In response to Bennett’s recent remarks on the two state solution, Netanyahu said: “I will seek a demilitarized Palestinian state”
Dan Margalit’s writes about The high price of words
-
While Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has taken a position that has minimized the damage caused by statements against the two-state solution uttered by several government ministers and deputy ministers, the problem is becoming worse, both in the domestic and international arenas.
Netanyahu’s position is clear. First, there must be negotiations. If an understanding is reached with the Palestinians, Netanyahu will then conduct a democratic battle to get his coalition members and the Israeli public to support the two-state solution, which rightist ministers in Likud-Beytenu and Habayit Hayehudi currently oppose.
It is also convenient for Netanyahu to present his situation in this light, as otherwise he would have to tell the Americans, and later the Palestinians, that he lacks a mandate to make peace.
There are three lines of thought being espoused by coalition members who oppose the two-state solution. The least burdensome of these is the assessment that negotiations with the Palestinians won’t go anywhere in any case. In past talks with prime ministers more moderate than Netanyahu (namely, Ehud Barak and Ehud Olmert), Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas showed he was not seeking a peace agreement based on two states west of the Jordan River. Why would Abbas act any differently toward Netanyahu? This is the view expressed by representatives of the ministers and MKs who are part of the Knesset’s Land of Israel Lobby.
A more troublesome act is direct opposition to negotiations with the Palestinians. On Monday, it was Habayit Hayehudi leader Naftali Bennett’s turn to denigrate peace talks. Rather than saying that talks with the Palestinians would not succeed (a view that Netanyahu might think was reasonable), Bennett expressed his hope that Netanyahu’s efforts would fail.
It is appropriate for an opposition MK to make such a statement, but it is unacceptable for a coalition member to do so. Such an act exposes the government’s internal divides to the Israeli public and the international community. Parties such as Yesh Atid and Hatnuah must respond as Science and Technology Minister Yaakov Peri did on Monday when he criticized Bennett. The party vs. party and minister vs. minister battles are already underway.
The world, long accustomed to puzzling behavior within Israeli democracy, will be able to move on from Bennett’s words. But statements like the one made by Deputy Defense Minister Danny Danon — that the Israeli government and its leader do not actually want to reach a peace agreement with the Palestinians — cause real damage. This either falsely attributes views to Netanyahu that he does not hold or it reveals a diplomatic secret that undermines Israel’s credibility and its maneuvering ability with the Americans, Europeans and Arab states. Netanyahu is already suspected of not being interested in two states for two peoples, and Danon’s words harmfully reinforced that view.
Why are ministers and MKs talking in a way that is sawing apart Netanyahu’s parquet floors? Due to shortsightedness that also harms their desire to maintain the coalition.
Ultimately, they are cutting off the floor on which they stand. This is too heavy of a price to pay for a prominent, but passing, headline.
Unfortunately ISRAEL HAYOM didn’t see fit to publish an article on the high cost of participating in the two-state solution charade or why it is better to voice disagreement with the negotiations.
Margolit says Netanyahu wants the world to understand that he first has to make a deal and then sell it. To undermine his approach is to tell the US “that he lacks a mandate to make peace.” He certainly lacks a mandate to make peace on his minimalist terms and the sooner that this is made clear the better. And who enters negotiations on minimalist terms? Normally one sets out maximalist terms as Abbas is doing. But if Netanyahu has already promised Obama that he will accept such minimalist terms, then it is hard to now say otherwise. If he has made such a promise than we can’t fault Kerry in thinking he can produce a deal.
Netanyahu said in response to Bennett’s remarks,”I will seek a negotiated settlement where you would have a demilitarized Palestinian state that recognizes the Jewish state”. Netanyahu may be satisfied with this but it is a certainly that the majority of his coalition isn’t and a majority of Israelis aren’t wither if a settlement requires Israel to return to the ’67 lines plus swaps and to divide Jerusalem. Margolit argues its better to present a unified view to the world to maintain credibility. I disagree. It is better to announce to the world that Israel is divided on the issue so if they want to arrive at a deal, they better support a better deal for Israel that Netanyahu signals he wants to accept.
Furthermore if Netanyahu will be content with achieving his read lines, is it not better for those opposing him to start the battle now rather than to wait for a deal they hate, to be arrived at.
The world should know that Netanyahu is not a dictator. He is the head of a parliamentary democracy and as such is subject to the will of his coalition and his party. He is not a free agent to cut any deal he wants. He is accountable or should be. He must be remained of this and so must the peace mongers.
By the way Pres Clinton is in town and argues that Israel has no choice but to embrace a two-state solution because “No alternative to two-state solution ‘No matter how many settlers you put out there, the Palestinians are having more babies than the Israelis’”. But he is wrong on the demographics. Therefore Israel can say no to the TSS.
ArnoldHarris Said:
Put Stefi on a post,[as in a turtle on a post] and come down to “Bil and Roses” De’Henis,TX for the BIGGEST CHICHKEN FRIED STEAKS in the world. Stefi will keep.
@ ArnoldHarris:
CB and GWB whould ” one can never be nis-under-estimate enough”.
@ honeybee:
Honeybee,
I just happen to have a soft spot in my heart for Texas songwriters. It starts with none other than the immortal Buddy Holley. (I surely miss his music more than I can tell you about, ever since that night in Clear Lake, Iowa, when Buddy. the Big Bopper, and Richie Valens — three of the best of the late ’50s — flew with an unprepared pilot that snowy night in early 1959 from Clear Lake, Iowa, because their tour bus broke down. Truly, the night the music died.)
Years ago, Stefi and I would spend days at a time driving across the vast and beautiful state of Texas. And if Stefi didn’t keep me locked into the mostly vegetarian diet I have to suffer with, I surely could get friendly with a bowl of authentic Tex-Mex chili. Con carne, of course.
Guy Clark is an interesting song writer. A good old boy who can admit he’s gotten inspiration from the poetry of none other than Dylan Thomas. As for his philosophy, if I heard him right on the YouTube clip, I think it boils down to:
“Just do whatever it takes to get the job done.” I can relate to that.
Probably a lot of other folks around Wisconsin could relate to Guy Clark, his work, and his thoughts. But probably not here in the liberal snake-pit around Madison. Folks like that just sneer at Texas and its sons and daughters. But to hell with them.
Thanks for posting that YouTube item for us to look at and listen to.
—-
You know, I wish I could be proud of the USA as I was when I served this country for three years, back more than 60 years ago. But some of the people — too many of them — have turned into something I’d like to grind into the pavement with the heel of one of my old Made in USA Red Wing hiking boots. Otherwise, a specimen like this Obama never could have been elected to two terms as President of the United States.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
yamit82 Said:
The arab initiative starts in the wrong place because there is the starting premise that Israel has no claim to any land in YS. this alone makes negotiations ludicrous. a second issue, as large as the military security issue, is the issue of returning Pals even to a pal state, or autonomy in YS. whether Israel owns or does not own YS the thought of millions of pals returning to that area cannot even be considered. therefore, annexation or total control over immigration is absolutely necessary as a permanent MO. In this case annexation and transfer make the most sense. right now Israeli arabs are trying to get recognition and a commitment to a special minority status which enables them some autonomy and separate development in Israel. This is enough for me to decide that it would also be best to transfer the Israeli arabs. there appears to be no scenario which allows for a loyal arab population in the Jewish state. this does not mean that everyone must leave immediately however reality must always be a consideration superior to fantasy.
@ ArnoldHarris:
Check my post directly above yours, see if you don’t agree,especially living in WI.
Yamit, I checked out lemming behavior on Wikipedia. I think you are citing a canard, which, although widespread, is based on no scientific evidence. But you are correct in that liberal Jews seem to practice the same kind of self-destructiveness of which lemmings are incorrectly accused by numerous but apparently less than well-informed people.
Arnold Harris
Mount Horeb WI
@ yamit82:
http://youtu.be/1-QzLIjL1u4 CB’s favorite song and his philosopy on life
@ yamit82:
http://youtu.be/51uLHfoq90w
Hebrew lemmings, the strangest of the species known to all as Suicide Now.
Yes, The lemming is a small animal, about the size of a rat. The lemming is a strange animal with a very strange custom. The lemming, every few years, gathers together with a great many other lemmings, and they all march together – to the sea. The lemming and all the other lemmings march shoulder to shoulder and when they reach the sea they do a very strange thing: They jump in and drown. The lemming is a very strange animal and no one can understand it.
Why is Israel so afraid of the Arab Peace Initiative? TOI
It promises full diplomatic ties with the Muslim world, including Iran. It’s the ‘best idea ever,’ says an ex-Likud minister. So why does the government reject the Arab world’s ostensible path to peace?
SarahSue says:
Luckily no one even Bibi believes that the Pals will take him up an offer of a demilitarized state. If they were smart they would and then do what they want. But they can not even say the words Jewish State is acceptable to us.
Any PA state would become militarized and be a disaster for Israel.
Bibi got roped into saying a demilitarized state by Obama so as not have severing of relations with Obama who Israel needs. Too bad Romney did not become President. Israel could have annexed Area C without serious fallout internationally at least from the USA.
Bibi is managing the conflict. So he lets Ya’alon and others speak what he is thinking. Right or wrong, irritating to us nationalists but that is what he is doing.
Dan Margalit is an idiot as are all of Israel’s leftist journalistic elite. The Arabs do not want peace – its not Israeli intransigence or the settlements that stand in the way of the peace – the Arabs have no interest in making a deal with Israel. Blaming Israel for the absence of peace deflects attention away from the fact the Arabs’ minimum terms for a deal are not acceptable to most Jewish Israelis. They show no sign of a willingness to compromise. That is why the TSS is politically dead. No amount of Jewish restraint, self-abasement or goodwill will revive it in the future. Peace is impossible and declarations to that effect made by certain Israeli government ministers simply acknowledge this reality even if the Prime Minister is not yet prepared to accept it.