Isabel Kershner of the NY Times reports that “moderate” Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas refuses to acknowledge Israel as a Jewish state.
The Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, on Monday dismissed a demand by Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, to recognize Israel as a Jewish state, underscoring the considerable gaps between the sides.
“I do not accept it,†Mr. Abbas said in a speech in Ramallah, in the West Bank. “It is not my job to give a description of the state. Name yourself the Hebrew Socialist Republic — it is none of my business,†he added, according to Reuters.
Mr. Netanyahu, who took office almost a month ago, has refused to endorse the notion of an independent Palestinian state alongside Israel as a solution for the conflict, as many nations urge. But he says Palestinian recognition of Israel as the national state of the Jewish people is crucial for progress in any future talks.
Netanyahu changed his stance a little from his original statement and said that no agreement was possible without the Palestinians accepting Israel as a Palestinian Jewish state. (Thanks to commenter Noam for the catch!)
But it’s misleading to write that Netanyahu doesn’t accept “an independent Palestinian state” as Barry Rubin points out:
But the fact is that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu accepted the two-state solution back in 1997 when he took over in the midst of the Oslo agreement peace process and committed himself to all preceding agreements.
And Rubin turns things around.
This is not the real issue. The real issue is this: much of the world wants Israel to agree in advance to give the Palestinian Authority (PA) what they think it wants without any concessions or demonstration of serious intent on its part.
The first problem is that the demand is totally one-sided. Does the PA truly accept a two-state solution? That isn’t what it tells its own people in officials’ speeches, documents of the ruling Fatah group, schools, the sermons of PA-appointed clerics, and the PA-controlled media.
The second problem is that PA compliance with its earlier commitments is pretty miserable, though this is a point that almost always goes unmentioned in Western diplomatic declarations and media.
Since 1993, Israel has given the Palestinian Authority legitimacy (the PLO supposedly renounced violence in return for no longer being considered a terrorist organization), territory ( Jericho, Ramallah, Bethlehem, Tulkarem, Kalkilye, Nablus, Jenin and all of Gaza) arms, money and the Palestians have failed to keep a single term (no violence, no incitement against Israel) of the Oslo agreements. Given that Abbas has done nothing for Israel, the question really should be whether or not Abbas (or any leader of the PA) accepts the notion of an independent Jewish state living alongside a Palestinian state. Abbas’s latest makes it clear that the answer is most likely “no.”
Kershner goes on:
During a trip to the region in mid-April, President Obama’s envoy to the Middle East, George J. Mitchell, said the two-state solution was the “only solution†to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, leaving the conservative-leaning Mr. Netanyahu and his predominantly right-wing government little room for maneuver.
Abbas is clearly expressing his own hesitations about a two state solution and yet Kershner doesn’t mention anything about his “room to maneuver.”
Kershner, though, does get credit for this:
In an attempt to bolster the Palestinian argument, Mr. Erekat on Monday produced a copy of a letter signed by President Harry S. Truman on May 14, 1948. In its original form, it recognizes the provisional government of the new Jewish state, but the typed words “Jewish state†in the second paragraph have been crossed out and replaced with the handwritten “State of Israel.â€
Shlomo Avineri, a professor of political science at the Hebrew University of Jerusalem, said Mr. Erekat was misinterpreting the American president’s intention. According to Mr. Avineri, the Truman letter had been prepared hours before Israel declared its independence, before the new country had chosen its name.
It’s nice to see an American paper quoting Shlomo Avineiri again. And it’s all too familiar seeing a “moderate” Palestinian trying to rewrite history.
Yaacov Lozowick considers Abbas’s statement to be “not news:”
The peculiar thing about this is that it’s not news. It has been the official Palestinian position ever since they began recognizing Israel’s existence, somewhere between the late 1980s and early 1990s, and it effectively negates the recognition because it assumes large numbers of Palestinians will move into Israel, thus turning it into a bi-national state at best. No official Palestinian spokesman ever said otherwise, no matter how moderate he purports to be. This is the main reason why even Olmert and Livni never got close to a peace agreement with Abbas during the 18 months or so of their talks: the positions of the two sides are too far apart.
Shmuel Rosner expects that Abbas’s outburst will strengthen Netanyahu domestically. (Rosner’s Israel Factor panel doesn’t foresee a major confrontation between Israel and the United States over a two state solution.) Israel Matzav picks up another immoderate suggestion by Abbas: that Hamas divide into political and military “wings” so that they can receive American funding. (What? They weren’t already divided into wings?) And Yid With Lid notices that Abbas essentially said give us all we want, then we’ll talk.
Not surprisingly Bashar Assad says roughly the same thing.
Syrian President Bashar Assad believes that the return of the Golan Heights is a condition for peace talks between his country and Israel, but at the same time does not foresee such negotiations happening in the near future.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
