Before the UN makes a decision for us

Both sides are understandably impatient and sick and tired of each other. The world is too. However, a "shrinking timetable" is helpful for the side that has something to win: Palestinians now believe, that given Netanyahu's factual (albeit not verbal) intransigence, they have something to win by threatening a game-changer added to a deadline. Recurring to the UN is the game-changer and the date is September 2011. While everybody is blaming the Israeli side, the Palestinian side is threatening with an "our-way-or-apocalypse". This is what Mr. Nabil Shaath declared today to the BBC (Hardtalk). And not only that, they are refusing to talk to Israel, because they sense they have a better side to talk to, namely the UN, which has boiled to the point of following the Palestinian narrative blindly and repeating everything it wishes the world to crow. Thus the sides and the world have, by means of this combination of Israeli intransigence and Palestinian opportunism, arrived to a "shrinking timetable". Shaath's Damocles sword should not hang from a hair over Israelis' and Palenstinians' heads with eight months for "apocalypse".

You are suggesting that the US should try to engage the Palestinians - once again - as an "Authority" when the rest of the world is beginning to talk with them as a "State" with a recognized border. The second problem with your reasoning is that you seem to assume that the US has no plan whereas in fact it has one. The US pulled its plan last month because of Israeli intransigence. It seems to me that what Israel needs most right now is an advance commitment by Israel to accept any new American initiative if and when it is taken. And the new American initiative must take into consideration that the world has now raised its stance to a new threshold

Why are all of you so gung-ho for a Palestinian State. How would that improve all your lives, and the world if this State (?) we to be formed ? Do you all think the World would change one iota for the better ?? The prospects would War would be the same, maybe worse. Would the Arabs give us a gift and lower the price of gas to $2 per gallon ?? Why do all of you have this Pavlovian urge for the 23rd Arab dictatorship ?? Makes zero sense.

A Palestinian State will be a source of instability for both the Palestinians and the Middle East plus the world. You can't plant a State. In fact many Arab states planted in the Middle East after the First World War and all of them by League of Nations which was no much different than todays United Nations. None of those Arab States Iraq, Lebanon, Syria, etc.. was really and real State that serve its own people and a source of stability for its own people or any other people in the entire world ?! The world must think again of any Palestinian State. Another duplicated catastrophe for the future ! Israel will survive but in a world that is living in chaos !

Since the US withdrew its last initiative, the ante has been raised considerably by the international community. Would the US now match what the world is offering the Palestinians, and then get kicked in the shin again by Israel? Or would it offer a diluted plan and put itself on a collision course with the international community, without even being sure that Netanyahu will accept the diluted plan? Israel's intransigence undermines in advance anything the US can do, and Obama would only risk giving the perception, ONCE AGAIN, that he is helpless with America's most dependent client. The only sane thing for him is to let Israel on its own until the world articulates its response, and and then step in as a facilitator. And I would not worry about Israel making unilateral annexations. These would not give her a stronger hold on the territories.

Since the US withdrew its last initiative, the ante has been raised considerably by the international community. Would the US now match what the world is offering the Palestinians, and then get kicked in the shin again by Israel? Or would it offer a diluted plan and put itself on a collision course with the international community, without even being sure that Netanyahu will accept the diluted plan? Israel's intransigence undermines in advance anything the US can do, and Obama would only risk giving the perception, ONCE AGAIN, that he is helpless with America's most dependent client. The only sane thing for him is to let Israel on its own until the world articulates its response, and and then step in as a facilitator. And I would not worry about Israel making unilateral annexations. These would not give her a stronger hold on the territories.

NEEDED: A FRICKEN ISRAELI PEACE PLAN FOR PEET'S SAKE..DAMN..REALITY CHECK!!!!

You've got to look beyond America's realtionship with Israel. America is on the road to Empire and it's bankrupt. As it's money is the world's sovereign backed by oil, it's getting away with flooding the world with counterfeit money. Israel is a tool that is helping it. If things change, AIPAC looses it's influence, the situation will change radically and fast. Go to WND.com. Bring up "Is this the end of America." look at the big picture, not what's happening around you.

First War, Terror, Lies in Agreements., Lawfare the Palestinians whether Hamas, Arafat, Abu Mazen all want all of Israel in the end. When Israelis do confront this directly they only hurt Israel. The Palestinians only differ in their tactics. It is unfortunate that many in the Israeli left think by acting scared of others opinions and appeasing the enemy Israel will be saved.

The USA is not competent to proffer any peace plan. It has proven it's total submission to the Israeli right and it's unwillingness to stand up for it's previous 'plan.' America has been pretending to try and broker peace between Israel and Palestine for decades and it is clear that it is incapable of doing so..

Israeli leadership either wants peace or it doesn't. Stop all this nonsense.

I am sorry that you are of the belief that Israel, the child of the UN, is incapable of responding to the present situation and needs the US to do it for them. "...partial annexation and military action" : is that really all the state of Israel can imagine ? I wish to hope otherwise.

Obama exhausted much political capital trying to persuade Israel to reconcile with the Palestinians. Abbas made extraordinary efforts with specific proposals. Olmert and Livni created a foundation for a two-state solution. Netanyahu and many USA Jews demonstrated disdain for Obama and his efforts, and then lobbied the USA Congress to interfere in the peace process. Peace, justice and reconciliation cannot be achieved unless greater political forces are applied. The Quartet and the UN can act in unison recognizing both the illegality of the settlements and the need for an independent Palestine.

There will never and I mean never be a Palestinian State.

Wrong!!! The compromises required for peace would be political suicide for BOTH Abbas and Netanyahu...and neither is bold enough to commit. The US can't fix this problem, nor should we have to...that responsibility rests squarely on the shoulders of Israel and the PA.

We don't need an American Plan, we need an Israeli one which offers proposals not just responses to others.

whose fault is it that it has come to this? In the world's eyes, including Jews in the Uk, purely the hardline non-flinching US-embarrasing arrogant Netanyahu government ..i despair at the task of the Obama government in having to bring a government including extremists literally dragging and screaming to acheive peace..it really doesnt seem to the outside world as if your government wants it..hence the departure of reasonable Labor ministers

The decision of the General Assembly will create nothing. It will be one more paper and another stupid decision. Israel security cannot be ignored in any peace plan. Pals try to avoid discussions of the mostly sophisticated problems.

Israel has been hijacked by settlers and rightists. The Left must put an end to this insanity that threatens the whole country.

There was NO Palestinian state with the 1967 boarder.

And let's face it, it almost seems sometimes as if that's what Israel is asking for...which is completely understandable. The political situation in Israel makes the idea of reaching a final agreement extremely fearful to its politicians. Even those who sincerely believe in it, and its importance for Israel's future and security, are deathly afraid of actually going through with it...despite a majority consensus of Israelis who are in agreement. The only way for it to happen, is with external pressure that is sufficient enough for them to claim no other alternative for the good of Israel. They have an inherent need of being able to say "I had no choice". And yes, Israel may initially annex its larger settlement blocks, but in the long run, it cannot withstand international censure, and the end result will inevitably be land exchanges much in line with what's planned anyway. But you're right. It's too Israel's benefit to see the handwriting on the wall and to come to terms with it before it reaches that point. Because the handwriting is in indelible ink, and it's not going to change, nor is international consensus going to swing back the other way; which means that prolonging and forestalling will only serve to make it more imperative. And it has nothing to do with the delegitimization of Israel, it has to do with the world finally waking up fully to the situation, and the true injustice and extent of Israel's occupation and settlement enterprise.

It is numbingly beyond belief that any pro-Israel voice could complain about the 1967 border suggestion, 22% of former Palestine and being a demilitarised, client state of a country that has for 60 years oppressed them. Sorry, only a 1947 border discussion can provide any sense of justice for the Palestinians. They need to be secure from a country - Israel - far into the future. Given the Israeli record so far there is no guaranteed security for them in any 1967 plan

then they will have a chance at making peace. the refrain that israel won't be secure with a palestinian state in its heartland is absurd. with a palestinian state, perhaps israel will face security threats. with the continued occupation, israel faces more than a security threat, it faces an absolutely certain annihilation of itself. the occupation is a boot on the neck of the palestinians (giving them motivation to want to attack israel) and a cancer destroying the jewish and democratic state. continuing the occupation is suicide; once it's ended the palestinians can do what they want. israel's military can protect it and no palestinian government would be suicidal enough to try and attack israel. now the question remains, how to get people to realize that judea and samaria are a rotten, decayed fairy tale given an unholy reanimation by childish fantasy and religious fanaticism? solve that problem and peace will be possible.

In theory, Reichman is correct. The US could bridge the gap between Israel and the Pals, but only IF it is prepared to put huge pressure on both sides. Since AIPAC prevents the US putting almost any pressure on Israel, it's a non-starter. AIPAC has overplayed its hand. By exposing its almost total control of US policy towards israel/Palestine so nakedly it has made the US irrelevant as a mediator there and ironically ultimately made itself irrelevant. The only way AIPAC could make itself relevant again is by slackening its grip, but, after so many decades of throttling US political criticism of Israel, it simply doesn't know how to do that.

It is unfortunate that I cannot guarantee an American peace plan that will work on the ground. We received absolute assurances from the Lebanese army, Hezbollah, and Syria that Hezbollah would not be supplied with weapons The UN has been unable to enforce its mission and today Hezbollah has many more and better missiles than they did at the end of hostilities. We extracted from Egypt promises that Israel would have free transit on the Suez Canal(and we would have forces stationed between the Israeli forces and the Egyptian forces to assure peace.) When Sadat demanded they be removed they were removed quickly. Our history of guarantees and be able to enforce these guarantees indicates that no matter what promises we receive we will be unable (and possibly unwilling )to enforce them on the ground .For Arabs, ‘back to the future’ means return to 1948, genocide of Jews, Israel’s elimination.

There is no need to involve US in peace negociations, No solution will be found out of Jordan-Palestine federation.

Would ISrael really take a US proposal? They already proposed Israel to stop settlement constructions. Result: Still more buildings are constructed in East Jlem. What peace needs is not a US proposal, but a peaceful Israeli government.

... if Netanyahu sincerely participates in a peace process. I will equally shocked if the PA attempts to trust him. I see no plausible way to avoid this so-called "unilateral" option. Nor do I see any practical way that such a resolution by the UN would change a thing on the ground. Therefore I will be very surprised if war is not going to be the ultimate destination for everyone involved. But then again, I'm an optimist ...

The Arabs seem to be pushing a move that I have been advocating since the peace negotiations got stuck: They are going to ask the UN Security Council to condemn Israel for construction in the Occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem. The US prevailed on the Arabs in the past not to do so in order not to undermine the peace process, but with the failure of US mediation, there is no reason to wait. The goal of the move is to gradually increase international (and US) pressure on Israel. Obama will not veto such condemnation since he condemns construction himself. Indeed, the US might vote Yes. This will be a message to Israel that she is losing protection from her only friend. A few months later, when Israel does not comply, there should be a move to ask for mild sanctions. Later still, a move to recognize Palestine in the 1967 borders. This will probably pass the GA. Sometime later, a request to the Security Council to admit Palestine as a member state. It is important to go gradually, so as to gradually condition the US and the world to punish Israel for its bad policies. I think that before we get to advanced stages of this conditioning process, the Israeli public will recognize the danger, bring down the Netanyahu government, and replace it with a peace-oriented coalition. The same happened when Shamir the extremist was replaced by Rabin.

The US is now run by a weak President, one who would not even apply enough pressure on Israel to get a trivial result like freezing construction in the West Bank for THREE miserable months. Obama has good intentions, but is not inclined to use pressure. To move ahead, the Palestinians can decide not to accept Obama's mediator any longer. They should announce it and say publicly they will only deal with a Quartet (European) mediator. The Europeans are not in the pocket of a pro-Israeli Lobby, unlike the US Congress, and are more even-handed. Of course, they exert less influence on Israel, but potentially, they are very influential because of trade and proximity. The problem so far was that when the US takes responsibility, the Europeans stay on the sidelines. The Palestinians should get them to be more heavily involved, and in fact can do that. A mediator cannot mediate if one side rejects him.