As U.S. Special Envoy George Mitchell shuttles back and forth between Israeli and Palestinian leaders in the region this week to kick off the long-awaited "proximity talks," the Palestine Liberation Organization's man in Washington remains skeptical the talks will lead to real progress in solving the overall conflict.

"To be honest with you, I don't see signals or indications on the Israeli side to point they are really going to enter these talks with the objective of trying to end the conflict with the Palestinians," PLO representative Maen Rashid Areikat told The Cable in an exclusive interview.

The Israeli side seems to be using the proximity talks to stall for time, hoping that the November elections in Washington and other priorities will lighten the U.S. pressure for a peace deal for a while, Areikat said.

"I'm saying that the Israelis, you watch what they're saying and their behavior, it does not send strong signals to us that they are changing their mentality and they are entering with a desire to conclude and resolve the conflict. I think they are hoping that time will somehow make the administration abandon its offers, and things on the ground will undermine the process," he said. "I don't think they are sincere. But they have a chance to prove that."

For their part, the Israelis say the Palestinians have thrown up new objections to negotiations, insisting on a complete settlement freeze before agreeing to sit down with their Israeli counterparts. That was not a precondition in previous iterations of the peace process, the Israelis point out.

Interestingly, Areikat said the proximity talks have "have not started officially," because all the discussions so far have focused on the agenda and procedures for the proximity talks, not the substance. And there's no agreement of what the substance of the proximity talks should be.

"The Palestinians are saying all issues are on the table, the Israelis are saying let's see how things will progress. We both have a different perception of what these proximity talks should yield or produce," he said.

Asked why the Palestinians don't just agree to direct talks with Israel now, Areikat admitted that part of the thinking was to keep the Obama administration involved as much as possible for as long as possible.

"It allows the U.S., for the first time since President Obama took office and appointed Senator Mitchell, with this team of seasoned experts on Middle East issues, to try to use their skills and diplomacy," he said.

The proximity talks are scheduled to last four months, but that timeline is flexible, Areikat said. The Israelis must institute a total freeze on settlement building, even though their pledged 10-month freeze will expire, in order for talks to progress, he added.

"We do not believe that there is a moratorium; it's irrelevant if they end it because we see continued settlement on the ground," he said, adding that there is "more impact and significance" if Israel expands settlements in the Jerusalem area, as opposed to other parts of the West Bank.

The Obama administration's focus on borders and security might not be the best approach, he said, because it assumes that other issues will be solved as a result of a border agreement. But the Palestinians want an agreement that directly addresses all issues, rather than a step-by-step process.

"We look at any deal as being one package. We're not going to accept a partial agreement, an interim agreement, to defer issues until later," Areikat said. For example, "We could make progress on water issues but not on Jerusalem, but we will not reach a final agreement unless we agree on all the issues."

The Palestinians are also not willing to budge from their stance that there must be an acknowledgment of the "right of return" for Palestinian refugees, a concession Israel believes would endanger its fundamental identity as a Jewish state.

"Israel cannot escape its responsibility for the creation of the Palestinian refugee problem," he said. "What we are saying is that Israel has to acknowledge that principle and then we and the Israelis will agree on the implementation and the mechanisms for implementing that ... Don't expect us to give up a very fundamental right ... this is part of the overall package."

 

BETZ55

3:40 PM ET

May 21, 2010

Settlement freeze is not a Palestinian 'precondition'

Very good article FP, thanks for having the Palestinian view.

The settlement freeze is not a ‘precondition’ as Israel and AIPAC are now campaigning for, but an obligation Israel undertook when it signed on to the 2003 international roadmap for peace plan.

The Palestinians don't have any conditions to resume negotiations. It's time for Israel to drop its conditions that obstruct peace in the ME. It’s about Israel and its settlements, incursions and assassinations.

It's not a Palestinian condition. It's an Israeli commitment from Oslo, the Arab Peace Initiative and the Roadmap that Israel needs to respect.

It is a matter of record that Mahmoud Abbas participated in 18 years of direct negotiations with seven Israeli governments; all without the settlements freeze.

In which time the settlements and their associated infrastructure grew exponentially. Abbas has wised up to the problems of his previous approach. More power to him.

While he declines negotiations the world is now seeing the it's not the Palestinians that were the problem as defined by the Israeli's but the Israeli's themselves.

The acquisition of territory by war is inadmissible, and thus all settlements, whether inhabited by Zionist extremists in Hebron or apolitical suburbanites in East Jerusalem, are illegal.

The world community has long recognized that a reasonable two-state solution requires a division roughly along the 1967 lines--including in Jerusalem--with at most minor adjustments.

 

BUDAHH

7:38 PM ET

May 21, 2010

Just a reason for them to blow the talks Betz55

Why are the settlements illegal? Look I think they don't help the situation, but from there and being illegal we have a long way, why are they illegal? can you telll me what sovereign nation had their sovereignty over that land? The Jordanians were occupiers themselves untill 1967 it is land under Israel's control now and no one has sovereinty over that land. Private land is a different deal.
Abbas has not wised up to anything, the only reason the hamas has not taken over the west bank is ironically because of the IDF, Abu mazen can't deliver anything, he can maybe agree on things in the west bank and while the palestinians know they can't deliver anything fron Gaza because the hamas controlls it and the palestinians are devided for 3 years already, they cannot even make peace with each other. I keep repeting this but the world seems to ignore it like hamas does not excist. If abu mazen signs a deal tomorrow than what, who is going to enforce it in the Gaza strip? like I said that piece of paper will be worthless. That is the reason for all the high demands they just cannot deliver on the palestinian side, but we mustr continue to negotiate anyway

The palestinians are again proving to be unreasonable negotiators, and the quastion is why? Why do they put the complete settlement freeze as a precondition to talks when they know that it is impossible for any israeli government to deliver such a thing, lets focus on the main issue which is agreeing on the main problems and decing where the boarders are, that way no side will have a problem with the territory or what is being bulit on it. If there is a decided boarder than the palestinians will have no more complaints about settlements etc.
There will never be a right of return Never NEver NEver, and no Israeli government will ever accept such a thing. There will be compansation at best, or a right of return to the palestinian territories.

 

BETZ55

10:31 PM ET

May 21, 2010

You need to read my original post

Until then, read some more issues of FP for answers to your ramblings.

Unlike in previous bilateral talks in which the balance of power favored Israel to dictate its will to the Palestinians on the basis of "take it or leave it". Israel negotiates for the sake of negotiating, all the while creating new facts on the ground that make it impossible for the Palestinian side to continue.

The Israeli government has a choice, either peace or settlements, and it can't have both.

 

JACOB BLUES

8:41 PM ET

May 21, 2010

Honestly Betz, the "world" doesn't give a shit

The "World" has more important things to worry about than a local land dispute.
.
If it isn't the global economy, various man-made or natrual disasters, poverty, or some disease outbreak, its going to be focused on the World Cup finals in the next two months.
.
"The World", has been propping up the Palestinians for decades now. In return, "The World", has received HAMAS, and a Palestinian leadership that falls to the bottom of the corruption rankings (anyone find Arafat's missing billions yet?).
.
Honestly, the world has their own concerns to deal with. If Abu Mazen is going to scream foul and take his bat and ball and go home declaring "settlements", well, that will hold only as long as the next suicide bomber or rocket attack. It's awfully difficult to claim some ephemeral high ground when half your population clings to the idea of destroying Israel and the other half doesn't want to kill the Jews, just make them go away.
.
At the end of the day, the argument of "give us everything we want, or we're not going to have peace, but go to war with you and take it anyway" doesn't hold as a serious argument for "peace".

 

BETZ55

9:23 PM ET

May 21, 2010

Not a very impressive, just

Not a very impressive, just another Israeli apologistt, to put it mildly, merely a repetition of the hasbara explanation of the conflict. It totaly fails to set the conflict in a greater strategical or even tactical perspective.

"The "World" has more important things to worry about than a local land dispute." -
Your joking right? You need to go back into the FP files by about 5 days and read about how the settlements and the Israeli-Palestinains issue is in the top three issue when Clinton makes here world rounds. Nice try.

"The World", has been propping up the Palestinians for decades now. In return, "The World", has received HAMAS, and a Palestinian leadership that falls to the bottom of the corruption rankings (anyone find Arafat's missing billions yet?).
Still kidding I see. Propping up the Palestinains? The US sends Israel 10 million dollars a day while our own go without here in the US. The US has been "propping up" Israel for decades. No, you say? Good, just send us back all the money care of the taxpayers of the US.

You only need to look to Israel for government dysfuntion. Israel is a country with no boss. Its cabinet is divided in a dysfunctional way. There's a deciding duo of Netanyahu and Defense Minister Ehud Barak, alongside a mostly right-wing forum of seven key ministers, plus another 23 ministers, all of whom do whatever they feel like. How did that Olmert corruption charge go? How about your moldavian thug of an FM Lieberman's corruption and fraud charges?

Rockets - How many Israelis have been killed by rockets ?
3 in 5 years.

http://www.jpost.com/Israel/Article.aspx?id=175599

While the rockets are an ineffective means of fighting back, they are the logical outcome of over sixty years of brutality, ethnic cleansing and assorted crimes against humanity committed by Israel against the Palestinians and other Arabs neighbors.

Rocket attacks from Gaza have almost ceased. A small number of rockets have been fired, although splinter groups and not Hamas itself are believed to be behind the attacks.

Also, if, during the period between 2000 and 2009 that Hamas shot those thousands of Rockets, Israel had not shot 14500 mortars into Gaza, you might also have a point. But you don’t.

The same cannot be said of the illegal settler terrorists. You know, the ones that are now killing, beating up, setting fire to, defaming mosques (just like the Nazis). Oh and let's not forget the serial settler killer Jack Teital.

Oh, and Hamas? The Israeli's only have themselves to blame for them.
You are ignoring the fact that Israel helped Hamas rise in the 1980s to defeat the PLO and then when the PLO ceased being effective advocates for its people, it embraced it and sidelined Hamas.

Zionism is the ethnic cleansing of all Palestinians from ‘Jewish’ land. You can’t accuse Hamas while ignoring all the right wingers in Israel who call for the ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians. You’re a hypocrite and not very good one at that.

Israel, and you, are forgeting that its continued denial of freedom to the Palestinians and its continued racist, apartheid regime are the very essence of the issue.

For Palestinians the list is endless and growing, particularly with each growing settlement, every home demolition, every land confiscation, every eviction and each day that passes that a brutal siege is imposed on the Gaza Strip or that Palestinian refugees are not allowed to return to their homes simply because they are not Jewish.

If you actually want peace, you don’t build illegal settlement colonies in the Palestinian capital or on Palestinian land.

You gotta work with what you have. Logically and morally, if one is an Israel supporter, like you, that‘s not much. Israel is the ugly face of Judaism.

Go back to the Institute of Hasbara in your capital, Tel Aviv. You need a refresher course.

 

Josh Rogin reports on national security and foreign policy from the Pentagon to Foggy Bottom, the White House to Embassy Row, for The Cable.

Read More

Enter your email address to get The Cable delivered to your inbox each night:

Delivered by FeedBurner