Avi Issacharoff, Barak Ravid and Natasha Mozgovaya in Ha’aretz (via the Daily Alert Blog)
Israel and the Palestinians are at odds over which subjects will open their next round of peace talks.
Prime Minister Netanyahu wants to begin with security arrangements, recognition of Israel as a Jewish state and a Palestinian willingness to declare an end to the conflict when an agreement is signed. But Palestinian President Abbas wants to begin by defining the borders of the Palestinian state.
Palestinian leaders adamantly refuse to recognize Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people.
Boaz Ganor in Globes (via the Daily Alert Blog):
From the point of view of the heads of the Palestinian Authority, holding direct negotiations with Israel is an obstacle to their strategy, and even puts it at risk. This is because, until now, they have been working to achieve their strategic goals with wall-to wall support (to a certain degree even with the support of Hamas), without being asked to pay any price to Israel without signing any agreements, without recognizing Israel’s right to exist, and without renouncing “the right of returnâ€, etc. Any significant progress in the direct negotiations with Israel will necessarily result in sharp criticism within the Palestinian arena and their position will be weakened.
Related see Jackson Diehl (via memeorandum)
But it’s worth noting that Abbas, following his first extended private conversation with Netanyahu in Washington, spent the subsequent days giving interviews to Arab media in which he publicly rejected each of those terms. Palestinians, he said, will never recognize Israel as a Jewish state; they will not allow Israeli forces to remain in the West Bank. In fact, if he’s pressured to make any concessions, he told the al-Quds newspaper, “I’ll grab my briefcase and leave.”
I don’t agree with everything Diehl writes and hope to follow up tonight.
Credit for the image: Elder of Ziyon.
See previous editions: the original and part ii.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
meh.. this is all a part of the long, long tradition of anti israel spin.
eg. when writing about the Temple Mount there will be variations of: the haram al sherif is islam’s third holiest site…..( and Judaism’s holiest)
i don’t know about anyone else but when i was taught that first is better than third.
i guess iwas mistaken.
oh and the graphic is terrific!