Olmert, Abbas discuss broad peace issues

[oberliner]

JERUSALEM - The Israeli and Palestinian leaders discussed the broad outlines of Palestinian statehood for the first time in six years in a Sunday meeting that both sides called a small step toward breaking the paralysis in peacemaking.

In the first in a series of biweekly talks, Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas spent most of their time discussing day-to-day issues such as travel and trade restrictions.

But it was also the first time since the collapse of peace talks in 2001 that Israeli and Palestinian leaders raised broader issues.

"It was a good beginning," Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said of the two-hour meeting.

http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070415/ap_on_re_mi_ea/israel_palestinians;_ylt=Aojhhzo1dvrU9KEC5x86WTes0NUE

[Jim Sagle]

1. A small but hopeful beginning. I know all avid followers of this issue will join in cheering on

this hopeful sign.

[Lurking Dem]

2. I'll join in the cheering.

I hope something grows from these seeds.

[bemildred]

3. PM backs U.S. plan to arm and train Abbas loyalists

Israel supports the implementation of the Dayton plan for the training and arming of the Palestinian Presidential Guard, loyal to Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas, diplomatic sources said yesterday, following a meeting between Abbas and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. However, Palestinian sources described the meeting as fruitless.

At the meeting, the Palestinian delegation relayed the details of the plan the Palestinian Authority had devised with the assistance of Lieutenant-General Keith Dayton, the U.S. security coordinator to the PA.

The sources said Dayton had procured a $59-million budget for two main objectives. The first of these is reinforcement of the Presidential Guard with additional weapons, ammunition, equipment, training and funds. The second is to secure the Palestinian side of the Karni Crossing, which is the lifeline of the economy in the Gaza Strip.

Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh, the government's most senior contact to Dayton, has discussed the plan with the American coordinator in recent weeks. Egypt and Jordan have agreed to train the 1,500 soldiers of the Presidential Guard, most of whom are to be deployed in the Gaza Strip. Arab countries from the Persian Gulf have agreed to provide additional funding for the plan.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/848747.html

[LeftishBrit]

4. Fingers crossed - I hope that leads to something constructive!

It's at least good that they are talking.

[Violet_Crumble]

5. I doubt it'll lead to anything constructive...

Abbas has little to no power, and Olmert is pretty unpopular in Israel, so this is two lame ducks talking but neither having the power to implement it. That doesn't mean I think the talking isn't good - any talks of a positive nature are good, especially at a time when things seem every bit as bleak as they were during the Sharon/Arafat days. Hopefully the momentum started by talks like this will pick up pace once things improve...

On a similar note, I just watched an interview with Olmert on a current affairs show here, and he said some things that surprised me, as I'd had the impression he'd taken a more hardline stance on things than he did when interviewed. I'll bold the bits of the transcript that impressed me...

Interview with Ehud Olmert
Broadcast: 17/04/2007

Reporter: David Hardaker

Ehud Olmert, Prime Minister of Israel

Transcript

HARDAKER: Ehud Olmert, welcome to Foreign Correspondent.

OLMERT: I’m delighted to be here.

HARDAKER: First up, the King of Saudi Arabia has endorsed a Middle East peace plan. What’s your view of it?

OLMERT: Well this is an idea, an approach, an attitude which I welcome very much. The essence of what King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia said is that the conflict between Israel and the Arab countries, particularly the Palestinians must be resolved in a peaceful manner. At the end of the process not just the Palestinians, but all the Arab countries will have to recognise the state of Israel. He (King Abdullah) has some territorial expectations from us, which are quite natural, I’d say.

HARDAKER: What are you prepared to offer?

OLMERT: You want me to negotiate through you? That’s... lets postpone it for a while.

HARDAKER: On the basics of what we know, it comes to land?

OLMERT: Yes, true, but I don’t have to draw the specific line now on television before we actually sit with them. What I say is that I like their approach. I’m favourable to their general attitude and I’m ready to accept the Saudi initiative as a basis for discussions with the Palestinians, together with the Saudis.

HARDAKER: Do you see it as a genuine hand in peace or is it kind of more of the game in a sense.?

OLMERT: Look this is certainly a change which is encouraging. When you think about it. When you think that these are the Saudis who years ago were the main instigators of the Arab boycott against the state of Israel, would never ever utter the name of Israel in public, would not stay in the room when Israel was present there. I think there is a change. Now we have to encourage that change and we have to try to play along those lines in a genuine manner with the Arab countries and with the Saudis in order to strengthen the moderate forces amongst them.

HARDAKER: Well, one of your first reactions to the Saudi plan was to raise the question of the return of Palestinian refugees to Israel soil. You were very, very strong about it. Why so? Why do you say you won’t have one refugee?

OLMERT: Of course, this is a sensitive issue. We think, we believe, we never said differently that the refugee problem must be resolved. And it must be resolved with a complete awareness to the suffering that the Palestinians went through over generations. We are not playing games here. This is serious. This is the life of my country and I have to be very careful.

HARDAKER: But you already have put on the record that you won’t have one Palestinian refugee return to Israel and you’ve called that a question of the highest moral order? And I wonder why you do that?

OLMERT: The question here is whether the two sides accept the concept of a two state solution. If we accept the concept of a two state solution then it means there is a Palestinian state, but that there has to be a Jewish state whose existence is not in jeopardy. And whose existence will be in jeopardy as a Jewish state, if on top of all the Israelis that we have now and the non-Jews, the Palestinians, who already live in the state of Israel, we’ll be forced to accept other Palestinians. So that’s the logic of the moral issue here, why of course if they are genuine when they talk about a two state solution they don’t mean one Palestinian state and the next will become a Palestinian state. That is not a two state solution.

HARDAKER: Let’s move on to the Palestinian side. You’re prepared to negotiate with Mahmoud Abbas, Abu Mazen, Yet you must know that he has little or no power on the street.?

OLMERT: Look, It is true that he doesn’t have enough power. He has difficulties and unfortunately he’s certainly much weaker than the brutality of Hamas. Now the question I ask is this; what shall I do? Shall I say now that he’s not strong enough (so) I will ignore all the Palestinians and fight all of them and just don’t create any environment through which we can perhaps negotiate with at least someone who is recognised to be of some position or should I do precisely this: I will fight the terrorists and I will encourage those as well who are opposed to terrorism, and Abu Mazen is opposed to terrorism. So he’s not perfect but he’s much better than the rest.

HARDAKER: Iraq? What impact do you think that had on US standing in the region?

OLMERT: Well definitely one thing must be clear. We don’t want to go into historical questions whether originally America should have entered into Iraq or not because this issue ahs been resolved. They are there. You are there, others are there. The question is how should America pull out and the other forces should pull out from Iraq? I think they should pull out in the manner which will maintain the prestige and the perception of America as a major power. Why? Because the perception will be different, then the possible consequences and ramifications will be very unpleasant to the moderate forces in our part of the world and that is something we are worried about .

HARDAKER: So you wouldn’t want US troops and perhaps even Australian troops to actually withdraw from Iraq?

OLMERT: I don’t say that. This is your conclusion.

HARDAKER: Well what do you say?

OLMERT: What I say is that it’s your decision to make. It’s the American decision to make. What I just tell you as someone who lives in this part of the world for so many years and who may know something about the dynamics of this part of the world is that knowing what you have invested for many years, how much it’s cost you, just think of what will be the possible ramifications of a premature pullout on the standing of the forces which are essential for our interest and your interest and your security in this part of the world.

HARDAKER: One consequence of the Iraq war has been the empowerment of Iran. Are you more or less concerned now about Iran than you were before, say, sanctions were applied?

OLMERT: I’m certainly concerned about Iran because Iran tries to become nuclear and to build a nuclear capacity and have non-conventional weapons and to have a delivery system with ballistic missiles that can reach Israel and they say they want to reach Israel and get rid of Israel. I think that at this time today, Iran is not as close to the technological threshold as they claim to be, but unfortunately they are not as far away as I’d love them to be. So, still there is time to stop them and the question is how?

HARDAKER: Would you launch a pre-emptive strike?

OLMERT: You offer pre-emptive action, military action I guess and I think that there is enough power in the international community to prevent Iran from actually possessing nuclear weapons by using other measures – economic sanctions, political sanctions. There is a lot that can influence the lives and quality of life of a nation like Iran.

HARDAKER: Prime Minister Olmert, thank you very much for talking to us.

OLMERT: Thank you.

http://www.abc.net.au/foreign/content/2007/s1899720.htm

[IndianaGreen]

6. Abbas, aka Abu Mazen, speaks only for himself, represents no one, and cannot make a deal

This is nothing more than the same charade we have witnessed since Bill Clinton left office, repeated over and over again.

I can see Donald Trump's comments about Condi Rice not being able to make a deal, she only flaps her mouth and gets her picture taken. To make peace, one has to talk to those that can make a deal and make it stick.

[oberliner]

7. Abbas is the head of the PLO and is the only person authorized to negotiate with Israel

There is no one else on the Palestinian side for Olmert to negotiate with.

Hamas is unwilling to engage in dialogue with Israel and has indicated that the PLO is the organization to represent the Palestinians in any such talks.

All previous agreements signed have been between Israel and the PLO.

Abbas heads the PLO and is therefore the only person who can, in fact, make a deal.