The US just recognized Jerusalem as Israel's capital

[Bengalzona]

(12-07-2017, 01:31 AM)Dill Wrote: Did Palestinians "walk away"? If we are talking about the most recent (2013-14) attempts to jump start the peace process, seems like the Israelis are to blame. Again.

E.g., Netanyahu insisted on a united (i.e., Israeli controlled) Jerusalem, recognition of Israel as a Jewish state, and categorically denied any Palestinian right of return to a state so defined.
http://www.jpost.com/Diplomacy-and-Politics/Netanyahu-rejects-Palestinian-right-of-return-to-Israel-329895

So far as I can tell, "coming back to discuss" would only mean reiteration of the aforementioned demands with no concessions beyond release of a few prisoners (already scheduled for release years ago) and continued Israeli control of the West Bank with increasing settlement.

Until now, the US has had some, if minimal, credibility as an impartial negotiator between Israel and Palestinians. It was upon that minimal credibility  that negotiations depended for international recognition and respect. The US stood for a two state solution (with Palestinian power of bilateral negotiations) and condemned the settlements and wanted the occupation to end.

I don't see how the US can expect continued credibility after we have just thrown our weight behind one of Israel's most contested bargaining points.  Israel has continually called for peace while continuing to settle the West bank, creating a huge block of Israeli voters who don't want to leave the West Bank. Netanyatu announced more settlements DURING THE LAST ROUND OF NEGOTIATIONS to the great frustration of Obama and Kerry.

To most of the world the message is pretty clear--Jews, Muslims and Christians are called to "work for peace" while acknowledging complete Israeli hegemony over Palestine.



For this to be a GAMBIT there would have to be a possibility that Israel would retract its claim for a unified Jerusalem capital. That became less, not more likely, because of Trump's move.

Tillerson was trying to get Israel and the Palestinians to the table earlier this year and the Palestinians walked. The view within administrations is fairly limited to the direction that admin is taking things.

(12-07-2017, 01:44 AM)Dill Wrote: The part I cut out of your post was an excellent overview, B-Zona. 

I disagree with your reading of Netanyahu, though. I don't think he wants Palestinians to come to the table. When he has them there, he does all he can to send them away again. That is the point of "playing hard."

At the moment, what could Palestinians hope to gain by "coming to the table"? Their leaders keep giving up major concessions, but nothing changes on the ground--except in the favor of Israel.  The things they want, like autonomy, the ability to farm their own lands, an end to occupation, are not what Netanyahu and the Likud want.

I think their response will have to be another Intifada. The Israeli response will be hard to spin away in international media.

Thank you.

Netanyahu's position in the negotiations at this point has to be as "the hard guy". This reflects the Palestinians' entrenched position on what they want. If he came in soft and conciliatory, they wouldn't trust him anyway. The two sides having hardline positions is why they need negotiations to begin with. During the process of negotiations, concessions are made by each side and compromises are reached. But two opposing sides never become 'friends' due to that process. That is another process which takes years (or decades) of each side honoring and abiding to the terms with which they agreed. But the initial agreement has to be made before they can start that process.

As for what the Palestinians have to gain by coming to the table, IMO they have everything to gain. This is the process for nationhood for them, the only way. Their problems, however, are that they are unable to organize behind a single entity and they have some groups that refuse to give up violence as an option. The violence has to stop on their end. No one can negotiate when there is only the promise of continued violence. Negotiations are held to bring an end to violence.

I realize that Israeli homes are being built in lands that the Palestinians claim and that some people believe that that is permanent. But the Israelis have demonstrated previously under Begin (who many initially thought was just as hardline as Netanyahu) that they are willing to remove the homes and evict their people if an agreement is in place. In the 1980's, they evicted their own people from Gaza and the West Bank even at the point of a gun.