Israel Rejects Kerry Proposal For Renewing Talks With PA

[Purveyor]

Source: HAARETZ

A fundamental disagreement between Israel and the U.S. regarding the renewal of Israeli-Palestinian negotiations came to light during U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry's visit to Israel.

A senior Israeli official involved in the talks Kerry held in Jerusalem said that Israel opposes Kerry's proposal to resume negotiations on the basis of discussing border and security issues alone.

Kerry has approached the Israeli-Palestinian issue with much enthusiasm, and is pressuring both sides to implement confidence-building measures and agree on a draft outline for resumption of talks. However, after his second visit to the region this week, it seems that the Secretary of State did not correctly assess just how frozen the standstill over the peace process is, and how rigid both sides' positions are. This is what Kerry was referring to when he left Israel saying that he himself, and the two sides, have a lot of homework to do.

A senior Israeli official, who asked to remain anonymous due to the sensitivity of the subject, expressed considerable skepticism regarding Kerry's steps, and made cynical, slightly scornful comments regarding his attitude. "Kerry believes that he can bring about the solution, the treaty and the salvation," he said. "He thinks that the conflict is primarily over territory…and that is wrong."

Read more: http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/diplomania/israel-rejects-kerry-proposal-for-renewing-talks-with-pa.premium-1.514801

[L0oniX]

1. Kerry: Hey look at what I can do. n/t

[karynnj]

8. This flies in the face of Kerry's own comments

that the solution cannot be American, but must come from the parties involved. What interests me is that you are taking an anonymous source that is said to be close to the Netanyahu administration at face value -- ignoring that he has been a major roadblock and has been consistently working to "change the facts on the ground" to expand what Israel can claim.

Kerry has made it clear that it is not going to easy for THEM to find agreement. Would you prefer that he (and the US) simply ignore the issue - especially as even if they do, they will support Israel 100%. Think of how that hobbles any US effort to back anything in the Middle or Near East as we are seen as not caring about their interests.

Interesting that Kerry, who other than Mitchell, is the first diplomat to have even a moderately good connection to the Palestinians - who even at his hearings mentioned concern for the plight of the Palestinians - is being treated by you this way.

[TwilightGardener]

2. I give him credit for trying. He is working hard on it.

[Comrade Grumpy]

3. Our "closest ally" in the Middle East gives us the finger once again.

How much money do we give these jerks, and couldn't we find something better to do with it?

[Fuddnik]

4. Impound their funding until the wall comes down.

And a real live peace agreement is signed.

[starroute]

5. Since this is premium content that you can't see without a subscription...

Perhaps the original poster could tell us what the Israeli official believes the conflict is about if not about territory? It would help a lot in assessing the rest of the story.

[Purveyor]

6. Here is a bit more... (btw, you can register for free at Haaretz and view 10 articles a month)

For its part, Israel demands that if negotiations are to be resumed they will need to address, in parallel, all core issues of the final settlement – including the issue of recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, and a solution to the refugee problem. "If the discussion commences with talks about borders and security, Israel will only give, and will get almost nothing in return," the senior official said. "When we get to the issues where the Palestinians will need to give something up - like the right of return - we won’t have any bargaining chips left."

In addition, Israel also opposes making significant gestures towards the Palestinians before the resumption of negotiations. Off the table are any moves such as releasing prisoners, transferring weapons to the PA's security services, and the promotion of economic projects that would require even the smallest transfer of land to Palestinian civic or security control.

[karynnj]

10. This shows either naivity or disenguousness of the official - the Arab proposal had at its heart the

Last edited Thu Apr 11, 2013, 10:11 PM - Edit history (1)

recognition of Israel. As to Israel only "giving", that is true ONLY if you consider that they OWN all the contested land. By international law, they don't. This suggests that the official leaking is from the right of the Netanyahu coalition which includes some very far right elements who believe that Greater Israel (including Judea and Samaria) is their right.

Right of return is a complex issue. Part of the problem is that any Jew can move to Israel and have the right to return - even if they have no idea when the last person in their ancestry was in Israel - or even Orthodox (and many Conservative and Reform) converts. However Palestinians, who left their land in 1948 taking their house keys, can't.

I wonder if this is not an attempt from elements within the Netanyahu government to push Netanyahu further away from any possible negotiations by stating as given terms that preclude doing anything.

[former9thward]

12. The Palestinians have had 65 years to recognize Israel.

They have refused to do it. And as long as they teach their children that Jews are mongrels who should be drowned in the sea they never will.

[karynnj]

13. Neither side can claim that they have been saints in regards to their treatment

of the other.

The point I made is that the officers reputedly said that it did not address recognition and that was the key of the Jordanian proposal in 2002 that is reportedly the basis of what Kerry is trying to do.

The fact is that if you want a Jewish, democratic state, you have to want a two state proposal to work. It may already be too late for that and if it does not happen you can have one of two things - one Democratic state that is NOT a Jewish state or a Jewish state that does not give rights to large percent of people living in lands that they control. (As a Jew, if those are the only choices, I with no hesitation think the first - where everyone has equal rights is by far the better.)

Here is a great article that looks at Obama's and Kerry's teamwork - and it notes that there have QUIETLY been gains due to their efforts. (Most noticeably Turkey's leader did NOT go to Gaza and Netanyahu agreed to some actions in the West Bank that his right flank is upset about ) They link to the OP's article. If anything, the leak is coming due to the far right wanting to stop any peace negotiations.

From the link:

The gestures he tries to coax from local leaders are meant to add to that upbeat mood, and show that America can get things done. Erdoğan's Gaza visit would have emboldened the Hamas hardliners in power there, weakened Abbas, and undermined the Israeli-Turkish reconciliation that Obama has imposed. Erdoğan agreed to stay home.

Turkish press reports, meanwhile, say that Kerry has asked Ankara to intercede with Khaled Meshaal, the relatively moderate Hamas leader who was re-elected last week under pressure from Turkey, Egypt, and Qatar. (The stress here is relatively moderate.) If the Turkish reports are true, Kerry's gambit is to inch Meshaal toward renouncing violence, recognizing Israel, and meeting Western conditions for a Palestinian unity government. That, in return, would undercut the Israeli argument that it's pointless to negotiate when the Palestinians are divided.

Departing Israel, Kerry announced that he'd received Netanyahu's approval for Palestinian economic development in Area C—the 62 percent of the West Bank under full Israeli control. Area C contains and connects Israel's settlements. The religious right party in Netanyahu's coalition, Jewish Home, calls for annexing Area C. Palestinian businessmen and officials argue that without its land reserves, developing Palestinian industry is impossible. Since Netanyahu has claimed he wants to improve the Palestinian economy, it's hard for him to reject the plan. Since it means conceding some control in Area C, it pulls him in a direction that he doesn't like and that threatens his coalition. (Small wonder that as soon as Kerry left, an unnamed Israeli official—speaking for Netanyahu or perhaps trying to embarrass him—dismissed this and other Kerry proposals.)

http://prospect.org/article/john-kerrys-middle-east-mystery-tour

[Douglas Carpenter]

15. surely you must have heard of the Oslo Accord of 1993 in which they did do that? In fact in 1988

the PLO formally announced that they wanted to make peace with Israel and find the two-state solution.

I'm sure you must also be aware of the Arab Plan which was further endorsed in by the PLO in 1996 and 2002 and reaffirmed many times.



Official translation of the full text of a Saudi-inspired peace plan adopted by the Arab summit in Beirut, 2002.



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------

The Arab Peace Initiative

The Council of Arab States at the Summit Level at its 14th Ordinary Session,


Reaffirming the resolution taken in June 1996 at the Cairo Extra-Ordinary Arab Summit that a just and comprehensive peace in the Middle East is the strategic option of the Arab countries, to be achieved in accordance with international legality, and which would require a comparable commitment on the part of the Israeli government,

Having listened to the statement made by his royal highness Prince Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz, crown prince of the Kingdom of Saudi Arabia, in which his highness presented his initiative calling for full Israeli withdrawal from all the Arab territories occupied since June 1967, in implementation of Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338, reaffirmed by the Madrid Conference of 1991 and the land-for-peace principle, and Israel's acceptance of an independent Palestinian state with East Jerusalem as its capital, in return for the establishment of normal relations in the context of a comprehensive peace with Israel,

Emanating from the conviction of the Arab countries that a military solution to the conflict will not achieve peace or provide security for the parties, the council:

1. Requests Israel to reconsider its policies and declare that a just peace is its strategic option as well.

2. Further calls upon Israel to affirm:


I- Full Israeli withdrawal from all the territories occupied since 1967, including the Syrian Golan Heights, to the June 4, 1967 lines as well as the remaining occupied Lebanese territories in the south of Lebanon.

II- Achievement of a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem to be agreed upon in accordance with U.N. General Assembly Resolution 194.

III- The acceptance of the establishment of a sovereign independent Palestinian state on the Palestinian territories occupied since June 4, 1967 in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, with East Jerusalem as its capital.

3. Consequently, the Arab countries affirm the following:


I- Consider the Arab-Israeli conflict ended, and enter into a peace agreement with Israel, and provide security for all the states of the region.

II- Establish normal relations with Israel in the context of this comprehensive peace.

4. Assures the rejection of all forms of Palestinian patriation which conflict with the special circumstances of the Arab host countries.

5. Calls upon the government of Israel and all Israelis to accept this initiative in order to safeguard the prospects for peace and stop the further shedding of blood, enabling the Arab countries and Israel to live in peace and good neighbourliness and provide future generations with security, stability and prosperity.

6. Invites the international community and all countries and organisations to support this initiative.

7. Requests the chairman of the summit to form a special committee composed of some of its concerned member states and the secretary general of the League of Arab States to pursue the necessary contacts to gain support for this initiative at all levels, particularly from the United Nations, the Security Council, the United States of America, the Russian Federation, the Muslim states and the European Union.

http://www.al-bab.com/arab/docs/league/peace02.htm

[blm]

7. Oh yeah, because 'senior Israeli official' has been so successful doing it HIS way.

I'm skeptical about the purpose of the article. Israeli officials under Netanyahu have become so accustomed to past Secretaries of State sitting there nodding their heads in agreement that they forgot how to listen to a Sec of State committed to being proactive and making a difference.

[byeya]

9. Byeya rejects any additional funding to Israel.

I wish.

[quadrature]

11. PA's demands have been the same for decades

seems like the 'negotiations'
could be conducted by email.

[geek tragedy]

14. The US has no constructive role to play.

We're Israel's agent, not a mediator.

[Adsos Letter]

16. When I first read the headline

I thought SoS Kerry was involved in an attempt to broker talks between Israel and Pennsylvania.

I was at something of a loss as to what their negotiations might involve...