An attempt is made to share the truth regarding issues concerning Israel and her right to exist as a Jewish nation. This blog has expanded to present information about radical Islam and its potential impact upon Israel and the West. Yes, I do mix in a bit of opinion from time to time.
weeks ago President Obama took time off from the crisis in Ukraine to
pursue the foreign policy cause that, together with nuclear disarmament,
has been closest to his heart: Israeli-Palestinian peace. Having
invited Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to the White House,
Obama welcomed him bypublicly declaringto
Bloomberg View’s Jeffrey Goldberg that Israel “could face a bleak
future — one of international isolation and demographic disaster — if
[Netanyahu] refuses to endorse a U.S. drafted framework agreement for
peace,” as Goldberg summed it up.
Fair enough, you might say:An April 29 deadlinefor
obtaining agreement to the framework is getting close, so it’s time for
a little presidential arm-twisting. It follows that when Mahmoud Abbas
troops into the Oval Office for his meeting on Monday, he should be met
with equally dire predictions of Palestinian doom if he fails to accept
far, there’s no sign of it: no presidential interviews, no statements
by Secretary of State John Kerry, no leaks of potential U.S. punitive
measures if Abbas — repeating a long personal and Palestinian history —
says no. Therein lies the fallacy that has hamstrung Obama’s Middle East
diplomacy for the past five years.
as he made clear in the Goldberg interview, perceives Abbas as the
golden key to Mideast peace — “the most politically moderate leader the
Palestinians may ever have,” as Goldberg paraphrased it — and Netanyahu
as the potential spoiler. “I believe that President Abbas is sincere
about his willingness to recognize Israel and its right to exist,” the
president said. “You’ve got a partner on the other side who is prepared
to negotiate seriously .?.?. for us not to seize this moment I think
would be a great mistake.”
agreed to Kerry’s proposal for another nine-month negotiating window
last year in exchange for Israel’s release of more than 100 Palestinian
prisoners, including many convicted of murdering civilians. Abbashailed them as heroes. Then he embarked on a public campaign to deep-six the two principal provisions Israel has soughtin the U.S. framework,
both of which have had Washington’s support. One would allow Israeli
soldiers to remain along the Palestinian-Jordanian border during an
extended transition period; the other would involve Palestinian
recognition that Israel is a Jewish state.
“Jewish state” question is hard for many non-Israelis to understand:
Who cares what Arabs call Israel, so long as they accept it? But for
Netanyahu and his followers, the question is essential. Arab leaders
have never conceded that a non-Arab state can hold a permanent place in
the Middle East, they say. Until they do so, there will be no real
peace, because Palestinians will keep pressing to weaken and eventually
eliminate Israel’s Jewish majority.
and Kerry have endorsed the Jewish-state principle; their hope was to
use it to leverage Netanyahu’s acceptance of framework language
stipulating that the territory of a Palestinian state would be equal to,
if not exactly the same as, the West Bank and Gaza Strip.Some in the Israeli media are bettingthat
Netanyahu most likely would accept that outcome — albeit with many
reservations — even at the risk of losing his right-wing governing
coalition. After all, the price of saying no,repeatedly underlined by Kerryand
Obama, is daunting: more boycotts, more anti-Israel initiatives at the
United Nations, perhaps even another violent Palestinian uprising.
short, Netanyahu has resigned himself to the likelihood that the U.S.
framework will include provisions he’s not ready to endorse. Abbas has
not.“There is no way. We will not accept,”the Palestinian news agency quoted him as saying of the Jewish-state principle on March 7. Two days later,Abbas persuaded the moribund Arab Leagueto adopt a resolution backing him up. He’s said much the same about Israeli troops on the border.
Why does Abbas dare to publicly campaign against the U.S. and Israeli position even before arriving in Washington? Simple: “Abbas believes he can say no to Obamabecause
the U.S. administration will not take any retaliatory measures against
the Palestinian Authority,” writes the veteran Israeli-Palestinian
journalist Khaled Abu Toameh. Instead, Abbas expects to sit back if the
talks fail, submit petitions to the United Nations and watch the
anti-Israel boycotts mushroom, while paying no price of his own.
Obama will disabuse him of that notion at their meeting Monday. If not,
another “peace process” breakdown is surely coming.