DEBKAfile: Kerry obtains Israeli, Palestinian consent to negotiate interim accord, without borders issue

No one else that I have read mentions this interim deal. Quite a shocker. Abbas has always been against a provisional state with temporary borders. Perhaps we are not talking here about such a state. Furthermore, I can’t believe that Bibi yielded on ’67 lines. We will see how this turns out. Ted Belman

DEBKAfile Exclusive Report July 19, 2013, 11:45 PM

After substantially lowering his expectations, US Secretary of State John Kerry was able to save his mission to restart peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians with only moments to spare before his sixth round of shuttle diplomacy crashed. Friday night, July 19, Kerry announced in Amman that “initial talks would resume in Washington very soon.”

In this exclusive report, DEBKAfile discloses for the first time details of the formula for which Kerry obtained the consent of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and, after an unscheduled side trip Friday to Ramallah, of Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas as well.

According to the Kerry formula, the forthcoming negotiations would focus on attaining an interim peace accord – without determining final borders – for establishing a Palestinian state in broad areas of the West Bank from which Israeli would withdraw.

Those areas would be subject to trilateral US-Israeli-Palestinian consensus on security arrangements and require some Jewish settlements to be removed.
Initial negotiations will start next week in Washington behind closed doors. Justice Minister Tzipi Livni and the prime minister’s adviser Yakov Molcho will represent Israel and senior negotiator Saeb Erekat, the Palestinian side. A third US team will report to John Kerry.

It was also agreed, according to this exclusive DEBKAfile report, that the negotiating process would last no less than nine months up until March 2014, during which Israel agreed to an undeclared partial standstill on construction in Judea and Samaria outside the settlement blocs – except for building to accommodate natural growth.

The freeze would not apply to the West Bank settlement blocs or Jerusalem.
The Palestinian leader dropped his stipulation for a total construction freeze. He also promised not to carry out his threat to push anti-Israeli measures through UN and other international institutions during the talks.

The US Secretary also persuaded Abbas Friday to waive his ultimatum for peace talks to be based on 1967 borders. Instead, President Barack Obama will send him a letter affirming US recognition that the object of the negotiations is to establish a Palestinian state as the national home of the Palestinian people whose borders will be based on 1967 lines.

Obama will send another letter to Netanyahu affirming that the negotiations must lead to the recognition of the state of Israel as the national home of the Jewish people, whose future borders will be based on the 1967 lines while also accommodating Israel’s security needs and its realistic demographic circumstances.

The talks will proceed on two levels: The Israeli and Palestinian negotiating teams in Washington, who will defer to their principals, Binyamin Netanyahu, Mahmoud Abbas and John Kerry. Those three will only meet for direct talks when the teams have tangible results in the bag.
Before leaving Amman, the US Secretary said cautiously: “The agreement is still in the process of being formalized.”

July 26, 2013 | 9 Comments »

Leave a Reply

9 Comments / 9 Comments

  1. bernard ross Said:

    my comment 8 in moderation

    I have reposted this comment instead to comment 4 on Blame EU sanctions on Obama. it involves what I believe to be a very interesting article which reveals the whole big current picture behind what is going on in the ME today and how it all interconnects

    “There is a broad possible unspoken coalition”

  2. Bill Narvey Said:

    also accommodating Israel’s security needs

    Has anyone noticed that noo-one ever really describes or demands the government of Israel to be specific about secruity requirements? wWat are Israel’s security needs except for vague references and limited explanations? For me any Palis entity and security amounts to less security and not more.

    Speaking of demographics, Israels Arab citizens in the age range 0-10 make up 35% of that key demographic. Forward 15 years that will give them about 25-28%. Add 700,000 non Jews holding Israeli citizenship. Add Israeli leftists and Haredim, you have a near majority of a coalition of non Jews and anti Zionists.

    We have with Y&S a built in 5th column of anti Israel and anti zionists who can potentially gain control democratically of the reins of Government ending the Zionist Jewish State. Creating the conditions for 3rd Pali State in Y@S will only empower our built in 5th column. They may agitate and demand autonomy where they have overwhelming majorities like the Galilee and the Wadi Arwa triangle, Nazareth and of course East Jerusalem. Even the Negev has a slight majority of Jews.

    I don’t trust the Israeli government left or right, nor it’s Oslo oriented leftist yes-men security heads and commanders.


  3. PM would give up 86% of West Bank, says deputy FM

    Kerry and Netanyahu speak by phone; secretary said urging PM to produce proposal for Palestinian borders


    PM reportedly agreed to limit settlement building during talks

    Netanyahu to bring construction cap, along with referendum and prisoner release, to Cabinet on Sunday, but poll shows scant support among public

    I say BB will give up much more than 14%. He was willing to give up 100% of the Golan. He gave up Hebron and he embraced Arafat and supported Sharon disengagement of Gaza with settlements. He voted for them in the Knesset and the cabinet.

    Olmert was at least honest and said up front what he was willing to give away. BB lies and lies. That disarms much of his opposition till he hopes it’s too late to do anything about the results.

  4. Bill Narvey Said:

    What material difference is there between Abbas’ position that negotiations be based on the 1967 lines, which he dropped and
    Obama will send another letter to Netanyahu affirming that the negotiations must lead to the recognition of the state of Israel as the national home of the Jewish people, whose future borders will be based on the 1967 lines while also accommodating Israel’s security needs and its realistic demographic circumstances.
    It seems to be a distinction without a difference.

    I don’t see Israel agreeing to those terms even Netanyahu wanted to. In any case, I’m against giving up a single grain of Jewish land to the Arabs. I prefer no peace to a peace that’s not even going to last a few years at the most. Remember, the Arabs want to wipe out Israel and they remain committed to that goal. Peace is not attainable at all, period.

  5. What material difference is there between Abbas’ position that negotiations be based on the 1967 lines, which he dropped and

    Obama will send another letter to Netanyahu affirming that the negotiations must lead to the recognition of the state of Israel as the national home of the Jewish people, whose future borders will be based on the 1967 lines while also accommodating Israel’s security needs and its realistic demographic circumstances.

    It seems to be a distinction without a difference.

  6. An interim agreement formalizing the current status quo is the most that can be achieved.

    The Arabs will never accept the two states for two peoples formula and recognize Israel as the Jewish State.

    This interim solution referenced above is realistic and conditions are simply not ripe for a permanent end to the conflict between the Arabs and Israel.

    Peace is impossible and that reality is not going to be changed by new talks in the picture.

  7. dear Ted, I “repost my comment from 20 july on this same story:
    DEBKAfile: Kerry obtains Israeli, Palestinian consent to negotiate interim accord, without borders issue
    http://www.debka.com/article/23134/DEBKAfile-Kerry-obtains-Israeli-Palestinian-consent-to-negotiate-interim-accord-without-borders-issue

    “negotiations would focus on attaining an interim peace accord – without determining final borders – for establishing a Palestinian state in broad areas of the West Bank from which Israeli would withdraw.”

    I believe the interim period would be years and during that time the Jordan Pal confed will re arise in order to solve some issues within the context of the Israel Jordan treaty. A Jordan Pal confed would shift “unsolvable” issues to treaty to take the heat off concessions by the PA. Some “unsolvable” issues would be security,refugees,recognition of Jewish state,no formal gaza west bank link,less necessity for “viable” pal state(border shape, contiguity,), perhaps Israel if lucky will get E1.

    “Before leaving Amman,…”

    a continuing sign of Jordans significance.