Responding to Palestinian Unilateralism

'Moderate' 'Palestinian' President Mahmoud Abbas Abu Mazen has threatened to declare a 'Palestinian' reichlet unilaterally in September. But what will Israel do if the 'Palestinians' take that step? Here are some possibilities.

Jerusalem is weighing the annexation of the major settlement blocs if Palestinians seek unilateral recognition of statehood, an official in Jerusalem told AP on Tuesday.

The official said that "adopting unilateral measures is not a one-way street," and that it was not the only option being considered, according to the report. He cautioned, however, that he was not aware of how seriously the political leadership was considering such a bold move.

Other responses to Palestinian unilateralism could include reducing water access below agreed upon levels, as well as restricting the use of Israeli ports for Palestinian imports and exports, AP reported.

The Prime Minister's Office said that it had not heard of the plan, Israel Radio reported.

Message to Bibi: Stop talking and just do it already.

Labels: Binyamin Netanyahu, unilateral declaration of statehood

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 12:59 AM

Are the Territories Disputed or Occupied?

Binyamin Netanyahu will be on YouTube answering the most popular questions submitted by people around the world. Although I am asking my question a bit late, here's what I would like to hear him address:

What is the Government of Israel's official stance on the legal status of the territories? Are they occupied, disputed, or something else?


Israel used to be adamant that they were "disputed" (except for Jerusalem which was annexed) but the recent governments seem to have gone away from that formulation. I would simply like a clear answer.
Elder of Ziyon

West Bank Settlements Resume

Settler leaders acknowledged construction activity would be minimal in the coming months, in part because banks and developers are reluctant to commit to new projects out of fear that building will be stopped again

Palestinians regard settlement as a major obstacle to peace because the construction is on land they claim for part of their future state. Some 300,000 Israeli settlers live in communities scattered across the West Bank, in addition to 180,000 Jewish Israelis living in east Jerusalem, the area of the holy city claimed by the Palestinians as their capital.

Immediately after the restrictions expired at midnight, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appealed to Abbas to keep negotiating.

Israeli defense officials said Defense Minister Ehud Barak has floated a proposal under which any future construction – even projects with all the necessary permits – would need his personal approval.

Under this scenario, Netanyahu would in effect be able to leave the building restrictions in place without openly declaring this. But it was not clear whether Netanyahu favors the idea. The defense officials spoke on condition of anonymity because no decision has been taken.

Under heavy U.S. pressure, Netanyahu persuaded his hard-line Cabinet to agree to the slowdown last November in a bid to bring the Palestinians back to the negotiating table after a breakdown of nearly two years.

The Palestinians initially dismissed the gesture because it did not halt construction on thousands of settlement apartments already under way. They also objected because it didn't officially apply to east Jerusalem – though there has been a de facto construction freeze there for months as well.

After U.S. mediated peace talks were launched earlier this month in Washington, the Palestinians demanded Israel maintain the curbs.

Netanyahu – a settlement champion who just last year grudgingly endorsed the notion of a Palestinian state – had faced heavy pressure within his pro-settler governing coalition to resume construction.

Any negotiations would be complicated by the rival Palestinian governments in the West Bank, which Abbas controls, and in the Gaza Strip, which is ruled by Islamic Hamas militants who overran the territory in June 2007.

On Monday, Hamas' top leader, Khaled Mashaal, said from his base in Syria that only minor issued remained for a full reconciliation with Abbas' Fatah movement. Mashaal did not elaborate, saying only that the two groups have taken "serious and real steps" toward reconciliation and would meet in early October in Cairo.

There was no immediate comment from Fatah.

Multiple efforts to reconcile the two sides have failed. Breakthroughs have been heralded before, only to fizzle. Reconciliation would likely require major concessions, including the integration of rival security forces, new elections and some sort of Hamas recognition of Israel's right to exist.

Hamas opposes peace talks with Israel and has threatened to spoil the latest round with violence.
HuffPO,AP
___

Less Engagement with POTUS, Please!

Bibi is a different story. Here the deliberate and sustained assault (from the fit over Jerusalem housing to the threats of an imposed peace plan and an abstention in the UN Security Council) suggests that more than personal ire or irritation is at play. Here Obama plainly intends — he’s told us as much — a change in American policy. The charm offensive is meant to quiet domestic Jewish opinion, not to repair or moderate its stance toward the Jewish state.

Diehl argues that a personal failing on Obama’s part is at the root of these conflicts. (”Public bullying won’t do it. Assurances of U.S. support and stroking by special envoys go only so far. What’s missing is personal chemistry and confidence, the construction of a bond between leaders that can persuade a U.S. ally to take a risk; in other words, presidential ‘engagement.’ Isn’t that what Obama promised?”) But with regard to Israel, there is something far more fundamental at issue. Despite the PR offensive, Obama’s goal is not to re-establish a more robust relationship with the Jewish state; it is merely to mask the animus that bubbled to the surface over the past two months. It is not through neglect that relations with Israel have been strained — it is by design. We therefore should not expect that increased presidential attention will result in an improved U.S.-Israel relationship. Frankly, the more Obama focuses on Israel, the more damage to the relationship is likely to occur. At this point, benign neglect would be a welcome development.

I'm with Jennifer on this. The less we see of Obama here, the happier we will all be.

posted by Carl in Jerusalem