Palestinian FM rejects Quartet proposal for not addressing settlements, Israeli withdrawal

[Jefferson23]

Proposal calls for setting agenda for new peace talks with a goal of a deal by the end of 2012; U.S. says timeline is 'realistic and serious.'

By Natasha Mozgovaya, Barak Ravid and Avi Issacharoff

Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Malki rejected on Saturday the Quartet's proposal to renew peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians. Speaking to a Palestinian radio station, al-Malki said that the Quartet's proposal does not call for a settlement freeze and an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 lines, and therefore isn't sufficient.

In a statement on Friday, the Quartet - the United Nations, the European Union, the United States and Russia -- said it wanted to see comprehensive proposals within three months on territory and security, and substantial progress within six months.

The statement followed a day of high-stakes diplomacy over the Middle East which saw Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas submit a formal application to the UN Security Council for recognition of a Palestinian state.

Also on Friday, a U.S. official said that the proposal by the Quartet of Middle East mediators - according to which Israel and the Palestinians should meet within one month to agree an agenda for new peace talks with a goal of a deal by the end of 2012 – was "realistic and serious."

in full: http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/palestinian-fm-rejects-quartet-proposal-for-not-addressing-settlements-israeli-withdrawal-1.386482

[bemildred]

1. +1.

Having a recognized Palestinian government can only facilitate negotiations and peace.

[Jefferson23]

2. +1 back at ya. n/t

[hack89]

5. You are kidding right?

The PA is recognized as the government - the world does not deal with anyone else. How does a state change that?

[bemildred]

8. I am not kidding.

I am also quite confident that you could work out the reasoning if you wanted to, and I have no interest in arguing with you about it. I will just point out to you that a large number of very important people of all stripes have just had major conniptions over this issue, so there must be some reason for that. It is true that I think the VIPs were mistaken to make such a fuss about it, but that still leaves the question as to why they did? There are various pieces posted here that go into these issues: why various parties do or do not like it, what effects it would have, etc. and do it much better than I.

[hack89]

9. They have a recognized government.

They gain nothing - no leverage, no extra funds, no advantageous position. At the end of the day they will.end up exactly where they started - at a table across from Israel. And statehood will mean nothing.

[bemildred]

19. Yes, completely useless, means nothing, now can we move on? nt

[hack89]

20. Sure - not that it makes any difference

The Palestinian insistence on unreasonable preconditions before they are willing to talk ensures that nothing will change. Their unwillingness to recognise Israel as a Jewish state is not encouraging either. The entire point of this UN stunt is to placate domestic pressure and find a way to gain leverage to avoid the concessions they will have to make.

[Fozzledick]

3. -1. Abbas "negotiates" like a teabagger.

He makes extortionate demands for preconditions that he knows are unacceptable, then when he's offered 99% of what he demanded he walks out and brags about his refusal to compromise. If he really wanted peace he would sit down and talk instead of making excuses not to.

[pennylane100]

4. Well it is very hard to have peace talks

if you cannot discuss your main grievances. Israeli settlements are a very big problem for the Palestinians and it does not seem unreasonable to discuss what the borders would be in any peace settlement. If they do not start talking about it, nothing will change.

[azurnoir]

6. well it could be very hard to have 'Peace Talks'

when one side will have a hard time hearing the other above time hearing the other above din of bulldozers, saws, hammers ect, you do realize Israel just ok'd around 4500 new settlement units on occupied er disputed land with still more to come

[Jefferson23]

7. Yea, Bulldozer Watch is in order, I think. All those moves for peace

need to be documented...so many of them too.

[pennylane100]

26. Well I definitely agree with that.

However, my point was that the Palestinian foreign minister is right to insist that peace talk must include the return to 1967 borders and I also think that not just the freezing of new settlements, but the demolition of all the settlements should also be considered.

[shira]

10. +1 to comment #3. Abbas refused to negotiate during the 10 month freeze. Why is he demanding...

...another one?

And Israel now needs to withdraw to the 1967 lines?

He simply doesn't want to negotiate and it couldn't be more obvious. Negotiations are a dead end for him. If he agrees to anything reasonable, he's a dead man - the next Sadat. By refusing yet another reasonable offer, he exposes himself as a fraud.

Is it any wonder he refuses to negotiate?

[Jefferson23]

11. The Settlement Freeze That Isn't

If there were any doubt of Benjamin Netanyahu’s commitment to the settlement enterprise, he dispelled it this week.

snip* The freeze is really a very thin layer of ice atop the river of settlement growth. Netanyahu says it will last just 10 months (of which three weeks have already passed) and no more. It doesn’t apply to Israeli-annexed East Jerusalem, where building of Jewish neighborhoods is intended to block a political division of the city between Israel and a Palestinian state. It also doesn’t apply to 3,000 or more housing units already under construction elsewhere in the West Bank. For example, in Modi’in Illit, a town of 38,000 or so people, work continues on more than 850 homes. A recent analysis by the Peace Now movement shows that relative to population size, the rate of residential building is higher in the settlements than inside Israel—even during the supposed freeze. In other words, the availability of homes will keep encouraging Israelis to migrate to settlements. Unnatural growth will continue.

http://prospect.org/cs/articles?article=the_settlement_freeze_that_isnt

Obama's Statement Is In Line With Comments By Bush, Olmert, And The U.S. House Of Representatives
In 2008, Then-Israeli Prime Minister Edud Olmert Stated That Israelis Must "Return To The Core Of The Territory That Is The State of Israel Prior To 1967." On the anniversary of the death of Yitzhak Rabin, who was assassinated by an Orthodox Jew opposing the Oslo Accords, then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert stated: "We must give up Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem and return to the core of the territory that is the State of Israel prior to 1967, with minor corrections dictated by the reality created since then." From Haaretz:

http://mediamatters.org/mobile/research/201105200001

[shira]

12. Now that's more Palestinian than the Palestinians. When did Abbas or the PA balk at this "freeze"

...during the 9 1/2 months they avoided negotiations? They never said the "freeze" was inadequate and that's why they avoided negotiations AFAIK.

[Jefferson23]

13. I don't see evidence you have any idea what Abbas, the PA, nor

the Israeli government you work so hard to shield say or have said...none.

[shira]

14. Can you find one article from the time of the freeze stating that the reason the PA refused...

...to negotiate was because the freeze was inadequate?

What you're presenting are apologetics after the fact, a lame excuse for the PA well after the 10 month freeze lapsed.

[Jefferson23]

15. Anyone can read the links I left, and then they can

contrast the information with your claims about the freeze and the borders in your first post in this thread. That is, if they
are interested.

[shira]

16. Your article is crap. Here's Abbas demanding a continuation of the so-called bogus "freeze"...

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/news/abbas-end-of-settlement-freeze-would-end-direct-peace-talks-1.309608

At no time during the 10 months did the PA argue the freeze was inadequate.

This article shows the PA thought it was good enough to continue beyond 10 months.

[Jefferson23]

17. The article shows the PA thought it was good enough to continue

beyond 10 months? So you acknowledge there was no freeze as Bibi had claimed, or you would not have added, " thought it was good enough."

ANY settlement activity that took place and it did significantly continue is NOT a freeze. What it did was add to the complete hypocrisy that Netanyahu owns. Even the fake freeze to continue was denied.

Consider what Bill Clinton said of him recently, and the West Bank..these were not statements and finger pointing at Bibi
to merely to fine tune Bill's own legacy. Read carefully what he says, what Likud's objectives have been all along.

[shira]

18. It means the PA evaded negotiations during a 10 month freeze & your article is crap. n/t

[Jefferson23]

22. Okey dokey. n/t

[shira]

23. Good, so hopefully you learned the PA saw the freeze as legit. Let me know if you still...

...require more convincing.

[Jefferson23]

24. Okey dokey does not mean agreement, it means you're a waste

of time and my links, as well as your posts..you nor I control who accepts them or not.

I post my links not to convince you but as an alternative for anyone else to consider.



I hold no illusions about you and accuracy in reporting.

[shira]

25. Why would Abbas demand extension of a phony freeze back in 2010 in order to continue negotiations?

Do you have a rational response for that one?

In fact, Abbas is asking for a freeze RIGHT NOW. Where have you seen in recent days that he is asking for a "real" freeze as opposed to the phony one you're trying to peddle here?

[azurnoir]

27. A question if Bibi is really willing to give up land why the refusal to stop building temporarily

what's the rush? You can complain all you want about the Palestinians refusing to negotiate for 9 months but it still really doesn't explain why Israel will not stop building and in fact is revving it up if the Palestinians are willing to negotiate now so whats the difference, if Israel really wants peace all that badly. The land will be there unless of course Bibi and Israel are trying desperately to create more facts on the ground prior to or instead of any negotiations or peace

[shira]

28. Why freeze building on land everyone knows will be part of a future Israel?

There will be land swaps and many settlements will clearly be part of a future Israel.

[azurnoir]

29. Really 'everyone knows ' this?

but thanks for apparently admitting Israel has decided what it will and will not do making negotiations a useless charade at best

[Violet_Crumble]

21. No, he doesn't. Nutty certainly is akin to the Tealiban, though...

So, we all know that ceasing settlement construction is totally unacceptable to Israel and it's 'supporters', but it's an extremely reasonable expectation seeing as how for the past 20 years of 'peace process' the settlements have grown and grown.

If he really wanted peace he would sit down and talk instead of making excuses not to.

Israel refused to negotiate with the Palestinians for a very long time. Maybe if they'd sat down and talked instead of making excuses, then the occupation would be ended and there'd be two viable and independent states living side by side.