Hillary Clinton and Bibi Netanyahu are shown all smiles today at the Sharm el Sheikh dog and pony show, in which Israel and the PA are attempting, with the intercession of various powers and allies like the U.S. Egypt, and Jordan, not to completely torpedo the chances of peace for the next five or ten years. Yes, you can tell from my tone that I’m extremely skeptical.
First, you have the settlement freeze issue. Bibi’s not going to extend it and Abbas claims he’ll walk out if he doesn’t. But even if they overcome this biggie looming in the next two weeks (the deadline is September 26th), they’ve got to get down to tachliss sometime. And man, that won’t be easy.
But the really egregious passage in today’s N.Y. Times report on the talks revealed just how clueless the American negotiators are:
Mrs. Clinton said she believed the two sides could find a creative solution to the impasse – steps that would allow the Palestinians to accept less than a full extension of the moratorium or could enable Mr. Netanyahu to sell an extension to his domestic constituency.
Among the options, American officials said, would be Palestinian recognition of Israel as the Jewish homeland..
Why, sure…the Palestinians will agree to this in a heartbeat. Something not even all Jews agree with by the way. And while we’re at it why don’t we demand that Israel recognize Palestine as a Muslim nation as well?
Yes, they’ll fudge things by using the term “Jewish homeland” rather than “Jewish nation,” assuming the Palestinians can agree to the vaguer term homeland. But really, I have a much more fair formulation: let the Palestinians and Israeli agree together that Israel is a homeland for its Jewish AND Arab citizens. First, it clearly IS. Second, you simply cannot demand of the PA that it recognize Israel as a Jewish homeland while asking that it ignore the fact that there are 1-million Israeli Arab citizens for whom this state is their homeland. The families of many of them predate the settlement of most Israeli Jews in this land. So what does that make them? Chopped-liver?
There is an air of delusion in these talks. Granted that George Mitchell and perhaps even Hillary have the best of intentions and perhaps even the skill to pull this off. But when you begin with premises like the one outlined above, it does make you wonder what they could be thinking. Further, when they can be seen grasping at straws like this one, it makes you realize just how far apart both sides are and how impossible it will likely be to bridge those differences.
As far as I’m concerned, the ethnic definition of Israel or Palestine is something that is besides the point. Why should recognizing Israel as Jewish even be part of the negotiations? Yes, perhaps you reassure Israeli Jews to an extent if you get Palestinians to concede on this point. But are the Americans even thinking about the unease with which this will be greeted by Israeli Palestinians AND those in the PA negotiating this deal? The fact that they are grasping at irrelevancies is not a good sign.
One thing that is a good sign is that Mitchell flies afterward to Syria in an effort to sound out the parties about advancing Israel-Syria peace talks. Given the saber-rattling on the northern border in the past few weeks, any such meetings can only be for the good. The key is whether Israel is serious about peace with Syria. Assad has already signalled his willingness to sue for peace as long as Israel returns the Golan. It is Israel that has dithered, commenced a few wars in the interim, etc. It’s up to Bibi and his far-right coalition. As I wrote above, I’m dubious that he either can or wants to pull this off. But who knows, if Obama pushes hard enough (unlikely I realize), a miracle might happen.
Reading your post i can’t help thinking that you actually – for your own agenda – want’s the talks to fail, and as we say in Hebrew “you will not hesitate dancing on blood” (Jewish or Palestinian)
i like many other before me invite you to make aliya, and be a real fighter for what you believe in. change from within. hiding in Seattle Washington you don’t have much effect on people you know.
I take that quotation to be a deeply offensive one & will not brook such statements in my comment threads. I would ban you immediately normally, but since you’ve just begun commenting here I put you on notice that the next personally offensive calumny you utter here you will be gone. The next violation of the rules of any kind & you will be gone.
And stop the narischkeit about aliya. Make peace & then Jews will make aliya. Some Jews don’t want to raise their children to be killers.
I find your entire comment to be deeply, deeply offensive, not to mention stupid. Your shelf life here will be very short if you continue in the same vein.
Richard i have a question for you.
you are saying you are a Jew, and i don’t doubt that for one second.
My question is what are the roots of the word Jew, what doe’s it represent, where does it comes from ?
as for your debate with the gentlemen above, in the history of Israel in the modern time, there were always those who chose to show moral support from afar, they helped whatever way they could.
It comes from Jacob’s son, Judah, who is considered the progenitor of King David and hence the Kingdom of Judea (not sure I have that last bit correct, but it’s something like that).
Make sense that it comes from the kingdom of Judah , but why are we known as Jews, i mean in the bible the word Jew is not mentioned and we were known as Israelite or Hebrews, so when did people started calling us Jews and why ? i know it’s a bit off topic, just something i find very interesting.
Based on what Richard calls the really egregious passage in the NYT–
“Mrs. Clinton said she believed the two sides could find a creative solution to the impasse – steps that would allow the Palestinians to accept less than a full extension of the moratorium or could enable Mr. Netanyahu to sell an extension to his domestic constituency.
Among the options, American officials said, would be Palestinian recognition of Israel as the Jewish homeland..”
I don’t think anything fair to the Palestinians is likely to come from talks mediated by an American team so clearly biased as this. I might be wrong. But it seems more likely that some stupid proposal most Palestinians will reject will be put forward as a “generous offer” and then Palestinians will be blamed for rejecting it.
And this notion that the talks have to be kept secret stinks. It shows that they are thinking in terms of a proposal that will have to be shoved down people’s throats, and again it seems more likely that the Palestinian side will get hit harder. (Though if there is any chance of some settlements being evacuated no doubt the fanatics on the Israeli side will scream about that.)
It’s really hard picturing a just and stable peace coming from this collection of clowns.
Richard, the biggest reason this is nothing more than a dog and pony show is the fact that most Palestinians, including those in Gaza and the diaspora, aren’t even represented in this bogus negotiations. Sham-al-Sheikh, indeed.
Netanyahu is negotiating with MossadMole AbuMazen. Read the old zionist directives about how to rule over palestinians: “take a palestinian sheikh haara, promote him to general/president and he’ll do whatever you order him to do”. there is nothing oalestinian about AbuMazen.
“Creative solutions” are an old Labor Zionist invention which means doing something but calling it the opposite in order to make it palatable. For example, a “creative solution” to the refugee problem is to say that “Israel recognizes the Palestinian ‘Right of Return'” but then drawing up the terms so that is never implemented. That way the Palestinians have “their pride assuaged” but Israelis don’t have to worry about a flood of refugees. Barak’s “creative solution” to his promise to Israelis not to give the Temple Mount to the Palestinians was to in fact, give it to the Palestinians but call it being under “Divine Sovereignity”, or “under sovereign control of a committee of people from Saudi Arabia and Morocco” which I believe was Olmert’s idea.
I don’t think either Israelis or Palestinians will buy this nonsense any more.
RE: “It’s up to Bibi and his far-right coalition.” – R.S.
MY COMMENT: Perhaps Bibi’s father should literally (rather than just figuratively) be in on the talks. Isn’t he the one who actually pulls Bibi’s strings?
I am wondering why isn’t Hamas right now willing to make a statement that they are now ready for peace, not a 10 year truce that Meshaal proposed. Why 10 years.
Not just talk the talk but walk the walk. Shutting down their rocket attacks for months is not enough. The fact that israeli government is rightist or that bibi is not willing to make peace is not excuse to Hamas to not to make moves towards “truce/peace” . Few Haniyehs and Meshaal statements haven’t convinced me yet that they truly desire peace with state of israel and are willing to put effort to resolve the conflict.
What a better way to force israel’s hand to peace than to embarass them by making positive moves right now towards peace if truly israeli government doesn’t want peace. By moves I mean other than talk.That would really shape their image in the international community. Somehow i don’t see that happening,
I’m kinda wonderin’ myself why Bibi isn’t willing to make a statement that he’s ready for peace too, not just a peace in Israel’s interests, but one in which he proclaims his readiness to share Jerusalem & return to ’67 borders. When you can get Bibi to do that I’m sure Hamas will reciprocate. So don’t just talk the talk, go to work & get Bibi to shut down the targeted killings, Gaza blockade. The fact that Hamas is Islamist isn’t an excuse not to make moves for peace. Bibi’s statements haven’t convinced me he truly desires peace & is willing to put his money where his mouth is.
What better way could there be than to force Hamas’ hand & embarrass them by making positive moves right now toward peace if Hamas truly doesn’t want peace. By moves, I mean other than talk, you understand. Somehow, I don’t see this happening.
What’s good for the goose, baby…
Hamas is generous in offering the 10 year hudna, since Israel violates almost all agreements it makes with the Palestinians. If you live among thieves, you don’t leave your door unlocked.
what i am tryin to say that if israeli government is making excuses what is hamas’s excuse, that israel is making excuses? What’s good for the goose is good for the gander? There isn’t only one actor (israel) in this drama.
Judging by Meshaals interview (charlie rose) he is sudgesting that israel pulls unilaterally and if the palestinians are satisfied there will be truce? “that would be the end”? no more territory demands(rose). then meshaal responds, that if israel withdraws to 1967 borders, it will be enough for Hamas, BUT given time after this withdrawl palestinian majority (on both sides?) will decide if this territory is sufficient. in other words no permanent agreement would follow with Hamas after israel relocates 500.000 people and withdraws across green line.
What nuttiness. In fact, possibly 80% of the settlers will be absorbed into Israel proper if there are land swaps. So you’re 500,000 goes down rather quickly to 100,000.
Okay, so 100,000 (based on your assumption).
The point still stands though.
Israel absorbed many times that many Soviet immigrants in the 1990s. No problem.
People keep speaking of Netanyahu as if he were some kind of exception to the rule when he is just a continuation of the rule that has governed Israeli “negotiations” throughout its existence.