PA and Erekat reject direct talks with Israel

Check out this JPost article, about how Erekat recently remarked that he is rejecting direct talks with Israel, since the Quartet didn't ask for direct talks.


Actually, the Quartet did ask for direct talks.  But when the PA refused even that, the Quartet despaired, and said that each side should submit their own proposal individually.


You can see why Israel would never want to do that - how can you give in proposals on borders and security without knowing what the other side is willing to negotiate over?? It's preposterous!


You can't have peace without direct negotiations.  We had direct talks with Egypt and Jordan, and we got piece.  We didn't have foreign intervention.  And that's really the end of it. 


And true, in both cases, both sides were willing to create peace.  In this case, we see 40 years of Palestinian intransigence.


In that article, Erekat rejects direct talks with Israel.
Erekat whines some more, then complains, and then finally, has an expression of utter shock when he discovers the U.S. has called for *gasp* direct negotiations.

Who can blame him? Direct negotiations are such a concept! It's a far too radical concept! Direct negotiations, could, gasp, possibly lead to peace! And if not, it would probably be, gasp, the fault of the PA (ex: Camp David in 2000, or Olmert's offer in 2008).

How can a country actually expect the Palestinians to make peace??? It contradicts the PA's most basic tenets! This is a hard slap in the face to the PA, and is completely uncalled for!

And yes, that is sarcasm.

Check out this poster I created for the occassion - feel free to use it (with credit please).

NOTE: While all three images may appear to be seperate images, they are actually one image, and they are the same file.  They have a transparent seperation between them.

Quite simply, they want it all

Barry Rubin, JPost:

No matter what the Palestinian Authority is offered – money, concessions and even steps toward statehood– the response is always “no.” Media, academic “experts” and governments seem to find this amazing phenomenon very hard to understand.The answer is simple, but a lot of the people paid to deal with this stuff don’t get it. So let me elucidate: The Palestinian Authority (PA) wants everything.

The PA wants an independent state on all the West Bank, Gaza Strip and east Jerusalem with no restrictions, no recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, no serious security guarantees, no limits on militarization, no agreement that this means an end to the conflict, no insistence that Palestinian refugees be resettled in the state of Palestine, and nothing to prevent them from pursuing a second stage of wiping Israel off the map entirely.
Now, one could say it’s common for people to want everything and to give nothing in exchange but that certain factors – missing in this case – push them toward compromise.

These factors include:

• Knowing they can’t get a better deal. The Palestinians know the West will always offer more if they are intransigent.

• The impasse favors your adversary because your intransigence will gain it international support. In this case, the more stubborn the Palestinians are, the more Israel is blamed.

• Economic pressure. Since the PA is almost completely supported by foreign aid that is not threatened by its hard line, this pressure does not exist.

• Public opinion pressure to change the situation. In this case, Palestinian public opinion is relatively radicalized and ideological and does not demand a compromise settlement.

• Concern that your political rivals will “outmoderate” you and win by offering to make a deal. In this case, the opposite is true: rivals “out-radicalize” one another and threaten to destroy you politically (and perhaps even physically) if you make a deal.

• Belief that time is not on your side. Due to religious and nationalist ideology, along with misperception of Israel, the PA (and even more so Hamas) believes that time is on its side.

That’s not a complete list. But the point is that the world in general – the United States and Europe, the UN, Arabic-speaking countries and Muslim-majority states – have created a “perfect” system.

Here’s a brief description:

• The PA has no incentive to make compromises for peace, so it won’t.
• The world insists that “peace” is an urgent top priority.

• The only variable is Israel, which must be made to give way. But Israel won’t because of past experience and the fact that the risks are now too high.

Deadlock.

So nothing will change. There will be no peace process, no Palestinian state. No “progress” will be made.

...

This is not left-wing or right-wing but merely an explanation as to why all the schemes and theories of those who do not see these facts never actually take wing. It may not be politically correct, but it is most definitely factually correct.

Now, you might ask, do I just criticize or do I have constructive policy advice?

I do. Here it is: When the Palestinian Authority rejects the Quartet proposal for negotiations, the United States, European Union and anyone else who wants to go along tells them, “We’ve tried to help you and you don’t want to listen, so since we have lots of other things to do, we’ll go do them. Good luck, and if you ever change your mind and get serious about making peace you have our phone number.”

The previous paragraph would send shock waves throughout policy circles, right? But why? If you can’t solve a problem and – let’s be clear here – the problem doesn’t need to be solved immediately, then you work on other problems. There are no shortage of those! I hope you have enjoyed this article and found it useful. We are left, however, with the following problem: Those in positions of political, media and intellectual power don’t get it.
The writer is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center. He is a featured columnist at Pajamas Media and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) journal.

Direct negotiations are VITAL to peace

Ari Alexenberg, the director of the Jewish Community Relations Council of New Hampshire, in Sea Coast Online:

Abbas coming to the U.N. for acceptance of a Palestinian state without acknowledging Israel as a Jewish state is ironic. For it was the United Nations' Resolution 181 in 1947 that recommended British mandated Palestine to become two states, a "Jewish state" and an "Arab state."

It is worthy to note that Resolution 181 called for an "Arab state" not a Palestinian state. The reason for this is that the notion of a Palestinian people didn't exist. A search on Google books (a database of millions of books going back hundreds of years) on the subject of "Palestinians" before 1948 will return no results.

Yet, Netanyahu, in his speech to the U.N. explicitly stated he will accept a state for the Palestinian people alongside Israel. The Israelis have shown a remarkable willingness to compromise, agreeing to cede land that is the heart of Jewish civilization dating back thousands of years, for the sake of peace. Giving the Palestinians statehood without their acceptance of Israel as the homeland of the Jewish people portends the continuation of the conflict, not the end.

Israel wants peace! It does not want to rule over another people and it does not want to send their children into battle. But just like any other nation on Earth, they must know their neighbors are not sworn to their destruction. In his speech, President Obama articulated Israel's need for security by saying, "Let us be honest with ourselves: Israel is surrounded by neighbors that have waged repeated wars against it. Israel's citizens have been killed by rockets fired at their houses and suicide bombs on their buses. Israel's children come of age knowing that throughout the region, other children are taught to hate them."

If the Palestinians have a state, its borders will run beside the heart of Israel's population center, a mere primitive rocket launch away from Tel Aviv or Israel's only major airport. How can the Palestinians be granted statehood when approximately 40 percent of its population is ruled by Iranian backed Hamas, an internationally recognized terrorist group. Netanyahu made this clear in his speech when he said "Israelis are prepared to have a Palestinian state in the West Bank, but we're not prepared to have another Gaza there."

Peace is not a unilateral decision, it is a partnership. There are difficult issues that need to be negotiated. Borders, status of Jerusalem, settlements, Palestinian right of return, security arrangements and many more. A unilateral declaration of statehood doesn't address or solve the real issues on the ground. As President Obama iterated, "peace is hard, peace is hard." Netanyahu is willing to sit down without preconditions to do the hard work of negotiating peace. Abbas' unilateral declaration avoids doing the work necessary to bring a Palestinian state to fruition. It is a shallow exercise that will yield nothing on the ground for the Palestinians. It will only serve to isolate Israel and embarrass the United States by potentially forcing it to veto a Security Council resolution. The Palestinians need a leader whose vision for creating a democratic Palestinian state is greater than his aversion to accepting a democratic Jewish state.

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon - "Palestinians are using settlement issue as distraction"

JPost:

Deputy Foreign Minister Danny Ayalon said on Sunday that the Palestinians are using the issue of settlement construction in order to distract the world from the so-called Quartet of Middle East mediators' demand to renew peace talks, according to Israel Radio.

Speaking during a tour of Gilo for foreign journalists, Ayalon added that construction plans for the east Jerusalem neighborhood are not a matter of "political timing," but rather a response to the needs of residents.

Israel on Sunday formally accepted the Quartet's proposal for re-starting negotiations with the Palestinians, following a meeting between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and his senior ministers.

"Israel welcomes the Quartet's call for direct negotiations without pre-conditions with the Palestinian Authority, which was already suggested by US president Barack Obama and Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, even though Israel has a number of reservations which it will bring up in the negotiations."

Israel received rebukes from European and American diplomats over the plans in Gilo, with the US calling the move "counter-productive" and Europeans, including European Foreign Affairs chief  Catherine Ashton, saying it was the kind of "provocative" action that should be avoided as per the Quartet's statement. 

Ashton called on Israel to "reverse" its decision to build 1,100 new housing units in Gilo.

The government, however, has insisted that construction in the Jewish neighborhoods of Gilo is standard Israeli policy, and that Gilo is not a settlement nor should construction there be considered settlement development.

The statement called on the PA to enter negotiations without delay.

A fellow blogger, Elder of Ziyon, confirms this tactic by showing multiple maps and pictures of Gilo in relation to the Green Line and Arab villages, and shows that Gilo isn't a settlement but rather a neighborhood on area that would be kept as Israel in any peace agreement.

But once again, the Palestinians must always seek an excuse as to why they can't enter into negotiations.

"It's Israel's fault, they want to actually negotiate, instead of giving up everything in preconditions! This isn't something we will accept!"

"It's Israel's fault, they're building homes for residents of Israel in areas that would remain Israel in any peace agreement!"

"It's Israel's fault for building settlements! The settlements are the obstacle to peace! That's why terrorism against Zionists started in the 1920's, and the 1948 and 1967 war, and many acts of terrorism, took place before 1967 - before any settlements!"

"It's Israel's fault for refusing to give into our lunatic demands that Israel commits suicide! Israel doesn't want to negotiate!"

"Israel is the obstacle to peace! Our incitement of hatred on Palestinians T.V., newspapers, indoctrination of youth, declaring all of Israel as "occupied," refusal to accept any peace talks - including the very generous Olmert offer in 2008 -, training our children to become terrorists, throwing stones at Israelis which led to the death of Asher Palmer and his infant son, have nothing at all to do with the failure to establish peace!"

Speaking of Danny Ayalon here, check out his excellent video, "The Truth about the West Bank," to learn more about the West Bank and the settlements.