Israel-Palestine Analysis: "Security" Moves to the Front in Direct Talks (Yenidunya)

On 1 September, following the murder of four Israelis ahead of the Israel-Palestine direct talks, we said:

The most significant, if cynical, question is: which side can get the most benefit from this tragedy during direct talks? Will this attack boost Israel through attention to its security concerns? Will it make Ramallah a more valuable partner for peace, given the shadow of Hamas and other opposition groups, especially at a time when polls show that more than half of Palestinians in the West Bank do not believe that there will be a peace agreement in Washington?

Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon has offered an answer, underlining the magical word "security" through reference to an "existential threat". He wrote on his Facebook page:

The vicious and cold-blooded attack on four Israeli citizens last night underscores the importance of a security dialogue like the one I just had with our counterparts from Canada and other friends and allies. After the attacks on Israel in recent weeks, the Iranian regime has proven once again the threat that it poses to global peace and security through its proxies like Hamas.

Israel-Palestine Transcript: George Mitchell on the Direct Talks (3 September)
Israel-Palestine Video & Transcript: Clinton-Abbas-Netanyahu Statements and Meeting (3 September)

A day later, Ayalon saw the reward from his warning through pressure on the Palestinian Authority. He said:

While negotiations are restarting in the US, ministers in Abbas' government are continuing with their incitement and encouraging acts of terrorism by visiting the and praising families of terrorists and murderers. These types of visits encourage terrorism, as we saw recently with the murder of four Israelis. The Palestinians need to make a decision, they cannot talk peace and at the same time encourage terrorism.

At the ceremony at the White House marking the official launch of direct Mideast peace talks at the White House, the most prominent word was "peace" (39 times), but it was followed by "security" (24).

Unsurprisingly, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made great use of the term. For him, two points are key: the root of the conflict with Palestinians  has not changed, but there are other "genuine security needs of Israel that have changed", due to Iran and its "proxies". Let's go back to his 2009 speech at Bar Ilan University: "The simple truth is that the root of the conflict has been and remains the refusal to recognize the right of the Jewish People to its own state in its historical homeland." Netanyahu reiterated this position yesterday: "We expect you to be prepared to recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people."

Netanyahu situated this tragedy of this week's killings of Israeli settlement as a contribution to the definition of peace and security in his Washington statement:

The last two days have been difficult. They were exceedingly difficult for my people and for me. Blood has been shed, the blood of innocents: four innocent Israelis gunned down brutally, two people wounded, seven new orphans. President Abbas, you condemned this killing. That’s important. No less important is to find the killers, and equally to make sure that we can stop other killers. They seek to kill our people, kill our state, kill our peace. And so achieving security is a must. Security is the foundation of peace. Without it, peace will unravel. With it, peace can be stable and enduring.

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton also used the deadly event in the context of "suspicion and skepticism".  "Peace" was not a concrete and immediate action but a series of actions, starting with the willingness to come to Washington. She said:

We understand the suspicion and skepticism that so many feel, born out of years of conflict and frustrated hopes. The tragic act of terror on Tuesday and the terrorist shooting yesterday are yet additional reminders of the human costs of this conflict. But by being here today, you each have taken an important step toward freeing your peoples from the shackles of a history we cannot change, and moving toward a future of peace and dignity that only you can create.

But here is the twist: Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas also adopted the "security" framework. Indeed he offered it even more often than Netanyahu, and he also used the attack on the four Israelis for essential context:

Also, with respect to security, you do know, ladies and gentlemen, that we have security apparatuses that are still being built, that are still young, but that are doing everything that is expected from them. Yesterday, we condemned the operations that were carried. We did not only condemn them, but we also followed on the perpetrators and we were able to find the car that was used and to arrest those who sold and bought the car. And we will continue all our effort to take security measures in order to find the perpetrators. We consider that security is of essence, is vital for both of us, and we cannot allow for anyone to do anything that would undermine your security and our security. And we therefore do not only condemn, but we keep on working seriously. Security is fundamental and very sensitive.

Palestine-Israel Analysis: The Two Questions to Answer Today (Yenidunya)

Starting question for today's direct Israel-Palestine talks in Washington: as a group lacking the legitimacy of being a state, both in the eyes of Palestinians and of the international community, can the Palestinian Authority get any traction for its negotiating position?

Palestinian negotiators will first urge Israelis, as move towards resolution of the status of borders, to reach a solution on settlement construction both in the West Bank and in East Jerusalem. Before agreeing on drawing the borders, Israel will urge its "partner" to come as close as possible to a proposal based on its "security needs". That in turn will take talks to a broader agenda beyond Ramallah's demands, which means an early victory for Israel.

Palestine to Israel: “What Kind of State Does Netanyahu Have in Mind?” (Yenidunya)
Israel-Palestine Talks: Will Confidence-Building Measures for Ramallah Work? (Yenidunya)
Gaza Latest: UN’s Flotilla Interviews Start, More Aid Ships?, Worry Over Hamas
Israel-Palestine: Were 4 Settlers Killed to Sabotage Talks? (Yenidunya)

The only exit for Palestinians from this outcome is standing firm against the broader agenda while re-stating its conditions, including the extension of the settlement freeze to East Jerusalem.

And thus a more specific question: will the settlement freeze issue replace the status of Temple Mount at the 2000 Camp David talks as the breaking point of discussions?

Palestine to Israel: "What Kind of State Does Netanyahu Have in Mind?" (Yenidunya)

Before flying to Washington for this week's talks with the Palestinian Authority, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made a series of statements ruling out any immediate movement on on key issues. After Sunday's Cabinet meeting, he said: “We have held talks with the Americans and there is no change in our stance. I assume that there will be problems, but the framework of negotiations is the way it was established, without preconditions. I do not know that there is any intention to go beyond discussion on procedure in Washington."

On Monday, the Israeli Prime Minister told his Likud ministers that Israel had made "no proposals" to the Americans on the settlement freeze. Netanyahu said that the future of settlements is not different than other core issues such as borders, Jerusalem and refugees; all of which are to be decided at the final stage.

Israel-Palestine Talks: Will Confidence-Building Measures for Ramallah Work? (Yenidunya)
Gaza Latest: UN’s Flotilla Interviews Start, More Aid Ships?, Worry Over Hamas
Israel-Palestine: Were 4 Settlers Killed to Sabotage Talks? (Yenidunya)

On the same day, Netanyahu told Likud activists at a pre-Rosh Hashana toast in Tel Aviv that he would be cautious during the talks and insist on security guarantees, so an Israeli withdrawal would not be met by the firing of hundreds of rockets. Indeed, Netanyahu said that he was not “naive”.

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon dismissed Palestinian pre-conditions:

Whoever places the settlements as a precondition is not serious. Preconditions are not conducive to successful negotiations and placing the blame on Israel before the negotiations have even started is extremely unhelpful and damaging for peace. All sides should arrive at the negotiations with good will.

The Palestinian Authority leader Salam Fayyad reiterated Ramallah’s position that the talks will collapse if Israel fails to deliver the extension of settlement freeze. In response to Israeli decision-makers’ emphasis on the “urgent need of guaranteeing Israel’s security”, Fayyad asked a key question: "What kind of state does Mr Netanyahu have in mind when he says 'Palestinian state'"?

Israel-Palestine Talks: Will Confidence-Building Measures for Ramallah Work? (Yenidunya)

Today brings the first meetings in Washington between US officials and Israeli and Palestinian delegations, with direct talks between the Israeli Government and Palestinian Authority starting Thursday. The preliminary talk has begun, however.

Having met with Jordan’s King Abdullah on Sunday, Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak held a secret meeting with Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas in Amman.

Jordan's King Abdullah is a key broker as the head of an Arab country which is at peace with Israel. He told Barak to be an honest partner, giving answers on central issues at the start of talks.

Gaza Latest: UN’s Flotilla Interviews Start, More Aid Ships?, Worry Over Hamas
Israel-Palestine: Were 4 Settlers Killed to Sabotage Talks? (Yenidunya)

But then the question: why Barak's secret discussion with Abbas? The Jerusalem Post says that two leaders discussed the further easing of security conditions for Palestinians in the West Bank as a confidence-building measure.

Haaretz has reported recently, from sources “close to the Obama Administration”, that Washington will urge Palestinians to soften their stance on an Israeli proposal for continued construction in large settlement blocs but not in isolated settlements. In response to this “concession”, land from Area C, which is both governed and controlled by Israel, will be transferred to Area B which is controlled by Israelis but governed by Palestinians.

Haaretz also reported in July that Netanyahu was thinking of some confidence-building measures such as enabling the Palestinian police to broaden its activities beyond Area A, which is under the Palestinian Authority's security control, setting up six new police stations in Area B, where the PA is currently responsible only for civilian affairs, and possibly having some authority over civilian matters in Area C.

However, Fatah spokesman Ahmed Assaf dismissed on Monday demands that the Palestinians accept Israel as a Jewish state. He said such a demand was in violation of international law and threatened to sabotage the peace talks.

So to Washington: will the “confidence-building measures” be discussed to get some Palestinian movement on the issue of Israeli settlements? Or is this an unrealistic plan given larger demands that may be on the table?

Israel-Palestine: Were 4 Settlers Killed to Sabotage Talks? (Yenidunya)

On Tuesday night, four Israelis were killed in a car by at least one gunman in the West Bank. The Qassam Brigades, the military wing of the Hamas movement, claimed responsibility for the attack. Osama Hamdan, a Hamas spokesman, told Al Jazeera that Hamas had not planned any attacks intended to sabotage the Israeli-Palestinian Authroity talks. However, Hamdan said he was speaking for the political wing of Hamas and the Qassam Brigades could have planned the attack independently.

Abu Mujahad, spokesman of the Popular Resistance Committees (PRC), told YNet that the West Bank attack was a message to the Palestinian negotiating team over the resumption of direct talks with Israel. "They should not have gone for this move without the support of the Palestinian people," he said. "Our people still abide by resistance and do no believe in the fictitious talks scheduled to commence tomorrow."

Israel-Palestine Talks: Will Confidence-Building Measures for Ramallah Work? (Yenidunya)
Israel: A Rabbi’s War on Palestinians (Yenidunya)

Then another Hamas response came. "Hamas praises the attack and regards it as a natural response to the crimes of the occupation," said Sami Abu-Zuhri, a Hamas spokesman in Gaza.

Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak responded:

This is very grave incident. The IDF and Israeli security forces will do everything they can to capture the murderers. Israel will not allow terrorists to lift their heads and will exact a price from the murderers and those who sent them.

US State Department Spokesman Philip J. Crowley called the attack as a “tragedy” and continued:

Any time one human being takes out a weapon and fires and kills other human beings it’s a tragedy.

We are cognizant that there could be external events that can have an impact on the environment. We also are cognizant that there may well be actors in the region who are deliberately making these kinds of attacks in order to sabotage the process. We are very aware that as we go forward in this process, not everyone sees this in the same way, and there are those who will do whatever they can to disrupt or derail the process.

The most significant, if cynical, question is: which side can get the most benefit from this tragedy during direct talks? Will this attack boost Israel through attention to its security concerns? Will it make Ramallah a more valuable partner for peace, given the shadow  of Hamas and other opposition groups, especially at a time when polls show that more than half of Palestinians in the West Bank do not believe that there will be a peace agreement in Washington?