Israel-Palestine Analysis: Obama Has Failed --- It's Back to Indirect Talks

On Friday, Arab League ministers endorsed the call of Palestinian Authority leader Mamoud Abbas' call to end direct talks unless Israel agrees to another freeze on West Bank settlements. 

The Arab ministers said they would meet again in a month to study alternatives and decide on next steps, giving the Obama Administration more time to broker a compromise on renewal of the talks. The Arab delegates want to see a clear path forward after the November Congressional elections in the US.

The Palestinian Authority has still not made a commitment, despite Mahmoud Abbas' declaration that he is ready to leave the negotiating table; given the Arab League outcome, the PA may not do so until November. However, the position seems clear. Unless Israel agrees to a two-month extension on the settlement freeze, we are back to indirect talks.

For the moment, the Arab representatives have saved Barack Obama's face. But Washington, rather than just sending out another set of envoys, needs to spend some time in serious consideration of major steps. Abbas told Arab leaders that he may seek US recognition for a Palestinian state if Israel does not offer a response on settlements. Alternatively, according to sources close to the PA leadership, Abbas told U.S. envoy George Mitchell that he will resign if there is no movement.

Click to read more ...

Israel-Palestine: Arab League Gives Talks One More Month (Sanders)

Looks like EA's Ali Yenidunya was spot-on in his prediction. Arab League ministers did not set down an immediate ultimatum on Friday over the Israel-Palestine talks, even though West Jerusalem has not agreed to extend the moratorium on settlement expansion in the West Bank, but delayed a decision for a month.

Click to read more ...

Israel-Palestine: Abbas to Mitchell "If Settlement Expansion Continues, I Resign" (Eldar)

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas informed U.S. envoy George Mitchell last week that the renewal of settlement construction will not only bring about the collapse of peace talks but it will also induce his resignation from the post of Palestinian Authority president.

According to Palestinian sources close to the PA leadership, Abbas told Mitchell of his plans during their last meeting together.

Abbas's resignation means the dismantling of the Palestinian Authority, since it was agreed inside the government that no one from the leadership of Fatah will step up to replace Abbas as president, and no new elections will be held.

In a conversation he held last week in his plane with a reporter, Abbas said "this is the last time that you will fly with me while I am president of the PA."

Click to read more ...

Israel-Palestine Analysis: It's "Win-Win" in West Jerusalem....but Who Won?

The US approach to Netanyahu, pleading for an extension of the settlement freeze, was that it was a "win-win" proposition: the Prime Minister maintained his flexibility in the talks, which would continue, and Israel also received guarantees and money from Washington. The only problem is that this is not the only "win-win" in town. Away from the formal negotiations, other Israeli politicians were setting out a different "win-win" to the Prime Minister. Bibi, you get to maintain the role of leader in the discussions with the Palestinians but we get the measures inside Israel --- defining who is "proper Israeli" and who is not --- that we want.

Click to read more ...

Israel-Palestine: Netanyahu Seeks Cabinet Agreement to 2-Month Extension of Settlements Freeze

While Washington has denied that President Obama sent a letter to Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu giving assurances in return for an extension of the moratorium on settlement expansion in the West Bank, the London-based newspaper Asharq al-Awsat quoted Israeli officials on Monday that Netanyahu has agreed to extend Israel's freeze for 60 days. 

According to rumours, Obama's offer included a continued Israel Defense Forces presence in the Jordan Valley, continued US political and military support with an annual increase of $3 billion, a commitment to veto any anti-Israel UN Security Council resolution in the next year, an agreement not to ask for any more extensions of the freeze, with that the fate of the settlements dealt with only as part of a final status agreement with the Palestinians, a series of guarantees to prevent the smuggling of weapons and missiles into a Palestinian state, and a comprehensive regional defense pact for protection from Iran. 

At a meeting of Likud ministers, Netanyahu hinted at a freeze extension, saying there were "a lot of reports on the subject, most of which are wrong, and we can't deny or correct everything".  He added: "Now there is interest in continuing the peace negotiations... Peace is a vital interest for the State of Israel."

Click to read more ...

Inside the Israel-Palestine Talks: Going Nowhere? (Haaretz)

The three meetings held so far between Prime Minister Benjamin Netayahu and Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas in the current round of peace talks have addressed nothing of substance, diplomatic sources say.

American mediators are still trying to save the talks from collapsing in the crisis following the resumption of construction in settlements.

Netanyahu refused to hold a serious discussion on any of the core issues apart from security, Abbas reportedly told diplomats he met at the UN General Assembly. Israeli and foreign sources say the main problem is that Netanyahu refuses to present fundamental positions or discuss the borders of the Palestinian state.

"I heard nothing from Netanyahu but niceties," Abbas reportedly told foreign diplomats.

Click to read more ...

Deadline Approaches for Settlements: What Are the Options for Palestinians?

So, why can't Mahmoud Abbas leave the talks and go home if he cannot guarantee another full freeze? Washington Post gives the answer to this question:

In the end the Palestinian president would be foolish to end the talks. In so doing, he would leave Israel free to proceed with unchecked settlement construction while postponing Palestinian statehood indefinitely. He would also place himself at greater domestic political risk, since the end of negotiations would empower Palestinian militants.

If he stays in the talks, Mr. Abbas can oblige Mr. Netanyahu to spell out his specific terms for Palestinian statehood, something he has yet to do. If they resemble those offered by previous Israeli governments, it might be possible to move relatively quickly toward an accord on borders and security. 

In other words, sitting at the table for Abbas is better than nothing. Let's see what Israelis are going to bring to it.

Click to read more ...

Palestine Analysis: Abbas to Accept Israel's Build-Up of Settlements?

Speaking to US Jewish leaders in a phone call Monday, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu praised President Barack Obama and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. He also called the Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas a real partner for peace. 

Two days later, at a dinner in New York, the "partner of peace" would not say that a renewal of settlement construction in the West Bank would end peace talks. Abbas said:  "I can't say I will leave the negotiations, but it will be very difficult to continue if Netanyahu will announce that he will start building."

Therefore, if Abbas's demand to the Obama Administration to extend the freeze by three months, during which time the issue of borders would be discussions, cannot find traction this week, then Netanyahu's plan of a continued build-up of large settlements could be the de facto position until final borders are drawn up by both sides. 

As we said on 15 September, "It is unlikely, however, that Damocles' sword will be held over West Jerusalem. Instead, as we pass 26 September without resolution, the Palestinians are likely to face this choice: compromise on the settlements or be labelled as 'rejectionists', if not by Obama's representatives then by the Israelis with whom they are supposed to find an agreement."

Israel-Palestine Memories: Prime Minister Olmert's 2008 Offer and the Palestinian Response

On Sunday, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said that if the current Israel-Palestine talks are to succeed, the agreement would have to resemble the plan the Palestinians turned down two years ago in negotiations.

Israel offered the Palestinians close to 94 percent of the West Bank, with East Jerusalem as the capital of Palestine and holy sites governed jointly by Israel, the Palestinians, Jordan, Saudi Arabia and the US. In addition, less than 20,000 refugees would have returned Israel and 100,000 Palestinians would be given US citizenship.

Olmert blamed the Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas for no resolution: "There is no choice but to say that this agreement was not achieved when that was possible because the Palestinian side was not prepared to make the extra step that I believe we made."

The Palestinians have a different recollection. In March 2010, their top Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat told an audience at the University of Birmingham that a counter-proposal had been offered to Olmert and nothing had been received in return.

Click to read more ...

Middle East Special Analysis: The Israel-Syria-Palestine Triangle

Washington’s “Wise” Plan?

As the deadline for Israel's construction freeze in the West Bank approaches, US Mideast special envoy George Mitchell hinted at a tactical manoeuvre to keep the Palestinian Authority at the table for direct talks after 26 September: "We think it makes sense to extend the moratorium.”

What kind of extension could this be, however? Relatively short, at best, given the position of Israel's Netanyahu Government. The American hope is to keep some momentum in discussions, avoiding both an Israeli walkout and the labelling of the Palestinians as "rejectionist".  

As soon as the Arab League responded by saying that they would back Ramallah if Israel resumes construction from 26 September, Washington refined its manoeuvre. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton talked to Israel’s Channel 10 on Thursday: "Where we sit now it would be useful for some extension, it would be extremely useful. I don't think a limited extension would undermine the process going forward if there were a decision agreed to by both parties."

Click to read more ...