how things would be much different with Obama.) Does this mean you're FINALLY catching on?

In 1973, on the advice of Henry Kissinger, Israel refused to come to a reasonable accommodation with Egypt despite Anwar Sadat's best efforts. As a result, Egypt came to the conclusion that nothing short of military action would redress the situation. The result was the devastating Yom Kippur War. Israel is now facing enemies who were willing to make peace, and friends who had made peace. All are turning away in utter frustration. All are recognizing that, with this Israeli regime, there is only one way to achieve a just resolution. Is it too late? It soon will be.

Israeli Palestinian negotiations will lead to nowhere. peace is dead

According to Bibi and according to current rate of construction and land grab;it is difficult to foresee what would be left to settle in negotiations. If you believe in negotiations for the sake of negotiations, then this would be a welcome proposition. I think the Americans will realize their mistake soon. They supported and demanded a total freeze. In essence they helped harden Abu Mazen's position and now they are back peddling. This is a good day for Bibi and a bad day for both the Palestinians and the Americans.

Just work closely with the United States. Don't do anything unilateral. That's the only way to retain the maximum amount of support. Keep Obama informed. Palestinians need to reign in their own extremists and extremist demands now.

it is clear that any weakness shown by the PA will alow HAMAS take charge. Both sides dont want Hamas incharge and that is why the PA (who is trying to have the perception that is it strong) is making ridiculous demands on Israel. Not to mention the upcomming elections in the territories... which the PA desperately needs to win to maintain the legitimacy of thier Regime.

The one and only reason PA demanded a settlement halt is because their expectations of Obama vis a vis Israel were ridiculously unrealistic. As usual they misread US desire for peace to mean "Palestinians now call the shots". Wrong again. I hope they see this as the best chance for peace in a long time and take it.

The way Abbas turned a blind eye towards unprecedented Israeli settlement expansion during 2001-2008 (ostensibly while the "peace process" was going on)...was criminal. It is about time Abbas stood up against the illegal settlements. He has been played like a fool by consecutive Israeli governments for far too long. This is not a "new demand", this is a demand that should have occurred LONG AGO.

... they would make all the same mistakes again and again without a sincere change to their inherent belligerence, spiritual and physical historical revisionism, and fascist-like military threats against the nascent, modern Israel. All of their failed, militant policies towards Israel's existence over the recent decades have resulted in the strategic depths Israel gained and now necessarily guards in the absence of viable peace treaties with those insincere parties still holding out for more concessions from Israel. So Abbas, suck it up as there's no going back in reality and the old adage, "It's better late than never", seriously advises you to make real peace now or forever hold your unreal peace.

History repeats itself once again, perhaps Mrs Clinton got a little piece of paper to wave when she gets back home, she may believe that this peace in our time,but like Neville Chambelain she will soon find out that there are some people you just can't trust.

Is everyone nuts? They have to be, because otherwise how can the same thing happen repeatedly? These have been the same damn final-status issues for over forty years, give or take a few settlement blocs. If anyone wanted this conflict over, it would have a while ago. A Palestinian state is a lofty, unrealistic dream in the face of such intransigence. Israel is the one conceding! Why should there be any preconditions for Israel to abdicate themselves unilaterally? If the Palestinians were the ones with clout, they could make demands. However, Abu Mazen is leverage and spine-less.

true they did complain, but it wasn't a pre-condition to talk. This is new, and as the palestinians are unwilling to make any compromise why should Israel discard one of its card for negotiations?

Yes we all remember the Oslo Agreement Stephen, when even during the negotiations the number of settlers on the West Bank doubled. You might need two to tango, but you also need two to make concessions too, especially when all of these concessions are being made on Palestinian land.

Yes we all remember the Oslo Agreement Stephen, when even during the negotiations the number of settlers on the West Bank doubled. You might need two to tango, but you also need two to make concessions too, especially when all of these concessions are being made on Palestinian land.

Welcome your description, I'll let you know mine later.

and the sacrificial lamb is , of course, the PALS.Who else , will accept 2B the door mat. Shame on this president too.I thought that he does have more guts than his predessessors, Alas.

Who are going to wait? Who are you representing us person who lives in USA? Your ar*b brethren will never get this

"Palestinians have nothing to gain from negotiations. So why should they?" On my planet, during the Clinton negotiations, the Palestinians were offered over 97% of the territories. Maybe they have a state of their own to gain.

"No, it shows that this Administration is doing what all US Administrations do i.e. when Israel digs in its heels the Americans run away from THAT fight and decide its much easier to strong-arm the Palestinians instead." Poor puddinhead. When the Palestinshowed flexibility, they achieved more. When they became intransigent, they have had their butts handed to them. Every time the Palestinians reject an offer, the next offer is for less. Are they better off acting in the manner you believe is justified?

"The Palestinian position is that if it is to negotiate with the occupying power, it asks the occupying power to acknowledge international law, which says settlements beyond the green line are illegal." The law is a funny thing in this regard. Jordan captured the West Bank and East Jerusalem in 1948 and kicked out every single Jew. Jordan attacked again 19 years later. Your opinion of international law is that it was illegal for Jews to reclaim and develop their properties. Sounds like a ridiculous law, doesn't it?

we sure did.

... this is clearly a non-starter from the Israeli side... ... freezing or vacating or planning a time-frame of re-location, a basic requirement... ... other options are chatter and polite procrastination... ... preservasion of the status quo while feigning advancement, the worst of all options...

Calling Israeli towns & villages in Judea and samaria "illegal" gets us nowhere. Everything must be up for negotiation. Setting pre conditions gets us nowhere. And if settlements are "illegal" what are Palestinian rockets fired into israel? It seems abass, in his refusal to negotiate with Israel, is seeking to appease Hamas. The settlements are just an excuse. If he was really going to talk to israel he would stop stating his refusal to recognize srael as a jewish state. Both sides need to stop grandstanding & get down to talks. Instead of trying to appease Hamas, leaders should seek to unseat them from gaza

the tragedy has been unfolding for over sixty years. palsetinian rejectionism is the source of this tragedy. hypernationalism and religious fanaticism among the arabs is a source of the problem. barak had offered the palestinians a state, and so had olmert. they were rebuffed. the truth is that the arab-muslim world does not want to accept the legitimacy of israel.

Perhaps it is very hard for some people to understand this, but the reason for calling for a complete halt to settlement construction is that "enough is enough". The Palestinians have been demanding this for years. Now when you have an Israeli Prime Minister who only recently and very reluctantly and under great pressure from the US, decided to recognize the establishment of a Palestinian state with very limited rights, is it any wonder that the Palestinians want a complete freeze? They have been complaining for years that with settlement activity, any future Palestinian state would be highly cantonized. If the "peace process" drags on for some more years, the Palestinians stand to lose even more of their territory with increased settlements. Who would want that? Blaming the Palestinians on this, is disingenuous to say the least. They are only fighting for about 23% compared to the original 45% of the land they were promised before 1948.

Mahmoud abbas' problem is Hamas. Specifically Hamas' rule over Gaza which puts paid to his hopes of a Palestinian state. Having tried confrontation, abbas is trying to appease Hamas in the hopes of achieving "Palestinian Unity" & ending the political seperation of the west Bank and gaza. To this end abbas' has taken on Hamas' suicidal positions. A refusal to recognize Israel as a jewish state & desperately seeking any excuse to avoid talks with Israel. Sad

Israel made a concession, gave back Gaza, as a thanks rocket fire into Israel increased If you'll make the effort to review fairly recent history, the United Nations PARTITIONED Palestine into two States, Arabs refused theirs, preferred to attack Israel in an attempt to steal the Jewish State It's really easy for you to want to make concession, you've living in Florida Let's assume for the moment that your neighbor says he wants you to concede half your lawn to him, how fast will you jump to do it??

It is a shame that Abbas placed himself in a humiliating position by misinterpreting Obama's speech as a signal that the US President had given him carte blanche to demand a complete stop to construction projects in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. His narrow vision is preventing a Palestinian State from being formed based on equitable concessions on both sides. Abbas seems to have a pension for misreading the cues. This only discredits him in the eyes of Palestinians. A demand for stopping all construction of settlements as a precondition for talks is unacceptable to the International community, and he had better come to grips with that reality.

because they know Hamas will never recognize the Jewish state of Israel.

harder!! arafat left barak and clinton at camp david and every day they are offered less and less. olmerde offered the moon but abbas wanted the stars!! keep it boys and youll find yourself negotiating in amman ere long !1

Palestinians than negotiating for a state. Arafat walked out on peace negotiations during Clinton's Presidency. Abbas refuses to even enter peace negotiations. Glad to hear the Palestinians in the West Bank are undergoing economic prosperity because they certainly will remain stateless for the next few years. ( not that a Palestinian nation was ever the top priority for Arab leadership)

The US has always kept the peace process paralyzed. Nothing new here.

Any deal will realistically involve Israel dismantling some settlements, but keeping the larger blocs. In return, Israel will give Palestinians equivalent land from inside the 1948 lines. In the meanwhile, Israel has a responsibilty to its citizens to provide them a normal life, which includes new schools, new police stations, etc. The reality here is that no one, not even the Palestinians, brought up the topic of natural growth until the Obama administration made a very public issue of it. Now it's very hard for Abbas to back down without looking weak. Looking back, this may be seen as an early blunder on par with JFK's early mistakes dealing with the Soviets.

Every one must make concessions, and do it again and again..it's a process. People to need to focus on the outcome..A Two State Peace Solution is right for all parties involved. Remember, there was the Oslo Peace that got reversed..How absurb?

Any eventual agreement between both sides would involve not freezing the settlements, but dismantling them. Otherwise you will clearly never get a Palestinian state. So if Israel is not even willing to freeze settlement activity for a limited time-span as a sign of good-will, this shows how likely it is to move on the hard issues (land, Jerusalem, refugees). Palestinians have nothing to gain from negotiations. So why should they? Especially at a time when Abbas is trying to win at least a little popular support ahead of elections. Staying away from negotiations is the only leverage the PA has left, while Israel has a whole arsenal of levers. So better use it.

Hillary now made it clear that settlements will continue. Everybody with half a brain knows that the US is the only one who can force Israel to reallign towards following at least parts of International law. The consequences of this will be that a two state sollution will become impossible. Now, by the WILL of the extremist Ultra Nationalists and the US betrayal, there can only be one state.

Palestinians don't want to live with Jews but we have 1 million living in Israel proper and I can live with that, so why can't you live with Jewish settlements in your midst. Israel did not seize your land, you never owned it, and Jordan and Egypt are not asking for it back. So get on with reality and make peace.

"Why didn`t the PA complain about settlements when Olmert was PM?" - Mark from Mars They did, so did the USA. You are totally clueless.

In case you were not informed settlements are illegal under International Law. NO country recognises the settlements. To me it is reasonable for the Palestinians to require the illegal settlement activity to stop before entering into negotiations. If Israel is serious about peace they should be willing to freeze settlement growth. The larger the settlements the more difficult it will be to reach an agreement. Not to mention the future displacement of the settlers. Their lives will be needlessly turned upside down.

JE: "If 'Israel is making 'unprecedented' concessions' It shows that U.S. efforts show that Israel is flexible ." No, it shows that this Administration is doing what all US Administrations do i.e. when Israel digs in its heels the Americans run away from THAT fight and decide its much easier to strong-arm the Palestinians instead. Because, of course, it's always easier to take the coward's way out i.e. to pick on the Pals rather than stand up to the Likudniks. Blaming the victim is a time-honoured part of politics, Joseph, and Clinton appears to have been tutored well.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/972210.html The Palestinian position is that if it is to negotiate with the occupying power, it asks the occupying power to acknowledge international law, which says settlements beyond the green line are illegal. One cannot negotiate with a producer a reduction in the price of butter when every time you meet the producer sets a higher price than the previous one on the butter.

It shows that U.S. efforts show that Israel is flexible . If PA scoffs at Israeli concessions , It shows that U.S. efforts show that PA is a rejectionist , is unflexible , doesn't compromise , is absolute , is not moderate. It shows that PA hinders U.S. efforts , PA hurts pal image . PA is the main obstacle in the way of any credible peace process . PA is to blame .

We do not want the "peace" that Israel is offering now! We will wait 600-800 more years and receive All the land that is ours. It is destined to happen and we will wait! The price that Israel will pay in 600-800 years will be far higher and far more timeless

It's clear that the PA is trying to avoid negotiations with Netanyahu. After all, Israel under Netanyahu is doing less settlement construction than under Rabin, Barak, Sharon, or Olmert. Yet the PA negotiated with all those PMs. Maybe the PA believes that Livni will be the next PM and the PA will get a better deal with her. Or maybe the PA believes that Netanyahu isn't serious about negotiations. But the issue of a total settlement freeze is a red herring.

Mrs. Clinton is already being bitterly denounced by Israelis as well as by Palestinians. That's serious....Obviously her double speak doesn't wash at all. But she is not important. President Obama is. He bamboozled a whole world, Hillary too, with his silver mouth and zero (or dubious) accomplishments. And this, in a crucial time in world's history: - the world soon filling up with nuclear weapons; - murderous conflicts festering all over; - the unprecedented financial depression that is almost sure to return (after having thrown out trillions that the US doesn't have); - the dollar on the way to becoming zero. What about the USA...?