Official: ‘Indyk is the last person who can preach to us about the peace process’; ‘Process was meant to be primarily bilateral’.
Reuters
Israel fired back on Friday at senior US official Martin Indyk, who blamed Jewish settlement construction in part for the breakdown of peacemaking with the Palestinians, saying he himself had done nothing to help the negotiations.
The blunt riposte signaled continued, deep tensions between Israel and Washington over the US-led talks, which collapsed last month amid bitter recriminations.
In his first public comments on the negotiations, US envoy Indyk said on Thursday that neither side had had the stomach to make the necessary compromises, and singled out settlement building on occupied territory as a particular obstacle.
But a senior Israeli official familiar with the talks accused Indyk of hypocrisy, saying he had known construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem would continue during the discussions.
“Indyk comes and blames others without speaking about his own responsibility for the current impasse,” the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, told Reuters.
“Martin Indyk is the last person who can preach to us or teach us anything about the peace process,” said the official. “He’s been prowling around here for years and fails at every one of his attempts and simply refuses to recognize that the problem is not with us.”
“(It is) difficult to point to any significant contribution that he (Indyk) had made to the process,” he added.
While faulting Israel’s expansion of settlements, Indyk also criticized the Palestinians for unilaterally signing 15 conventions meant to advance their demand for independence.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu suspended the talks on April 24 after Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas forged an unexpected unity pact with rival Islamist group Hamas.
Martin Indyk (Photo: AP)
Detailing Israeli actions that he deemed counterproductive, Indyk cited plans unveiled during the talks for some 8,000 Jewish homes on land the Palestinians want for their future state.
This, Indyk suggested, sapped diplomacy by helping convince Abbas that Netanyahu was not a serious negotiating partner.
Israel additionally announced tenders for the building of 4,800 homes on occupied territory, although Indyk said the Palestinians had indicated in the past that this land would be absorbed into Israel in any peace deal.
The Israeli official said Indyk had been informed of the construction plans, down to the number of homes.
“Furthermore, he knew that it was on this basis that Israel agreed to enter the talks,” the Israeli official said. “So it’s not clear why now that should be criticized.”
US Secretary of State John Kerry launched the negotiations on July 29 with the stated principal that Israelis and Palestinians might best make progress through direct meetings, facilitated by the Americans.
Kerry appointed Indyk as his personal envoy to the talks.
Direct Diplomacy
According to the senior Israeli official, Indyk had “demanded to be present at all of the meetings, despite the fact that the process was meant to be primarily bilateral”.
While some of the talks had indeed been between Israelis and Palestinians only, Indyk’s presence at other sessions had harmed progress, the official said without elaborating.
“In certain meetings, his absence would, indeed, have been advantageous,” the official said.
Other Israeli officials have previously criticized Kerry’s role in the talks, with Defence Minister Moshe Ya’alon accusing the top US diplomat of acting out of “misplaced obsession and messianic fervor”.
The Israeli official said the Netanyahu government had shown flexibility during the talks and that Indyk had failed to win similar flexibility from Abbas, who turned down ideas for a peace deal presented by the White House and refused to discuss Israel’s demand that Palestinians recognize it as a Jewish state.
Indyk said Abbas had “shut down” after the first six months of talks, while the United States negotiated first with Israel and then with the Palestinians on “bridging proposals” to try to bring them closer together.
However, Indyk suggested peacemaking may resume eventually, citing the start-and-stop example of former U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger’s ultimately successful 1975 effort to disengage Egyptian and Israeli forces in the Sinai.
“What was true then is also possibly true today,” Indyk told a conference hosted by the Washington Institute for Near East Policy think tank. “In the Middle East, it’s never over.”
How stupid this man Indyk is. A combination of arrogance and stupidity is a recipe for failure. Most likely, the continued intervention and presence in this process made failure more likely, not less. Indyk has been a longtime interloper in Israel-Arab relations, and as far as I can tell, has no positive accomplishments to his credit. I knew that nasty anonymous interview a few days ago must have been Indyk. Imagine, he insisted on being present at all meetings, despite the fact the negotiations were supposed to be bilateral. He, and the people he represents–Kerry, Obama–are nothing but trouble, and set progress back, not forward. He’s nothing but trouble and should resign, yet his arrogance and narcissism will only mean he continues to try intervening–hence his statement that the process is not dead–will only exacerbate the situation and lead to more blame directed at Israel. The recent picture of Indyk, by the way, shows a man who looks much more gray, much older, than the man I remember from earlier pictures. Unfortunately, he does not look like he is anywhere near old enough to decide to retire from his nonsensical intervention. Like the arrogant fool he is, he will only dig in his heels and work even harder as a meddler and bring more trouble into the process. It’s so typical of people on the left, if there is a problem, the leftist thinks he has to find a solution. Everything I see even in my home community, is the same with the liberals. The black population of Washington, DC continues to abuse the water system, and horribly pollutes the Anacostia River, throwing tons and tons of refuse into the river. So, the city council in D.C. imposes a tax on plastic bags provided by retail stores for purchases. Now, the neighboring suburban county of Montgomery County, Maryland, decides to jump on the bandwagon, saying they have to impose the tax too in order to preserve the water system. We residents in Montgomery County have no physical contact with the Anacostia River, and are certainly not responsible for its defilement. This is purely the result of the irresponsibility of residents of the District of Columbia. It sounds like a good idea, however, to the liberal County council in Montgomery, so they have to have a bag tax, too. Same with Obama. He is obsessed with the Israeli problem of the “Palestinians.” (What it really is, not a conflict between two peoples.) Israel ended up with more land in a just war of self-defense, and found itself having to deal with this surly population newly under its control. So, obsessed with always finding a solution, always doing something, Obama sends his fellow narcissist, John Kerry, into this situation, only to make it worse. Then he throws Indyk, another real piece of work, into the mess, a fellow who would never generate confidence in Israeli leaders, and think they can achieve something. Stupid, stupid and more stupid.
Abbas and BB knew this but were required to put on a show for public consumption. The main purpose of this drama is to showcase mediocre US political wannabes like Clinton and Kerry and for the midterm congressional elections soon due. Appearances, not facts, win votes for parties.
Also, I believe that the GCC recruitment of Sunni Jihadis in their proxy war against Iran needed to keep the pal issue quiet so that jihadis could be recruited against the shia proxies rather than Israel with whom, I have been saying for a long while, the GCC have been cooperating on Iran.
Indyk needed to be there to manage the “show” and that is why there was a 9 month period and a restriction on News releases. The US was to control news releases, and appearances, to suit its own agenda. The problem is that both Abbas and BB had their own interests which related to their political constituencies. First, Abbas let fly leaks, and gave speeches, to bolster his revolutionary image and in return Israeli pols made statements to bolster their own constituencies support: Lapid and Livni as peacemakers; BB, Bennet and Yaalon as hawks…etc.
An indication of what is really going on will be Israels reactions to steps of Abbas. My view is that if Israel allows Abbas to make steps without meaningful sanctions or major reactions such as annexation(which is an incredible and timely opportunity) that this will indicate an under the table agreement to allow events to unfold with the appearance of continued conflict and disagreement(which is what the constituencies need) I believe it is quite feasible that BB and Abbas might have agreed to maintain a kind of status quo with small factual steps over a long period of time in order to allow both streets to accept facts on the ground and alack of major progress. “Progress” may be more ethereal than actual.
Why do I believe this? :
1-I believe first that it is impossible for any pal leader, at this time, to arrive at an agreement which states unacceptable conclusions even if they are in the future. (e.g. no right of return to Israel proper, no recognition of a jewish state in the muslim world,no formal link to gaza,no real sovereignty but autonomy like exists now,etc.
2- the status quo is working for both sides at present but is untenable if made into an agreement.
3- In order to maintain a status quo with small steps the Pals must be given face saving concessions which make them appear to be hard won fought for victories. This allows them to avoid humiliation which is a major factor in their culture. When there is a lot of noise, chest thumping,threats, etc. we should be careful to observe actual facts as such behavior can be a cover for little actual progress. The greatest face saving devices are the faux pal state and the accession to faux international legitimacy. I expect their accession to international orgs and the appearance of grand, but token, reactions by BB if this scenario is correct.
4- One must imagine what the Pal leadership would be faced with in the event of a sudden agreement. For one, they would have to accept millions of Pals into the west bank. this is not only anathema to Israel but also an impossibility for the Pal leadership to handle over a short period and a major threat to their stability and leadership. They could not publicly refuse to accept the pals from other nations and therefore the status quo gives them an out for the time being.
there is a difference between hypocrisy and lies: Indyk and the Obama cabal are guilty of intentionally lying and most likely set out to do so at the beginning of the talks when they allowed both sides to add their disagreements to the public documents. What can be said of those who exploit an issue that they knew was already added to the agreement for talks? In the same manner that Obama attempts to play the anti semitic blood libel card with his disinformation Newsweek stooges article he dishonestly uses a similar crooked tactic here. Although they knew that Israel did not accept a settlement freeze they pretend, lie, deceive, cover up and obfuscate that FACT, intentionally, pre-conceived and with malice. It was always their plan to embarrass, cajole and pressure Israel with dirty, filthy, lying, deceitful, tricks which have become the hallmark of the pack of lying, deceitful creeps in the Obama admin.
The US continues to plague Israel and the world with a series of successive mediocre and/or inexperienced fools who behave with arrogance while displaying ignorance. Looking at Kerry, Indyk, Hillary, Rice one wonders how unfair it is that the world must suffer at the hands of American mediocrity every time there is an administration change in the US. Rice is a little girl whose appointment is an insult to any adult leader of a nation; Indyk is a typical know nothing talking head stooge; Clinton is an arrogant,provincial and corrupt opportunist; Kerry is a clownish buffoon famous for lying about swift boat. This ongoing parade of cartoon characters appears to be the 11th plague on the world. One thing binding them all together is that they are all willing to lie and libel Israel in order to fulfill their agenda. Obama and his handlers are upset that his remaining failures in waiting appear to be circling the same drain as all his other failures and scandals.
Here is the mover and shaker that demonstrates the new world paradigm of power and its erudite exertion:
LOL, looks like Daalder is in error.
Israel should carefully observe the precedents set by Putin which closely resemble opportunities and justification available to Israel to annex C(as a first step)
On the good side, as I predicted at the outset: the so called arab “spring”has proven to be a blessing to Israel as it has set Israels enemies to war and kill each other and they are now weaker than they were at the outset and are not currently focused on Israel.
In the same vein we should be positive at events in Europe. Assuming, as I do, that Europe(christianity, Esau) is an existential enemy of the Jewish people and Israel who continues their War against the Jews in a thinly veiled covert fashion by propagating BDS and funding Jew killing arab orgs,we can be grateful. The European enemy is being weakened and as a result we may hopefully expect a lessened focus and willingness to attack Israel. They are undergoing economic upheavals,high unemployment, internal sabotage from the same honor killing termites they foist on the Jews, and now they are under attack from Putin. This latest will force them to expend resources and attention closer to their doorstep in addition to their existing muslim threat.
@ Salomon Benzimra:
Yes. To paraphrase George Bernard Shaw:
It is truly amazing how American politicians are willfully ignorant. The failure to reach a deal is all the consequence of the quintessential fact that the Palestinians cannot abandon jihad because it is one of the basic tenets of their faith. Period.
A mini 5 + 1 question quiz for Secretary Kerry
http://www.madisdead.blogspot.co.il/2014/01/a-mini-5-1-question-quiz-for-secretary.html
With “diplomats” like Indyk and Kerry working for the talking nonentity, Obama, the “peace talks” could outlive Methuselah.
Hamas rejects peace with Israel. Martin Indyk should sit down with Ismail Haniyeh and try to moderate him. That won’t work. It takes chutzpah for him to berate Israel for something was never attainable in the first place.
Diplomats believe they can be constructive while being ambiguous and avoiding key aspects. This may be useful for a while. But after 20 years of diplomatic meanderings, that should be enough.
It is rather useless to address every statement of Indyk –with all its inaccuracies, biases and false equivalences. What is needed now, instead of reviving the “peace process”, is to finally launch a “Truth Process.”