Israel-Palestine Video: Obama & Peres on the Path to Peace

Palestine Video: 20 Years Later, Another Wall (Partially) Comes Down

Receive our latest updates by email or RSS SUBSCRIBE TO OUR FEED
Buy Us A Cup of Coffee? Help Enduring America Expand Its Coverage and Analysis

On the 14th anniversary of the murder of Israeli leader Yitzhak Rabin, President Barack Obama's video message was shown to Israelis gathered at Tel Aviv's Rabin Square.He underlined Washington's strong ties with Israel while stressing the importance of peace between Israelis and Palestinians:

America's bond with our Israeli allies is unbreakable and U.S. support for Israel's defense will never be undermined.

To all who seek peace I say tonight, you will always have a partner in the United States of America and in my administration. That's why we've been working aggressively for our clear goal, two states living side by side in peace and security.

Israelis will not find true security while the Palestinians are gripped by hopelessness and despair.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=lnt8qx8XoIM[/youtube]

Then Israeli President Shimon Peres addressed the crowd:

You, here tonight, don't leave any stone unturned so that next year we will be able to reconvene here, on the 15th anniversary of the murder, and say 'we did it, we realized our dream and Yitzhak's last will and testament.

It is better to have imperfect peace, than a perfect war with no end.

And the path to that imperfect peace? Peres called on Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas to stay in office:

We both signed the Oslo accords, and I turn to you as a colleague and ask that you don't let go.

I know that you toiled for the sake of your people for 50 years. Toil that was accompanied by many disappointments and frustrations. But knowing my people and Israel's government I can tell you that Israel wants true peace, not make-believe. A close peace, not peace from a distance. Therefore, it stands to reason that your 51st year will bring independence to the Palestinian people and peace to the State of Israel. The next year could be a turning point.

Comments

[Amy]

Hi Ali
I've been away & don't know if you already posted on this development:

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1126594.html" rel="nofollow">PM heads to U.S. under threat of Palestinian statehood declaration

A simple yet powerful idea... whether that path is actually used matters less than the fact that it's an option. The very possibility provides leverage that the Palestinians lacked in the past. International support is very probable. I hope President Obama backs the Palestinians in this approach. His stance on settlements suggests that it's likely. The admin can show that supporting Israel does not mean it is not backing Palestine.

The plan is sound because there would be a period of improving governance and institutions before the final step. Building that foundation increases the chance of success & stability which will not be wasted, no matter how Palestine achieves independence.

[Ali Yenidunya]

Hey Amy, thank you for the link. Actually, I heard about the news but I do not think that this plan can have a future. It is because of two basic reasons.

First of all, the Palestinian Authority has the Hamas problem and it is still not solved. With a divided Palestine, there is no future of a unilateral declaration for a sovereign Palestine if the proposal for such declaration foresees "a designated period for bolstering national institutions of the PA" which automatically brings Israel (with its political and economical strength) into the stage. In other words, within the current conjuncture, Fatah cannot consider a state by ignoring Israel.

Secondly, in the light of all points mentioned above, the Obama Administration is not willing to put pressure on Israel unfortunately. If they have wanted, we would have seen this willingness for the Goldstone Report. However, Washington still wants to wait for the time being.

An absolute US pressure on Israel is needed to give life to that proposal but there are other problems which make Israel feel relatively "less insecure" and US less willing to use the stick.

[Amy]

Ali
It's sad that Hamas & Fatah don't work together for the common purpose & settle differences later, but, of course that's easy for me to say sitting in my arm-chair. In addition to Israeli govt interference, the downside for the bolstering period is that the longer the timeframe, the harder it would be to maintain such a coalition. The unanswered question in the article is whether the proposal would even include Gaza.

Israel has made that situation so much more difficult by dividing the territories-- the problems & issues in the 2 areas seem worlds apart. Divide & conquer is age-old & effective.

As for the Obama admin, it's hard to read. Let me give an internal US issue as an example, if you will bear with me. President Obama stated 3 points that must be in the plan for health care reform for him to sign the law. During the long debate over the particulars, many people questioned why he wouldn't state that the bill must include certain provisions, or why he didn't submit a specific plan to Congress. People talked about lack of leadership, but President Obama continued to stick to the 3 general points. I was one of the frustrated, but lately have seen the wisdom of what he is doing. A great deal of parliamentary maneuvering is necessary to get the bill through Congress. Provisions are added & removed in order for various members to vote yes at one stage & vote no later. It provides political cover for members whose constituents are against the bill, while allowing the process to move along. If Obama drew a line in the sand, it would make it impossible for Congressional leaders to make it politically feasible to pass the legislation. In the end, it will come out pretty close to what he wanted, but at any given point in the process, it can look really bad.

Here's why I wrote the last paragraph... I was furious about the Goldstone Rept as well as the softening on the stance re settlements. Am hoping that what the admin is doing is something similar to what I described for working with Congress... that maybe they consider drawing a line in the sand to be counter-productive when it comes to negotiations. It's hard to say what is going on behind the scenes. The independence idea has a lot of appeal to me, because it would be an end-run around the intransigence of the Israeli govt... guess I'm a dreamer...

[Ali Yenidunya]

Amy, I have two points here again.

First of all, you are not a dreamer. You just want to see what must come true at the end of the day. Nothing could be better than witnessing the end of the occupation and two states living side by side in the region. So, I want to thank your heart as an individual...

Secondly, I see your point and you are right that nothing can be done overnight by being as frank as possible to public since the institutions re-shaping the aura of politics based on the neo-realist paradigm require more "fine-tuning" through negotiations. Therefore, no one should wait a clear-cut pressure on Israel but the peace-process require more than what we see today. If there is behind doors, it is at least for sure that there has been no tangible progress yet. On the other hand, yes negotiations is the only weapons the Obama Admin can use and convince Israelis through it since Washington cannot break ties with Tel Aviv. But, still, simply feeding with carrots is not bringing peace unfortunately. In short, we need to see more from Washington...

Again, thank you very much for your nice contribution...

[Amy]

Ali
I like your term "neo-realist". I'm not sure if it's meant in a positive or derogatory sense, but it has a more sincere ring to it than the older term "realpolitik", which to me always sounded cynical and somewhat sinister. I think this neo-realist approach is more pragmatic than manipulative.

I see your point too, that even if things are happening behind the scenes, there needs to be more visible action because people question whether the Obama admin is able to move things toward resolution. For several months it has looked like Netanyahu is holding the cards, whether true or not. I have no idea if it's the case (of course). It seems like the happy medium for public disclosure might lie somewhere between what we saw in the Clinton admin & what we see now. President Clinton created unrealistic expectations while President Obama leaves the impression that the efforts are stymied. They may well be, but if they aren't, it would make sense (to me) to show more of it publicly.

Obama first took office as the Gaza invasion was winding down. Even among American Jews and supporters of Israel, there was a sense of horror and anger about what happened in Gaza. The longer it takes for visible negotiations to begin, the more time the US pro-Israeli government faction has to influence public opinion. The economic problems here required so much time, energy and political capital in his first few months that it really took a toll on many of Obama's initiatives both here and abroad.