Israel halts peace talks with Palestinians

[DonViejo]

Source: Washington Post

In response to a new unity agreement between rival Palestinian factions, Israel's Security Cabinet unanimously decides to cut off negotiations and apparently end a nine-month peace initiative by U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry

Read more: http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/israeli-fm-lashes-out-at-palestinian-unity-deal/2014/04/24/3bb30be4-cb9d-11e3-b81a-6fff56bc591e_story.html

[Ash_F]

1. Divide and conquer, as they say. /nt

[geek tragedy]

2. With Bibi doing this and siding with Putin in Ukraine, time

to stop offering them diplomatic cover at the UN.

They have never been serious about a negotiated resolution.

[dipsydoodle]

3. I thought he was staying out of Ukraine's self made mess

as opposed to supporting Putin.

[geek tragedy]

4. silence is complicity, especially when dealing with a major priority

of Israel's only friend on the planet. And spare me the "self-made mess" given that Russian special ops guys in masks are occupying towns in Ukraine.

The reality is that Bibi and Putin are using the same playbook, just using different timetables, so of course he can't criticize invasion/occupation/annexation.

[dipsydoodle]

5. "Russian special ops guys in masks"

are an event subsequent to events in Kiev starting last November..........hence "self made." Its known as cause and effect.

[BillZBubb]

6. Netanyahu has done everything possible to scuttle the talks.

Now he has his pretext to end them.

[Xolodno]

7. He wants to go down in history as...

...the "Jewish Leader" who fought against the "imposition of a Palestine State on historical Jewish Land"....not as a Peace maker. Can't deal with a guy like that.

[karynnj]

8. So he may go down as the Jewish leader who threw away the last chance of a Jewish democracy

In the recent book by Ari Shavit, an Israeli journalist suggested that there were just 4 possible outcomes:

1) a two state solution - which he argued most Israelis still wanted (and his recent Haaretz articles still make this case)

2) ethnic cleansing by kicking the Palestinians out of the West Bank

3) An apartheid state encompassing the whole area where non Jews don't have the rights of Jews

4) A democracy where everyone has rights.

Obviously 4 is the only acceptable (or tolerable) outcome if 1 is impossible. It is impossible to see Netanyahu agreeing to that. Netanyahu failed to take a bold step kicking out the right wing (and yes he has a wing far to the right of even him) and replacing it with a center left party at a point before all this happened.

On the other hand, the Palestinian move insures they will be the side blamed in the US. In reality, both sides deserve blame.

[JDPriestly]

9. The change in the Palestinian factor changes the equation in the talks.

So it does not surprise me that Netanyahu does not want to negotiate in a situation in which an unknown entity has suddenly appeared on the scene.

Here are the questions that need to be asked.

How long will the rapprochement among Palestinians last? Is it permanent or merely temporary? Is it a tactic to throw the talks of balance, introduce new issues and prolong the talks or is it an effort on the part of the Palestinians to make it possible to reach a more conclusive peace? That is not yet clear.

What entity now officially represents the Palestinians in the talks? Does that entity, do those individuals have the firm backing of the Palestinian people? Would an agreement entered into with the current negotiating parties have to be reviewed or even renegotiated in the future?

Does the new configuration on the Palestinian side make peace more or less likely? Does it mean that an agreement involving the negotiating partners up to this point in the Kerry negotiations would more likely be enforced or more likely not be enforced by the new Palestinian configuration?

Will the new configuration among Palestinians result in a power struggle on their side? Will it mean that the Palestinians are preparing to attack Israel?

Those are just a few of the questions that the Palestinian reconfiguration raises.

Netanyahu's shelving of the talks for the moment is probably a good idea for all concerned. The Palestinians are regrouping. Could be a good omen for peace. Could be a bad omen for peace. It's too early to tell

[azurnoir]

10. What waPo conviently leaves out is that part of this unity deal is elections

elections that have been long held up due to the division between he West Bank and Gaza, lack of elections have been the excuse for some even here on to dismiss Abbas as a dictator who is an illegitimate leader and should not be allowed any legitimacy. There elections could also very well see Hamas voted out of power-perhaps this is really what is feared

Now enter the US house who sees a chance to score some points

Rep. Ileana Ros-Lehtinen, R-Fla., the author of the Palestinian Anti-Terrorism Act, called for an immediate suspension of US aid to the Palestinian Authority (PA). The 2006 law, passed after Hamas won that year's legislative elections, prohibits support for a "Hamas-controlled Palestinian Authority."

"The Administration must halt aid to the Palestinian Authority and condition any future assistance as leverage to force Abu Mazen [Mahmoud Abbas] to abandon this reconciliation with Hamas and to implement real reforms within the PA," Ros-Lehtinen, who chairs the House Foreign Affairs panel on the Middle East, said in a statement. "U.S. law is clear on the prohibition of U.S. assistance to a unity Palestinian government that includes Hamas, a designated Foreign Terrorist Organization, and President [Barack] Obama must not allow one cent of American taxpayer money to help fund this terrorist group."

Her Democratic counterpart on the subcommittee, Ted Deutch of Florida, issued a similar warning.

"President Abbas now stands at a pivotal crossroad — does he want peace with Israel or reconciliation with Hamas?" Deutch said. "Be certain that the Palestinian Authority will face significant consequences if a unity government is formed that includes terrorist members of Hamas."

Read more: http://www.al-monitor.com/pulse/originals/2014/04/suspend-aid-reconciliation-hamas-fatah-congress.html#ixzz2zq3nUN44

However it could also be asked why the apparent 'pricetag' for 'talks' is Abbas abandoning the people of Gaza

[applegrove]

11. NO!

[JDPriestly]

12. The change in the Palestinian factor changes the equation in the talks.

So it does not surprise me that Netanyahu does not want to negotiate in a situation in which an unknown entity has suddenly appeared on the scene.

Here are the questions that need to be asked.

How long will the rapprochement among Palestinians last? Is it permanent or merely temporary? Is it a tactic to throw the talks of balance, introduce new issues and prolong the talks or is it an effort on the part of the Palestinians to make it possible to reach a more conclusive peace? That is not yet clear.

What entity now officially represents the Palestinians in the talks? Does that entity, do those individuals have the firm backing of the Palestinian people? Would an agreement entered into with the current negotiating parties have to be reviewed or even renegotiated in the future?

Does the new configuration on the Palestinian side make peace more or less likely? Does it mean that an agreement involving the negotiating partners up to this point in the Kerry negotiations would more likely be enforced or more likely not be enforced by the new Palestinian configuration?

Will the new configuration among Palestinians result in a power struggle on their side? Will it mean that the Palestinians are preparing to attack Israel?

Those are just a few of the questions that the Palestinian reconfiguration raises.

Netanyahu's shelving of the talks for the moment is probably a good idea for all concerned. The Palestinians are regrouping. Could be a good omen for peace. Could be a bad omen for peace. It's too early to tell