Israel-Palestine: Space for a US-Brokered Solution Narrows

Bring It On: Israel Counter-attacks UN over Gaza Enquiry
Palestine: Suffering Life at Israeli Checkpoints

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

Is there any space left for the US as the "honest broker" of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks?

On Tuesday night, President Obama declared, on the eve of Israeli President Shimon Peres's Facing Tomorrow Conference in Jerusalem, that Israeli-US relations were "more than a strategic alliance." In a speech full of praises on Peres, he added:

Our moment in history is filled with challenges that test our will and invite pessimism. We can choose to defer action, to sustain a dangerous status quo, or we can meet the challenges of our time head-on. Like you, I believe now is the time to act.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=rhQaubxx6Rw[/youtube]

Obama's speech was undercut, however, by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. Ostensibly, he was calling for "peace", by putting the burden upon Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas:

Now it is your turn to say the truth about peace, the need for it and the true way to achieve it. What is important is to do it publicly, not just behind closed doors; to say the truth about peace publicly, to our people and to the Palestinian people.

The problem is that Netanyahu's demands comes in the context of a series of Israeli conditions on the talks, including the dispute over expansion of settlements and Tel Aviv's insistence on addressing of specific economic and security issues rather than the general recognition of a Palestinian state. So PA negotiator Saeb Erekat, who happened to be in Washington, pointedly said, "There's no agreement" and accused Israel of feigning interest in negotiations while claiming the Palestinians were preventing progress.

Israeli representatives were unable to reach common ground with Palestinians over three demands put by the latter: the start of the negotiations would be accompanied by a statement saying the goal was to reach an agreement within two years; the goal would the establishment of a Palestinian state with permanent borders based on an Israeli withdrawal; and there would a complete halt to construction of settlements, including in East Jerusalem. Late Tuesday, Israeli sources stated that negotiations failed.

Still the US persists. On Wednesday, the US Ambassador to the United Nations, Susan Rice told Israelis to "relaunch Middle East talks now" At Peres's conference, she said: "As President Peres always reminds us, being serious about peace means taking risks for peace. Being serious about peace means understanding that tomorrow need not look like yesterday."

That is enough for now, it appears, to keep the idea of a negotiation alive. After the message of the Obama Administration, One Israeli official said, "There appears to be a meeting of the minds and hopefully the Israeli-Palestinian dialogue will be able to re-start in the near future." Another explained under the prospective deal, on which Palestinians have not yet commented, the negotiations could be held on the basis of two UN Security Council resolutions, 242 and 338, from the 1960s and 1970s.

The resolutions call for "withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict"; however, each party interprets this in its own way. For Palestinians, it obliges Israelis to withdraw unconditionally to pre-1967 borders, whereas Israel interprets this as a partial withdrawal.

So far from making Washington's task easier, the border issue may bring talks to a critical stage. Unless Israel is willing to drop its step-by-step approach in favour of a grand resolution, or conversely the Palestinians are willing to compromise on a de facto Israeli occupation while other issues are considered, there will be a stalemate, if not a dramatic collapse. Saed Erekat's words, as Secretary of State Hillary Clinton prepared her detailed report on talks to Obama, laid the foundation for blame rather than agreement, "The report would identify the spoiler in the talks."

Enemy Iran: The US-Israeli Military Drill

Really?! Israel & Iran in Direct Talks on Nuclear Weapons
The Latest from Iran (22 October): Unsteady as She Goes

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 Wednesday, Israel and the US, with 1,000 participants on each side, launched a major air defense drill called Operation Juniper Cobra 10, simulating an Iranian missile attack. According to the scenario, Iran sends its missiles and Americans support the Israeli Defense Force with its missile defense system. Then allies attack Iranian missile batteries with missiles with unconventional warheads.

The drill will last for two weeks.

Really?! Israel & Iran in Direct Talks on Nuclear Weapons

Enemy Iran: The US-Israeli Military Drill
The Latest from Iran (22 October): Unsteady as She Goes

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

UPDATE 1030 GMT: No, Not Us. Unsurprisingly, Iran has denied the reports that it was at the same table as Israeli representatives. Ali Shirzadia, the spokesman for Iran's atomic energy organisation, said, "This lie is a kind of psychological operation designed to affect the constant success of Iran's dynamic diplomacy in the Geneva and Vienna meetings,"

Yes, really.

The rumour was out there, but this morning it seems to be  reality. According to Ha'aretz:

A representative of the Israel Atomic Energy Commission and a senior Iranian official met last month to discuss the chances of declaring the Middle East a nuclear-free zone....This is the first direct meeting between official representatives of the two states since the fall of the Shah in 1979.

Meirav Zafary-Odiz, director of policy and arms control for the Israel Atomic Energy Commission, and Ali Asghar Soltanieh, Iran's ambassador to the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA), met several times over September 29 and 30 and, together with representatives of other countries, conversed, presented questions and gave replies.

To be precise the encounter, which took place at the Four Seasons Hotel in Cairo under the auspices of the International Commission on Nuclear Non-Proliferation and Disarmament, including representatives of the Arab League, Jordan, Egypt, Tunisia, Turkey, Morocco, the United Arab Emirates, and Saudi Arabia.

But to be more precise, for the sake of engagement, European and American officials were also at the discussions. The sharp-eyed reader will note that the talks came just before the 1 October meeting on Iran's nuclear programme in Geneva, the first time US and Iranian delegations had been in direct, open talks in decades.

Australian sources --- the ICNND is chaired by Australian Prime Minister Kevin Rudd --- leaked the story to the newspaper The Age. The Israeli Atomic Energy Commission confirmed the report.

Of course, both sides maintained their peaceful intentions during the talks. Zafary-Odiz, the director of policy and arms control for the Israel Atomic Energy Commission, set out her country's responsible approach while noting that four countries in the region (Iraq, Iran, Libya, and Syria) had broken their commitment to the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty. During the meetings, She said that Israel was willing, in principle, to discuss the Middle East as a nuclear-free zone,  but regional security must be strengthened, security arrangements must be agreed upon, and a peace agreement must be sealed before Israel would further discussions.

Soltanieh insisted that Tehran was not striving for nuclear armament and did not endanger Israel. He added that the Israel did not understand the Iranian mentality and ideology: Iran did not oppose or hate Jews, but was merely politically opposed to Zionism.

At one point Soltanieh "in an impassioned voice", asked his Israeli counterpart, "Do you or do you not have nuclear weapons?" According to Ha'aretz, "Zafary-Odiz smiled, but did not respond."

Bring It On: Israel Counter-attacks UN over Gaza Enquiry

Palestine: Suffering Life at Israeli Checkpoints

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

Under the terms of the Goldstone Report on the Gaza War, now approved by the UN Human Rights Council, Israel and Hamas are required to conduct internal enquiries into the conduct of their military forces.

Fat chance.

On Tuesday, Israel's President Shimon Peres told CNN that the Goldstone Report "one-sided" and "unfair".





Peres' statement was mere prelude to the full Israeli resistance. In fact, for resistance, insert "counter-attack". On Tuesday, the Israeli Cabinet and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, promising a lengthy battle to "delegitimize" the findings of the United Nations commission, established a committee to deal with the prospect of "legal proceedings abroad against the state of Israel or its citizens."

Even Defense Minister Ehud Barak, seen as the moderate amongst senior Israeli ministers, refused to discuss the possibility of a Governmental investigation: "There is no need for a committee of inquiry. The Israeli military knows to examine itself better than anyone else."

Meanwhile Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman chose a diversionary strategy of undermining the Israel-Palestine peace process. He told his European Union counterpart Javier Solana:

The policy of subversion carried out by the Palestinian Authority against the State of Israel, which follows decisions at the Fatah conference in August in which there were calls for the resumption of the armed struggle, raises serious questions about the real aims of the Palestinians. The question now is whether the Palestinians want to establish a state, or to destroy the state of Israel.

Iran's Nukes: Text of IAEA Head El Baradei Statement (21 October)

UPDATED Iran’s Nukes: The Real Story on Vienna Talks and the Deal for Uranium Enrichment
The Latest from Iran (21 October): Room for a Challenge?

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 Wednesday afternoon Mohammad El Baradei, the head of the International Atomic Energy Agency, issued the following statement to the press on the Vienna talks between Iran and the "5+1" powers (US, UK, France, Russia, China, and Germany):

We just concluded our meeting of 2 1/2 days on "how-to" modalities, and how to ensure that Iran will have the fuel required for its research reactor.

As you know that research reactor is used for producing medical isotopes for diagnosis and treatment of cancer, so it is a purely humanitarian mission, objective.

However, everybody is aware that that transaction using Iran´s low enriched uranium to be manufactured into fuel is a very important confidence building measure that can diffuse a crisis that has been going on for a number of years and open space for negotiation.

I must say that, everybody who participated at the meeting was trying to help, trying to look to the future and not to the past, trying to heal the wounds that existed for many, many years.

I have circulated a draft agreement that reflects, in my judgement, a balanced approach on how to move forward.

The deadline for the parties to give, I hope, affirmative action, is Friday, two days from now. And if we do get an affirmative action, then I hope that we will have an agreement we can send to the BoG.

There has been talks on technical issues, legal issues, policy issues, issues of confidence and trust and that is why it has taken us some time and that is why we need to send the agreement to the capitals for final approval.

I very much hope that people see the big picture, see that this agreement could open the way for a complete normalization of relations between Iran and the international community.

It´s a very unique technical meeting, because it is a technical meeting although, that has been followed by heads of States, in fact with the actual engagement in the process. I would cross my fingers that by Friday we should have an okay, an approval, by all parties concerned.

Q: Can you tell us details?

Everybody should, including of course Iran, should sign up on this by Friday.

Q: France will also be included?

My proposal has France included.

Q: Do you think by the end of your term, this agreement could be endorsed?

I hope so, if we get an affirmative response by all parties by Friday then we have an agreement, then we just go to the Board for formal ratification. I will have to wait until Friday, I am optimistic and as I said, the spirit here was very constructive and forward-looking.