Recognition of 'Jewish State' is Necessary for Peace Talks

[shira]

In a speech before a joint session of Congress on May 24, 2011, Netanyahu explained the purpose and value of this position: “It is time for President Abbas to stand before his people and say: ‘I will accept a Jewish state.’ Those six words will change history. They will make clear to the Palestinians that this conflict must come to an end; that they are not building a state to continue the conflict with Israel, but to end it. They will convince the people of Israel that they have a true partner for peace.”

Meanwhile, Palestinian leaders have politely refused the offer, and continue to sidestep the question or simply flat-out deny Israel’s Jewish identity. In 2007, Mahmoud Abbas exhibited his linguistic agility on the topic, saying, “In Israel, there are Jews and others living there. This we are willing to recognize, nothing else.” Other times, Abbas has been more forthcoming with his opinion: “We're not talking about a Jewish state and we won't talk about one. For us, there is the state of Israel and we won't recognize Israel as a Jewish state."

Why bother? It is not entirely clear what Israel really has to gain by extracting a formal recognition of its Jewish character from the Palestinians—begrudging acceptance of this basic fact is hardly a cause for celebration. Beyond that, the long-term value of such acceptance is dubious: Will recognition of Israel’s Jewish character lead to additional security or the assurance of safety? Does an official PA statement carry any lasting value? At the end of the day, is it worth it to hold up negotiations over this?

Yes—emphatically. Palestinian acceptance of Israel as the Jewish State does not guarantee peace (by any means), but without it, negotiations are simply a waste of time. Recognizing the existence of the Jewish State is a vital step towards Palestinian recognition of the need for a Jewish State.

more...
http://www.thedailybeast.com/articles/2013/07/19/recognition-of-jewish-state-is-necessary-for-peace-talks.html

[TexasProgresive]

1. And vice versa. n/t

[aranthus]

2. Israel should not hold up talks for this.

Yes, Palestinian acceptance of the legitimacy of the Jewish state is the key to a peace agreement. But there are several reasons to go into talks without it. First, the Palestinians will never recognize Israel's legitimacy, so demanding it as a precondition for talks is like saying you don't want to talk. That is a bad move because Israel does need to reach an agreement with the Palestinians. Maybe it won't be a peace agreement, and that's okay. What Israel needs is an agreement that will better manage the conflict. Something that ends the onus of Occupation, and lets the Palestinians freely manage their own affairs. The "peace" will be kept for the same reasons that the peace is kept between Egypt and Israel, Jordan and Israel, and Syria and Israel; the ability of the Israeli military to obliterate everyone else in the middle east if they start a war. Yes, Israel deserves a real peace agreement, but that is not going to happen, and Israel should not throw away the chance for an agreement that is to its benefit in pursuit of the agreement that they truly deserve, but won't get.

Second, it gives the EU and other countries an excuse to ease up on Israel and open up a lucrative trade for Israeli gas. Third it will make Kerry happy, and that may make it easier for the US to support Israel on other issues such as Iran, arms proliferation and the like.

[shira]

3. But peace & an end to conflict is the objective to these talks

Since this is not just about management of the conflict, the Palestinians need to recognize a Jewish state of Israel.

As for Israel obliterating enemies who attack, that doesn't quite hold for the Palestinians who still attack Israel. While Jordan, Egypt, and Syria know better, the Palestinians don't. A few rifle shots and mortars onto Ben Gurion airport, and all hell breaks loose. Put Jordan in control of security & that may work, but I digress...

Besides, what countries out there will allow Israel to defend itself properly once it comes under attack from the new Palestine? Think the UN or media will back off? It's suicidal for the hundreds to thousands who would be affected. And if Israel is savaged by the world for defending itself, what help will they have for Iran? The EU would probably threaten to boycott Israel based on its "disproportionate attacks", etc...

[aranthus]

4. Where did you hear that?

Seriously, politicians say the darndest things. Some of them are even true. In the case of the middle east, not so much. Does Kerry really think that the Palestinians are going to sign a peace agreement that does not have Israel recognize right of return? He's not that stupid. And even if he is that stupid, the Israelis sure aren't. Will the Israelis sign an agreement that does recognize right of return? they aren't that stupid or suicidal. So what kind of a peace agreement could possibly come out of these talks? It's time to stop talking about peace, and start talking about what can really be accomplished. If these talks start that discussion, then they are worth it.