Sunday, October 3, 2010 - 3:48 AM
Unless George Mitchell can work a miracle in a region that has seen far too few of them over the last 2000 years, it looks increasingly like the direct Middle East talks are headed for an ignominious early failure.
One clear sign (in case you needed any after the Palestinians threatened Saturday to walk out) is this story in today’s Haaretz by the very well-sourced Barak Ravid, who reports that Mitchell has dramatically overstated the extent to which the negotiations were going well -- to the chagrin of the Palestinian side.
We’ll get to the reasons to be a little skeptical of this story in a minute, but first let’s look at what Ravid’s sources are telling him.
The main takeaway is that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has been telling anyone who will listen, that his ostensible partner for peace, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, is not serious. He only wants to talk about security, and won’t engage on other “core issues” of the conflict such as the borders of an eventual Palestinian state. "I heard nothing from Netanyahu but niceties," Abbas is quoted as telling unnamed “foreign diplomats” at the U.N. General Assembly.
The second interesting bit is that we’re learning more about what the actual contents of the discussion were. Abbas and Netanyahu held three meetings. The first one, Ravid tells us, was mainly about setting the ground rules for the discussion and agreeing to keep talking, though the two sides did have a conversation about whether to deal with borders or security first. At the second sitdown, Abbas and Netanyahu attempted (and apparently failed) to define what the “core issues” to be discussed actually were.
The third meeting, held in Jerusalem, sounds like a real disaster, with Abbas trying to get Netanyahu to discuss the offer made by his predecessor, Ehud Olmert, while Bibi again focused on security and supposedly didn’t engage on Abbas’s presentation of Palestinian positions. “The American brokers were reportedly extremely frustrated after the meeting in Jerusalem and some of them wondered if the talks hadn't in fact gone backward.”
Cleary, we’re getting largely the Palestinian side of the story here, so we don’t have a full picture of what is going on (the story also contradicts what we heard about the first meeting, after which Abbas aides told pan-Arab daily Al Hayat that they were feeling optimistic about the talks). But it looks like Ravid did try to confirm details with Netanyahu’s office, which doesn’t seem to have pushed back very hard. Be on the lookout for a follow-up article that tells Netanyhu’s side of the tale.
The real significance of the story, though, is not the details -- it’s the fact that they’re emerging now in such an ugly way. We’re no longer in the middle of a negotiation; we’re well into the blame game, with each side trying to hang the likely failure of the talks around the necks of the other.
That failure is going to have repercussions for both sides. On the Israeli side, some in the Labor Party are agitating to withdraw from Bibi’s coalition, and some in the opposition Kadima Party want Bibi to boot out Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman and his far-right Yisraeli Beitenu party -- which has become a national embarrassment -- thus paving the way for Kadima to join the government. Meanwhile, the right is blaming Netanyahu for agreeing to the settlement moratorium in the first place. A collapse or a reshuffle of Bibi’s coalition may be exactly what the Palestinians are hoping to provoke by withdrawing from the talks. But it’s not clear whether these rumblings have much traction, and in any case Defense Minister Ehud Minister, the head of the Labor Party, seems to enjoy being at the center of the action.
The key player to watch now is Kadima leader Tzipi Livni, who has kept her criticism of Netanyahu to a minimum while the negotiations still held out some hope of success. On Saturday, she urged Netanyahu to keep the Palestinians at the table, warning of dire consequences to Israel’s security if the talks “blow up.” Look to her now to start speaking out more often, and try to make some moves behind the scenes. It’s not clear whether she can do much, however, and she has her own internal opposition to worry about.
Hamas, meanwhile, is licking its chops, vowing that Palestinians will return to “resistance” when, not if, talks fail. And then things will really get ugly.
UPDATE: Haaretz, citing a story in London's pan-Arab daily Asharq al-Awsat, reports that Netanyahu has agreed to extend the settlement freeze for two months. Sourcing looks weak on this one, so let's see what actually happens.
"Hamas, meanwhile, is licking its chops, vowing that Palestinians will return to 'resistance' when, not if, talks fail. And then things will really get ugly."
The strategy of Israel's enemies is plain. They will wait for the eventual imposed peace settlement. When Israel has been returned to its pre-1967 borders, the PLO/Fatah government of the new and ostensibly legitimate Palestian Arab state will be overthrown by Hamas, backed by its Iranian parrtners and other Islamic states, even as Hamas overthrew Fatah in Gaza. Then things will get really ugly.
If there were violently imposed settlers on American soil, we would have a "Hamas" as well. When those settlers were removed, our Hamas would fade back into the woodwork.
Same in Palestine. Same everywhere. Where, in fact, is it any different?
I guess its all how one views the term violently imposed
After all, the United States was colonized, and violently at that. Indeed, the end result is that the 'native' Americans are living on reservations, and certainly without access to heavy weaponry.
.
.
Of course, the reality is, Jews did not 'violently' enter Palestine, rather came to a relatively empty portion of the former Ottoman empire, and set up shop by purchasing land from absentee owners.
.
I guess if one wants to view a 'violent' response, it could be seen from the view of the Arab armies invading in 1948, and then later the war in 1967. As for moving back into the woodwork, HAMAS philosophy doesn't seem to allow for that.
The reality is, the blame game started even before the talks
Given the ink spilled over the past weekend on this non-event, especially how many news outlets are quoting from the Palestinians, it seems almost part of their strategy before entering the talks to get on the horn about how badly things went.
.
In part, it seems to stem from the idea that Mahmoud Abbas doesn't want to be seen as the reincarnation of Yasser Arafat, though if the anticipated Palestinian violence ratchets up, he very well may fall into that same image.
.
What is interesting is that the normally verbal Israelis are content to remain quiet amidst all the strum and drang.
.
As for the opposition, they're more bluster than power at this point. Reality is, Israelis are behind Netanyahu on this one, and Labor, which has fallen out of power during the past decade of violence has no alternative solution that will rally the Israeli electorate. Remember, these talks came AFTER Kadima led PM Olmert offered even more to Abbas who also walked away then too.
.
Final note to Hounshell, get a better spell checker, your "update" section should read 'weak', not 'week' in relation to the claims from Asharq al-Awsat.
It's no surprise that the talks may be headed for failure. It would have been a pleasant surprise if either side engaged on the issues that are important to the other. They are not ready to do so.
The big losers in all of this will be the Obama administration, and more personally, SOS Clinton and George Mitchell. High profile talks of this sort require a huge investment in political capital, and it is hard to see what the administration hoped to get for it.
The Palestinians and Israelis will make peace themselves, without any urging from the US or anyone else, but only if and when the cost of an on-going conflict is greater than the political ramifications of a peace deal. There will be a lot more blood shed before that day is reached, unfortunately.
Passport, FP’s flagship blog, brings you news and hidden angles on the biggest stories of the day, as well as insights and under-the-radar gems from around the world.
Read More
(5)
HIDE COMMENTS LOGIN OR REGISTER REPORT ABUSE