Peace Talks: What Is Behind The Palestinian Message?
Translations of this item:
For now, the Palestinian Authority's strategy is to continue talking while at the same time blaming Israel for the lack of progress. Its next step would be to seek international intervention and pressure to force Israel to all its demands, including a full withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines.
Palestinian officials in Ramallah have lately been competing against each other over the release of statements regarding the secret peace talks with Israel.
All these statements have one theme in common: holding Israel responsible for the expected failure of the US-sponsored talks.
In briefings to Palestinian journalists, some of the officials have gone as far as threatening to pull out of the talks in protest against continued construction in the settlements.
Such statements and threats have accompanied the talks ever since they resumed several weeks ago.
PLO, Fatah and Palestinian Authority officials have described the talks as "futile," "unproductive," "a waste of time" and "a cover for Israel to pursue its policy of creating new facts on the ground."
U.S. Secretary of State Kerry, Israeli Justice Minister Livni, and Palestinian Chief Negotiator Erekat address reporters in Washington, D.C., on July 30, 2013. Palestinians are disappointed that US envoy Martin Indyk has attended only one out of five sessions of talks with Israel, and some Palestinian officials have threatened to pull out of the talks. [State Department photo/ Public Domain]
The officials who have been talking about the peace talks include the chief PLO negotiator, Saeb Erekat, PLO Secretary-General Yasser Abed Rabbo, PLO Executive Committee member Wasel Abu Yusef and Fatah Central Committee member Nabil Sha'ath.
Others have also been briefing reporters "on condition of anonymity" -- in violation of understandings reached with the Americans, according to which Israel and the Palestinians would refrain from talking about the peace negotiations.
There are a number of reasons behind the Palestinians' increased talk about the negotiations.
First, the Palestinian statements and threats are aimed at prompting the US Administration to exert pressure on Israel to comply with the Palestinian Authority's demands, including halting all settlement construction and the participation of a US representative in the negotiations.
The Palestinians hope that the presence of a US envoy at the negotiating table with Israel would help put pressure on the Israeli government to soften its position on a number of issues, including the settlements.
The Palestinians are disappointed that US envoy Martin Indyk has attended only one out of five sessions of talks with Israel.
Second, the Palestinian statements and threats to withdraw from the talks are directed toward the Palestinian public, which has not been quite supportive of the Palestinian Authority leadership's decision to resume the talks with Israel. The Palestinian remarks are designed to assure the Palestinian public that their negotiators have no intention to make "unacceptable" concessions to Israel.
Third, the Palestinian officials' comments about Israeli "intransigence" and "arrogance" are aimed at paving the way for holding Israel fully responsible for the failure of the peace talks. The message that the Palestinian officials are trying to send out to their own people and the international community is that the Israeli government, contrary to its public stance, is not interested in peace.
By sounding the alarm bell already, the Palestinians are hoping that when the talks fail they will be able to tell the world, "You see, we told you from the beginning that these Israelis do not want peace."
But these statements and threats have also proven to be counter-productive. The more Palestinian officials and leaders talk about the "futility" and "ineffectiveness" of the peace talks, the bigger the opposition grows to the negotiations with Israel.
Of course there is also the possibility that this type of anti-Israel rhetoric could spark another round of violence between the two sides.
No wonder, then, that Palestinians have been holding weekly demonstrations in the West Bank and Gaza Strip against the same peace talks that are being ridiculed and dismissed by none other than their leaders and negotiators. Why should any Palestinians be in favor of the peace talks when their leaders are declaring, almost on a daily basis, that the negotiations with Israel are just a waste of time?
Ironically, while the Palestinian officials are inciting their people against the peace talks, they are also deploying riot police to break up demonstrations opposed to the negotiations. This happened on a number of occasions over the past few weeks in Ramallah and other Palestinian cities.
Last week, five Palestinians were injured during a violent encounter with policemen outside the Ramallah headquarters of Mahmoud Abbas.
Asked why the Palestinians are not making good their threat to walk out of the "unproductive" talks, a senior Palestinian official explained: "We cannot pull out at this stage because of American and European pressure. We will continue with the talks for six to nine months in order to show the world in the end that Israel is not interested in peace."
For now, the Palestinian Authority's strategy is to continue talking while at the same time blaming Israel for the lack of progress.
Palestinian officials are hoping that by the time the talks fail, the world would have absorbed their message: namely, that the Israelis are not interested in peace. The Palestinian Authority's next step would be to seek international intervention and pressure to force Israel to accept all its demands, including a full withdrawal to the pre-1967 lines.
Reader comments on this item
|Diplomacy with Palestinians [195 words]||A.T. Halmay||Sep 10, 2013 07:40|
|Let us note [145 words]||Jehudah Ben-Israel||Sep 10, 2013 06:12|
Comment on this item
by Timon Dias
"Arab leaders are a reflection of their people. Arab leaders don't come from Mars or the sun, they emerged from among the people and share the same beliefs... I challenge any Arab citizen who may become a ruler to do anything beyond what current Arab leaders are doing." — Anwar Malek, Algerian author.
If anyone was trying to commit "genocide" during the Gaza War, it was clearly Hamas.
What the protestors in the Netherlands also revealed is that a killed Palestinian is only worth demonstrating for when the blame can be pinned on Israel.
The normalization and common approval of slogans that actually call for the destruction of the entire Jewish State, Israel, contribute to an atmosphere of hatred, violence and anti-Semitism that now seems as acceptable as it is overt.
by Anne Bayefsky
Why couldn't the UN... sponsor a conference on combating global antisemitism?
In theory the UN Charter demands equality of... nations large and small. In reality the UN mass-produces inequality for Jews and the Jewish nation.
The UN has launched a "legal" pogrom against the Jewish state. A "legal" pogrom is a license to kill.
Modern antisemitism targets Israel's exercise of the right of self-defense because self-defense is the essence of sovereignty.
by Vijeta Uniyal
In Europe, displays of ferocity were clearly not a "spontaneous reaction" to the developing situation in Gaza. They were an opportune moment for many to act on their anti-Semitism by dressing it up as a supposedly "genuine concern" for human suffering.
In India, youth groups rallied to show their support for Israel, a fellow democracy under terrorist siege -- a pain known only too well by Indians, who have lost more than 30,000 of their countrymen to terrorism since 1994.
A majority if Indians, whose culture is not tainted by anti-Semitism, can see that Israel not only has the right to defend itself, but an obligation to protect its citizens from terrorism.
The media elites of Europe seem unable to see the threat posed to the West by radical Islamist ideology, which drives countless terrorist outfits, including IS, Hamas and al-Qaida. They also seem unable to distinguish their friends from their foes.
by Khaled Abu Toameh
Many Arabs and Muslims identify with the terrorists' anti-Western objectives ideology; they are afraid of being dubbed traitors and U.S. agents for joining non-Muslims in a war that would result in the death of many Muslims, and they are afraid their people would rise up against them.
Many Arab and Muslim leaders view the Islamic State as a by-product of failed U.S. policies, especially the current U.S. Administration's weak-kneed support for Iraq's Nuri al-Maliki. Some of these leaders, such as Egypt's Abdel Fattah al-Sisi, consider the U.S. to be a major ally of the Muslim Brotherhood. Sisi and his regime will never forgive Obama for his support for the Muslim Brotherhood.
Also, they do not seem to have much confidence in the Obama Administration, which is perceived as weak and incompetent when it comes to combating Islamists.
by Peter Martino
Scottish independence would be a disaster for NATO, putting the UK nuclear deterrent in jeopardy. It would also put into question national borders all over Europe, including Catalonia, Belgium, France's Brittany and Corsica, Italy's South Tyrol -- and Ukraine.
Russian Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov warned in 2008 that Kosovo's independence "would be the beginning of the end for Europe."
Crimea's recent secession from Ukraine was justified with a reference to "the Kosovo precedent," which Putin pointed out, "our Western partners created with their own hands."