Doc's Talk: PM: Palestinians have much to lose from unilateral moves

Sunday, April 06, 2014

PM: Palestinians have much to lose from unilateral moves

Israeli, Palestinian and U.S, negotiating teams making effort to prevent collapse of peace process • Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu: The Palestinians will only get a state via direct negotiations, not empty declarations or unilateral moves.

Shlomo Cesana, Gideon Allon, Daniel Siryoti and Dan Lavie

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at Sunday's cabinet meeting

Photo credit: Amit Shabi

With the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations seemingly falling part, all sides put great effort over the weekend into a last-ditch bid to keep the peace process from totally collapsing.

Despite criticism U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has received, as well as calls for the U.S. to abandon the Middle East, it appears as though Kerry has no intention of giving up.

Israel has asked the Palestinians to stop the application process at the U.N. it set out on last week, and to tell the U.S. that they are ready to accept the draft proposal. If the Palestinians accede and agree to extend peace talks, Israel would agree to go ahead with the fourth stage of prisoner release, including Israeli Arab prisoners, and also free another 400 Palestinian prisoners without blood on their hands.

The proposal to return to last week's draft agreement will be raised on Sunday during meetings between the Israeli, Palestinian and American negotiating teams, led by Tzipi Livni, Saeb Erekat and Martin Indyk, respectively. A previous meeting of the parties last Wednesday night, which lasted for nine hours, ended with intense verbal accusations and no results.

Even Washington's pessimistic declarations began shifting on Sunday night, and despite the difficult atmosphere and political crisis, the U.S. also declared that it had no intention of abandoning the peace process now. On Thursday night, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Kerry spoke and agreed to continue attempts to return to the original deal.

"We are still at the negotiating table," said U.S. State Department Spokeswoman Marie Harf on Friday, adding that "the parties have said they want to continue. We are focused on continuing."

"We have said that if we can’t take steps forward, then yes, [negotiations] unfortunately will come to an end. But we’re not there yet," she said.

White House press secretary Josh Earnest said, "It is the view of this administration that it's also in the clear interests of our allies, the Israelis, and our friends, the Palestinians, to resolve this."

"It is in the interest of the world ... That is the ultimate goal, and that is something that we're going to continue to strive for," he said.

At the start of Sunday's cabinet meeting, Netanyahu said, "In recent months, the State of Israel has been conducting negotiations with the Palestinians with the goal of reaching a peace agreement. The citizens of Israel want peace, a real peace that will protect our vital national interests, first and foremost of which is, of course, security. Throughout the talks, we have taken tough steps and have demonstrated a willingness to continue with difficult moves with the goal of creating a framework that would allow us to end the conflict [with the Palestinians]."

"Just as we were about to enter the framework for the continuation of negotiations, Abu Mazen [Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas] rushed to declare that he was not prepared to even discuss recognizing Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people. He did this even though he knows that there will not be an agreement without recognizing the State of Israel as the nation state of the Jewish people -- something which the U.S. president and other world leaders also made clear.

"Unfortunately, later, a moment before we were to reach an agreement to continue the talks, the Palestinian leadership quickly moved to unilaterally join 14 international conventions, thus fundamentally violating the understandings that were reached with American involvement. The threats of the Palestinians to turn to the U.N. will not influence us -- the Palestinians have a lot to lose from such unilateral action. They will only get a state via direct negotiations, not empty declarations or unilateral moves. These only push a peace agreement further away and unilateral moves by them will be met with unilateral moves by us. We are ready to continue the talks, but not at any price."

On Saturday, Livni indicated that she had asked for less American involvement and more direct meetings between Israel and Palestinian negotiators.

"We are amid a very real and complex crisis," Livni said on Channel 2's "Meet the Press" program. "Last week wasn't good. We need to see how to fix the issues and progress. Signing Palestinian documents and applying to the U.N. was a violation and a big error that makes it difficult for us to return to a normal state of affairs."

Meanwhile, EU foreign ministers expressed their hopes for continued Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

"We support the efforts of Secretary of State Kerry," said EU foreign affairs chief Catherine Ashton.

"Kerry's initiative is without doubt in a critical phase," said German Foreign Minister Frank-Walter Steinmeier. "The radicals on both sides seem to start to prevail... we have to prevent that."

Palestinian chief negotiator Dr. Saeb Erekat admitted on Saturday that the Palestinians backed themselves into a corner and that Ramallah was interested in continuing negotiations with the U.S. as mediator.

Erekat, who met with Livni and Indyk in Jerusalem on Saturday night, said, "Our intention is to prevent the peace process from collapsing. We emphasized to envoy Indyk and the Israeli delegation that it is our intention to stand behind our commitment to continue peace talks until the end of [April]. If Israel returns to the negotiating track and releases the 30 prisoners, we will stand behind our commitment to continue peace talks."

Meanwhile, the Knesset will hold a special recess session to discuss the diplomatic crisis and the "failure of the government regarding the release of [Israeli spy Jonathan] Pollard."

Knesset Speaker Yuli Edelstein (Likud) decided to summon the Knesset to meet after a petition was signed by 25 opposition MKs on the matter. Meretz Chairwoman Zehava Gal-On, whose party initiated the special meeting, said that the "Netanyahu government is conducting a policy of rejection and could trigger a collapse of the peace process. The prime minister must report to the Knesset why peace talks have stopped and why Israel is refusing to execute the fourth stage of the prisoner release."

Senior Citizens Minister Uri Orbach (Habayit Hayehudi) meanwhile said Abbas is not a partner for peace and is not interested in a permanent agreement, but rather only the release of Palestinian prisoners from Israeli jails.

MK Tzachi Hangebi (Likud) said he hoped "that the Palestinians will regain their composure and understand that the process of bypassing negotiations does not lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state."

No comments:

The IDF’s Minorities in Numbers and Pictures

In honor of IDF Diversity Week, we present diversity through numbers and pictures. Each year, more and more Muslims, Christians, Druze, Bedouin and immigrants from around the world take on the responsibility of defending Israel.

MUSLIMS:

Muslim Arab Israelis are not required to draft in the IDF, but there are many who volunteer. In 2013, there were over 200 Muslims serving in the IDF and over 300 in the reserves.

Bedouins:

Bedouins are nomadic Muslims who were in Israel when modern borders were set in place and are now considered Israeli citizens. They are not required to draft but a growing number choose to enlist. In 2012, there were over 1,400 Bedouin Muslim soldiers doing regular IDF service and almost 1,500 in the reserves.

Read more:http://www.idfblog.com/2014/02/27/truth-idf-numbers-pictures/#more-34027

Are you aware that in 2013, Middle class taxes go up-significantly?

In January of next year, the federal income tax rate for middle-class taxpayers is scheduled to rise from 25 percent to 28 percent, and the payroll tax is scheduled to rise from 13.3 percent to 15.3 percent… This drives the marginal tax rate based on the aforementioned three taxes to 48.12 percent. Add in state and local property, corporate, excise, and other state and local taxes, and the percentage of each additional dollar that is taxed hovers around 50 percent… When half of each additional dollar earned is taxed away, taxpayers experience a disincentive to start businesses or expand existing ones. This leads to fewer jobs being created.

Why is HAMAS Inside Tampa Schools?

Clare Lopez

Kelly Miliziano, who teaches history classes at Steinbrenner High School in the Tampa, Florida area apparently thinks it’s perfectly OK to invite a senior official of a HAMAS-affiliated organization into her classroom to discuss Islam with her students. According to local media reports, not only has this been going on for years, but in spite of the civil and criminal proceedings that could result from such reckless negligence, the Hillsborough County school superintendent, Mary Ellen Elia, and the chairman of the school board, Candy Olson, also expressed approval for students under their responsibility to be exposed repeatedly to guest speaker, Hassan Shibly, who is the Executive Director for the Council on American-Islamic Relations (CAIR) in the Tampa area.
More...

Did You Know... Ignoring the Call to Islam will Bring Jihad

‘Conquest through Da’wa [proselytizing] that is what we hope for. We will conquer Europe, we will conquer America! Not through sword but through Da’wa.’
-- Yousef al-Qaradawi , Muslim Brotherhood spiritual leader The Arabic word ‘Da’wa’ means the “call to Islam.” But do not think that Da’wa is the same thing as an invitation to an optional holiday event. The classical Islamic doctrine of jihad mandates that enemies must be given the opportunity to convert to Islam or pay the jizya tax before it is permissible to attack them.
Clare M. Lopez

Who is being discriminated-facts tell the truth

Religious bias

Hate crimes motivated by religious bias accounted for 1,409 offenses reported by law enforcement. A breakdown of the bias motivation of religious-bias offenses showed:

65.4 percent were anti-Jewish.
13.2 percent were anti-Islamic.
9.5 percent were anti-other religion, i.e., those not specified.
4.3 percent were anti-Catholic.
3.8 percent were anti-multiple religions, group.
3.3 percent were anti-Protestant.
0.5 percent were anti-Atheism/Agnosticism/etc.

http://www.fbi.gov/about-us/cjis/ucr/hate-crime/2010/narratives/hate-crime-2010-incidents-and-offenses.

On March 31, 1977, the Dutch newspaper Trouw published an interview

with PLO executive committee member Zahir Muhsein. Here's what he said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct "Palestinian people" to oppose Zionism.

For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

In March 1977, Zahir Muhsein, a PLO executive, said:

"The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity. In reality today there is no difference between Jordanians, Palestinians, Syrians and Lebanese. Only for political and tactical reasons do we speak today about the existence of a Palestinian people, since Arab national interests demand that we posit the existence of a distinct Palestinian people to oppose Zionism."

"For tactical reasons, Jordan, which is a sovereign state with defined borders, cannot raise claims to Haifa and Jaffa, while as a Palestinian, I can undoubtedly demand Haifa, Jaffa, Beer-Sheva and Jerusalem. However, the moment we reclaim our right to all of Palestine, we will not wait even a minute to unite Palestine and Jordan."

The Arab Apartheid

Ben-Dror Yemini
In 1948, the Arab countries refused to accept the UN partition proposal and they launched a war of annihilation against the State of Israel which had barely been established. All precedents in this matter showed that the party that starts the war - and with a declaration of annihilation, yet - pays a price for it. Between 550,000 and 710,000 Arabs fled because of the war and a larger number of 850,000 Jews were expelled or fled from Arab countries (the "Jewish nakba").
Population exchanges and expulsions were the norm at that time, occurring in dozens of other conflict points and affecting about 52 million people. In all the population exchange precedents that occurred during or at the end of an armed conflict, there was no return of refugees to the previous region, which had turned into a new national state.
Only the Arab states acted completely differently from the rest of the world. Instead of assimilating the refugees, they crushed them despite the fact that they were their coreligionists and members of the Arab nation - instituting a regime of apartheid. So the "nakba" was not caused by the actual dispossession, which had also been experienced by tens of millions of others. The "nakba" is the story of the apartheid, oppression, abuse and denial of rights suffered by the Arab refugees at the hands of the Arab countries. (Maariv)

International Law and Military Operations in Practice - Col. Richard Kemp

"Islamist fighting groups study the international laws of armed conflict carefully and they understand it well. They know that a British or Israeli commander and his men are bound by international law and the rules of engagement that flow from it. They then do their utmost to exploit what they view as one of their enemy's main weaknesses. Their very modus operandi is built on the correct assumption that Western armies will normally abide by the rules, while these insurgents employ a deliberate policy of operating consistently outside international law. "

Lost Historical Moments

What Rabin’s last Knesset speech really said:repudiation of a Palestinian state

Rabin ruled out a fully sovereign Palestinian state :

“We view the permanent solution in the framework of State of Israel which will include most of the area of the Land of Israel as it was under the rule of the British Mandate, and alongside it a Palestinian entity which will be a home to most of the Palestinian residents living in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. We would like this to be an entity which is less than a state, and which will independently run the lives of the Palestinians under its authority.”

Rabin ruled out a total withdrawal from Judea and Samaria and thus a return to the pre-June 1967 borders :

“The borders of the State of Israel, during the permanent solution, will be beyond the lines which existed before the Six Day War. We will not return to the 4 June 1967 lines.”

Rabin ruled out withdrawing form the Jordan Valley:

“The security border of the State of Israel will be located in the Jordan Valley, in the broadest meaning of that term.”

Rabin ruled out uprooting settlement blocs, like the Gush Katif bloc in Gaza (which was subsequently uprooted by former Prime Minister Ariel Sharon):

“The establishment of blocs of settlements in Judea and Samaria, like the one in Gush Katif.

AND

Rabin ruled out removing any settlement before coming to a full peace agreement with the Palestinians:

“I want to remind you: we committed ourselves, that is, we came to an agreement, and committed ourselves before the Knesset, not to uproot a single settlement in the framework of the interim agreement, and not to hinder building for natural growth.”

Rabin insisted on Israel retaining full security control of the borders with Egypt and Jordan, contrary to Israel’s relinquishment of the Philadelphia Corridor on the border with Egypt:

“The responsibility for external security along the borders with Egypt and Jordan, as well as control over the airspace above all of the territories and Gaza Strip maritime zone, remains in our hands.”

Correcting Oslo Myths-Part 2

3) Kuttab laments that the post-1993 Oslo process resulted in a Palestinian Authority "whose ministers and legislators are not guaranteed passage between Gaza and the West Bank ...."

Before free passage or other perquisites, PA leaders were obligated, among other things, to eliminate the terrorist infrastructure in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, end anti-Israeli, antisemitic incitement in schools, mosques, and communications media, and resolve all outstanding issues through peaceful negotiations. They met none of these commitments, sometimes bolstering terrorism and greatly increasing incitement.

4) Kuttab complains that under Oslo the PA got "lightly armed police ---- but no real sovereignty over the land or contiguity between our communities in Gaza and the West Bank."

Oslo agreements repeatedly were revised, regardless of Palestinian non-compliance, until the authorized number of police grew from 8,000 to 40,000. Though they were to be the only armed forces in the territories, Israeli estimates early in the second intifada put the number of gunmen - police, "security services," terrorists, and armed gangs - at 85,000. Their armament reportedly included not only heavy machine guns and rocket-propelled grenades, but also anti-tank and anti-aircraft missiles.

Sovereignty was to be negotiated in the envisioned 1998 "final status" talks - after a five-year period of confidence-building. Palestinian leadership chronically undermined the process. Palestinian terrorism made the 1993 - 1998 Oslo period more deadly for Israelis than the 15 years preceding it.

The United States doesn't have contiguity between the lower 48 states and Alaska and Hawaii; territorial contiguity between the West Bank and Gaza Strip - that is, through the 20 miles of Israeli territory between them - was never promised and would destroy Israeli contiguity.

5) "Palestinians have been made to endure hundreds of checkpoints in the West Bank, an eight-foot wall deep in our territories, and tight Israeli control over borders."

The security barrier is not "deep in Palestinian territories," but rather encompasses less than 8 percent of Judea and Samaria, and is mostly a fence, rarely a wall; the land in question is not "our [Palestinian] territories" but disputed territory to which, according to the authors of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, Jews as well as Arabs have claims; and there are no international borders, only the 1949 armistice lines with Jordan. Under 242, borders remain to be negotiated. As for checkpoints - like the security barrier and "tight Israeli control" - Palestinian Arabs precipitated these measures themselves. No terrorism and there would be no fence or tight Israeli control and few checkpoints - like before the first intifada.

Correcting Some Oslo Myths

1) In Oslo "Israeli, Palestinian and other world leaders promised that ... Palestinian sovereignty would be solidified."

No, they didn't. The 1993 Declaration of Principles and subsequent Oslo agreements outlined a process by which final status negotiations about the West Bank and Gaza Strip would be reached. The process required an end to anti-Israel terrorism and incitement and a commitment to peaceful negotiations. The PA, Fatah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad, the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine, and other terrorist groups, sabotaged the process from the start.

2) "The reality is that, in defiance of U.N. Security Council Resolution 242, which states that it is inadmissible to occupy land by force, Palestinian territories are still under foreign military occupation."
Wrong again. Resolution 242 (1967) does note "the inadmissibility of the acquisition of territory by war." It also affirms the right of every state in the area "to live in peace with secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force." There were no "Palestinian territories." Jordan occupied the West Bank, Egypt controlled Gaza. Israel did not have "secure and recognized boundaries," so retention of some of those territories was possible under 242. Israel is not a "foreign" military occupier in the West Bank but, pending final negotiations, the lawful military administrator as a result of a successful war of self-defense.

Doc's Talk