White House set for Obama-Netanyahu-Abbas summit. Israel downbeat
This is too clever by far. Evidently 120,000 settlers would be outside the borders of Israel (this includes Maaleh Adumin and Ariel). The settlers in them would have the “the option of relocating across the lines in pre-1967 Israel or remaining on the West Bank under sovereign Palestinian rule.” These settlements would retain “sovereign symbols”. These symbols would enable a deal to be worked out for joint sovereignty of Jeruslem.
This report is very credible. Bibi talked about settlements outside Israel’s borders and creative solutions to Jerusalem. I don’t like it and believe it won’t get anywhere. Ted Belman
Negotiations to begin and last for 18 months
Here’s the deal. Netanyahu and Abbas to start negotiations without preconditions. Obama continues to back negotiations based on ’67 lines with swaps. No one issue will end talks. The appearance of engagement is what all parties want for their own reasons. No doubt there will be very little, if any, construction during this period. It is not yet a done deal. T. Belman
By Jonathan S. Tobin, Commentary
The New York Times is reporting today both the Israelis and the Palestinians have signaled they will agree to take part in a new round of peace negotiations. The purpose of these talks is reported to be an effort to avert a confrontation in the United Nations in September over the Palestinian bid for the world body to recognize their independence without making peace with Israel.
That Israel would agree to new talks is not a surprise. It was not the Israelis who walked away from the negotiations in the first place. That was the Palestinians’ choice, and it reflected not so much their impatience with the pace of the talks as their fear they might actually produce an agreement which they would then be forced to turn down. The leaders of the PA know their people will not accept a peace recognizing Israel’s legitimacy no matter where its borders are drawn. According to the Times, Israel has accepted the new talks even though they are accompanied by President Obama’s insistence the 1967 borders be the starting point for negotiations, a stance they have rightly rejected. However, as Prime Minister Netanyahu said in a speech yesterday, the end of the conflict would be brought about if PA leader Mahmoud Abbas were willing to say, “I will accept the Jewish state.”
But the idea any Israeli concessions are necessary to win a reprieve from a September showdown at the UN is a misperception of the diplomatic situation. The Palestinians fear the consequences of this confrontation, since they know the expectations this vote would raise among their people could not be realized: a U.S. veto means it is dead on arrival. If the Palestinians are signaling they may be willing to back down on September, it is because they know they have already lost. Were they more certain of their prospects, they would never consider turning back.
The notion these talks could ever lead to peace is unfounded. As the Palestinians told the Times, they will never give up on the right of return or recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Nor will they accede to measures guaranteeing Israeli security or accommodating Israel’s need for land swaps. All of which mean a peace accord is an impossible goal. Those pushing for these talks are also ignoring the fact the PA is about to become a Fatah-Hamas coalition. That will not only doom peace talks but also obligate the United States to cut off aid to the PA and cease negotiations.
All of this highlights the utter futility of the Obama administration’s current obsession with re-starting talks. While seemingly well-intentioned, for Israel to make any concessions in order to facilitate this latest exercise would be an egregious mistake.
We have to thank the Arabs for Israel’s dumb leaders not giving them Judea and Samaria. By making impossible demands on Israel they have made any “peace” agreement also impossible. The question is why is Netanyahu still engaged in this farce? I believe he is a closet left winger.
Bert is absolutely right. Enough of this nonsense of pursuing futile negotiations just to satisfy diplomats’ egos and appease the never ending grievances of the Arabs and their Palestinian hoax construct.
If after 20 years since the Madrid Conference we are nowhere near peace with the Arabs, something fundamental must be wrong in the pursuit of the so-called “peace process.” This is tantamount to NASA trying to land a Man in the Moon while applying the Flat Earth Theory, and wondering all along why all their launching attempts keep failing.
The “land for peace” principle is like the Flat Earth Theory: it is empirically flawed; it flies against reality; and it has left a trail of bloodshed behind. It is time to restore some truth and rename the peace process by inserting the missing word: “Arab Land for Peace“.
With Obama’s reputation, through out the Middle East, falling like the perveriable rock, Netanyahu may have the courage to annex all of J & S. Let’s pray for that.
Actually talks could be a good thing IF, and only IF, Israel greatly increased its demands on the Arabs and on Obama. Demands by Israel to recognize the Palestine Mandate of 1922 as THE legally binding international law would outrage Obama and the Arabs. It’s about time! Israel must also demand that Obama adhere to all prior America commitments to Israel and not ignore any of them. BUT this would create a great opportunity for Israel to show some backbone for a change while educating the public about Jewish rights. (I can dream can’t I?)