Someone please let me know if they see any airborne Porky Pigs. Because I’m not quite sure I’m really reading this:
Clinton said in her in-flight remarks that if the negotiating agenda is sequenced correctly and pursued successfully, settlements could disappear as a central point of contention.
“There are a lot of ways to get to the goal. Remember, the goal is to work toward agreement on core issues like borders and territory that would, if agreed upon, eliminate the debate about settlements,” she said.
Clinton recalled that when Netanyahu announced the partial moratorium nearly 10 months ago, it was widely attacked.
“It was summarily criticized, roundly and consistently, by everyone in the region,” she said. “And I took my fair share of that criticism for saying what happened to be the fact: that it was an unprecedented decision by an Israeli government. And now we’re told that negotiations cannot continue unless something that was viewed as being inadequate continues.”
Of course, the AP buried the lede. The article is about the negotiations, and of course, the settlement freeze gets top billing. Less important to the AP is this statement by a Palestinian negotiator:
“The agenda includes final status issues: Jerusalem, borders, settlements and refugees, security and prisoners,” he told reporters. “If you want to pick the right path, borders should come first. If you don’t want to reach (an agreement) pick some other paths.”
Yet another demand with nothing from the Palestinian side offered as a confidence-building measure. But they’re sure all over Israel for the CBMs:
A senior Abbas aide, Mohammed Ishtayeh, appeared to take a hard line on the issue of settlement construction, telling reporters in Sharm el-Sheikh Tuesday that an Israeli extension of its partial freeze would not signal progress in the negotiations but rather progress in “confidence building.”
Read Soccerdad’s post for more on the Palestinian intransigence.
“Remember, the goal is to work toward agreement on core issues like borders and territory that would, if agreed upon, eliminate the debate about settlements,†she said.”
The core issue is whether or not Israel will continue to exist as a Jewish state. The Palestinian Arab negotiating position is that it shall not. The Israel position is that it will. A bit hard to compromise on the issue of Israel’s very existence, eh?