U.S. Special Envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell told journalists after the September 1 + 2 meetings in Washington that were said to have relaunched direct talks between Israelis and Palestinians that “Any realistic appraisal of the situation, including the recent history – by which I mean the last two decades – makes clear that there are very serious differences between the parties, that there are many difficulties which lay ahead both in terms of the substance of the issues, the impact on their domestic politics, the needs and interests of their societies. We have not, of course, attempted to prescribe what they can or should say about any issue. These are independent and extremely able leaders representing the interests of their societies. What we have sought to convey in innumerable conversations that I have had personally with both leaders over many, many months is President Obama’s conviction that despite all of the difficulties – near term, long term, political, substantive, personal, and otherwise – the paramount goal of making the lives of their citizens more safe, more secure, more prosperous, more full can best be achieved by a meaningful and lasting peace between the parties and in the region; that the alternative to that poses difficulties and dangers far greater to the individuals, to the leaders, to their societies, than those risks which they run in an effort to reach an agreement that brings about their lasting peace; that any realistic evaluation of the self-interest of the people of Israel and the Palestinian people must, in our judgment, conclude that they are far better off living side by side in two states in peace and security than in a continuation of the current situation“.
George Mitchell on direct talks
September 3rd, 2010
Ehud Barak on eve of Washington talks – one-upsmanship or coordinated leak?
September 1st, 2010Just hours before the opening of events scheduled in Washington to relaunch Israeli-Palestinian direct talks (which were cut off in late December 2008, after the IDF launched a massive military operation against Hamas in Gaza, Ehud Barak has made big waves with remarks he made in an interview published this morning in Haaretz.
Was it Barak-style one-upsmanship? Or, was this a leak coordinated with Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu?
Here is an extended excerpt of the published Q+A:
Q: Ehud Barak, is there any chance that you and Benjamin Netanyahu will succeed in reaching peace with the Palestinians now, the same peace which you did not succeed in achieving in 2000 and Ehud Olmert did not succeed in achieving in 2008?
A: “In the current reality that is encircling us, there are remarkable changes underway. Thirty years ago, the Arabs competed amongst the Israelis in spouting rejectionist slogans that were reminiscent of [the three "nos" at] Khartoum. Today the Arab states are competing amongst themselves in arguing over which peace initiative will be adopted by the international community. The same situation is taking place with us. When I returned from Camp David a decade ago, the most vocal critics of my “irresponsible” concessions were Ehud Olmert and Tzipi Livni. Take a look at where they are today. It doesn’t mean that the task is a simple one. The gaps are wide and they are of a fundamental nature. But I believe that there is a real chance today. If Netanyahu leads a process, a significant number of rightist ministers will stand with him. So what is needed is courage to make historic, painful decisions. I’m not saying that there is a certainty for success, but there is a chance. This chance must be exploited to the fullest”.
Q: What are the principles of a peace deal that you believe can be agreed upon by the conclusion of the talks?
A: “Two states for two nations; an end to the conflict and the end of all future demands; the demarcation of a border that will run inside the Land of Israel, and within that border will lie a solid Jewish majority for generations and on the other side will be a demilitarized Palestinian state but one that will be viable politically, economically, and territorially; keeping the settlement blocs in our hands; retrieving and relocating the isolated settlements into the settlement blocs or within Israel; a solution to the refugee problem [whereby refugees return to] the Palestinian state or are rehabilitated by international aid; comprehensive security arrangements and a solution to the Jerusalem problem”…
[Asked to describe a possible Jerusalem solution, Barak mentions that 200,000 Israelis now live in 12 "Jewish neighborhoods" in East Jerusalem that will become "ours" [i.e., Israel's]; while 250,000 Palestinians in “Arab neighborhoods” will be “theirs” [i.e., be handed over to the Ramallah-based Palestinian Authority, whether or not they like it]. And, Barak went on, there should be a “special regime” [UN terminology from early UNGA resolutions] for the East Jerusalem areas of the Old City, the Mount of Olives, and the “City of David” – i.e., Silwan, an East Jerusalem Palestinian neighborhood south and east of the Old City walls.
In other words, what’s “ours” is “ours”, and part of what’s “theirs” will also be “ours”.
If this succeeds, it will be the first time ever that the Quartet (including the U.S. but also the European Union, Russia and the UN), as well as Jordan and Egypt would swallow Israeli claims in East Jerusalem without protest…
Barak’s remarks are published in Haaretz here.
Our fuller analysis of Barak’s remarks concerning East Jerusalem is posted here.
PLO (rump version) accepts U.S. invitation to direct talks
August 21st, 2010It was announced on Saturday that the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) Executive Committee met in Ramallah hours earlier and announced their agreement that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas can accept a U.S. invitation, issued on Friday, to engage in direct talks with Israel starting with meetings in Washington on 1 and 2 September (dinner the first night, talks the next day).
That move overrides any objections voiced by Palestinian “factions” — meaning mostly the small-constituency further-”left” groups, which are also mainly based in Ramallah.
The current PLO Executive Committee was formed after a rare Fatah General Conference held in Bethlehem in early August 2009, which confirmed Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas as the leader of the largest Palestinian movement (giving him the reins of leadership of two of the three institutions of Palestinian legitimacy).
Abbas then oversaw a PLO “National Conference” (the PNC) that met in the Muqata’a, the Palestinian presidential headquarters and stronghold in Ramallah, in late August 2009.
Though the PNC should normally now have between 500 and 600 members, a quorum was “seen” when something like 200 PNC members arrived in the Muqata’a for that session a year ago. During the session, Abbas was confirmed as the head of the PLO (formally handing him the reins of the third source of Palestinian political power and legitimacy — so now Abbas is in total control of all leadership positions, as the late PLO leader Yasser Arafat used to be…)
That PNC meeting authorized the composition of a new PLO Executive Committee, with most of the members based in Ramallah — they can now be convened on short notice, without the inconvenience of having to wait for any Palestinian leaders who might have difficulties or delays in travelling from abroad.
(Therefore, it is referred to it, in the headline of this post, as the “rump version” of the PLO Executive Committee.)
The PLO Executive Committee position said its decision to authorize engagement in the new direct talks was based on the statement of the Quartet (composed of the U.S., Europe, Russia, and the United Nations), issued in support of the U.S. invitation issued from Washington on Friday, which said (among other things) that “The Quartet expresses its determination to support the parties throughout the negotiations, which can be completed within one year, and the implementation of an agreement”.
That is an explicit commitment to continue funding upon which the Palestinian Authority is nearly totally dependent, from now though the conclusion and implementation of a hypothetical, but hoped-for, Israeli-Palestinian agreement. The payment of September salaries for Palestinian Authority employees (ministerial officials and security forces included) was recently put into question, with a reported $300 million-dollar budgetary shortfall, and the payment of anything beyond September is completely up in the air — until donor funding fills up the current financial hole.
According to a report published by the privately-owned and donor-funded Bethlehem-based Ma’an News Agency, the PLO Executive Committee specified that it had given its approval “to resume negotiations aimed at solving all final status solutions” within a one-year time-frame.
The Quartet statement [see our earlier post, here] called for a negotiated settlement that “ends the occupation which began in 1967 and results in the emergence of an independent, democratic, and viable Palestinian state”.
Ma’an also reported that the PLO Executive Committee also saw support, in the Quartet statement for “calling both sides to abide by international law and in particular, stick to the Road Map, calling on Israel to stop all settlement activity”, and that “the PLO statement also cited ‘the Quartet’s confirmation that international community will not recognize Israel’s annexation of East Jerusalem’, when it accepted the US invitation”. This Ma’an report is posted here.
The Palestinian President Abbas said in a interview recently published in the Arabic-language media that he had been put under “inhuman pressure” to move to direct talks.
Quartet on U.S. invitation: negotiations can be completed in one year
August 21st, 2010Here is what the Quartet said after the U.S. issued invitations to Israel and the Palestinian leadership today, to start direct talks in Washington D.C. on 2 September:
“The representatives of the Quartet reaffirm their strong support for direct negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians to resolve all final status issues. The Quartet reaffirms its full commitment to its previous statements, including in Trieste on 26 June 2009, in New York on 24 September 2009, and its statement in Moscow on 19 March 2010 which provides that direct, bilateral negotiations that resolve all final status issues should ‘lead to a settlement, negotiated between the parties, that ends the occupation which began in 1967 and results in the emergence of an independent, democratic, and viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel and its other neighbors’. The Quartet expresses its determination to support the parties throughout the negotiations, which can be completed within one year, and the implementation of an agreement”…
Mitchell back for a quickie
August 9th, 2010U.S. Special Envoy for the Middle East George Mitchell arrived back in the region on Monday night for a quickie — after rumors and subsequent denials of threats and pressures, particularly on the Palestinian side, to move from indirect or “proximity” to direct talks which Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu has suggested could last for years.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and his people appear to have done little to discourage denunciation of the talks. The jailed Fatah personality Marwan Barghouthi, serving five consecutive life sentences in an Israeli prison for his role in the second Palestinian intifada, issued a statement last week through a lawyer saying that the talks were against the Palestinian national interest. Marwan Barghouthi was elected to the powerful Fatah Central Committee at a rare General Conference closely choreographed by Abbas supporters that met for ten days in Bethlehem last August.
During Mitchell’s previous visit, for the sixth round of “proximity” talks, a Palestinian representative of a group putting up posters around the West Bank advocating a one-state (rather than the two-state) solution was invited to make a presentation during the Abbas-Mitchell meeting.
Abbas gave a private briefing to Palestinian journalists in Ramallah on Monday evening.
What has George Mitchell achieved so far?
July 22nd, 2010U.S. Assistant Secretary of State Philip J. Crowley said at the Daily Press Briefing for journalists in Washington, DC on Wednesday 21 July — in response to questions — that U.S. Special Middle East Envoy George Mitchell had returned from his latest efforts in “proximity” talks between Israeli and Palestinian leaders and had achieved… “A lot of frequent flyer miles (laughter).”…
Desperate for a two-state solution?
July 21st, 2010British Prime Minister David Cameron said, in a meeting with U.S. President Barack Obama in Washington on 20 July that “we desperately need a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians that provides security, justice and hope. As we were discussing over lunch, it is time for direct talks, not least because it is time for each, Israel and Palestine, to test the seriousness of the other”…
The full transcript of their remarks is posted here.
Saeb Erekat: We declared our independence in 1988 – it’s up to the international community to declare recognition”
July 13th, 2010Haaretz service is reporting that Saeb Erekat, chief Palestinian negotiator, said in an interview with Turkish state television TRT that “A unilateral declaration of a Palestinian state is ‘not on the agenda’ … ‘We declared our independence in 1988′, Erekat said. ‘Now it’s up to the international community to declare recognition of our independence … Our option is a two-state solution. We have recognized the state of Israel and its right to exist on the 1967 borders. Now it’s up to the international community to stand firm and recognize Palestine on the 1967 lines with Jerusalem as its capital’.”
According to Haaretz, Erekat also said in the interview that: “Our position is that the key to direct negotiations is in the hand of Mr. Netanyahu … The minute he stops settlement activities including natural growth in Jerusalem, the minute he agrees to go to permanent status talks, where we left them in December 2008, we’ll have direct talks … The Israelis have a choice, settlements or peace. They can’t have both”. These remarks are reported here.
Obama calls Abu Mazen
July 10th, 2010Haaretz is reporting that U.S. President Barack Obama has phoned Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas [Abu Mazen] on Friday (yesterday) “to brief the Palestinian president on the American leader’s recent meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu … Obama promised Abbas that he would exert every effort to ensure the establishment of an independent Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with Israel”.
The last time we heard about an Obama call to Abu Mazen was on the day after Obama’s inauguration — and his call to Abu Mazen then was his first to a foreign leader after taking office.
Apparently, U.S. Special Middle East envoy will be back in the region soon [either for a sixth round of indirect or "proximity" talks that started in May, or perhaps to transition into the direct mode which is, and always was, inevitable].
How do we know about this? Haaretz wrote that “Abbas’ spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh told the Palestinian news agency WAFA following the phone conversation that Abbas expressed his commitment to a serious peace process that would ‘end the occupation’ and result in an independent Palestinian state”. This report can be read in full ,strong>here].
Gideon Levy: “Everybody knows what the Palestinians want”
July 9th, 2010Writing after the Tuesday meeting in Washington between U.S. President Barack Obama and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu — in which Obama said he wants direct talks to start as soon as possible, and certainly by September when a nine-month [the duration was decided after considerable haggling] “settlement freeze”, Gideon Levy said in Haaretz that “When direct talks become a goal, without anyone having a clue what Israel’s position is – a strange negotiation in which everyone knows what the Palestinians want and no one knows for sure what Israel wants – the wheel not only does not go forward, it goes backward”.
This is posted here.