by Ted Belman,
There is no solution to the final status issues of
Recently two top administration officials advised David Ignatius, Washington Post, to the effect that Pres Obama is "seriously considering" proposing an American peace plan which would be based on "agreements nearly reached" in the past. This is outrageous, as I will explain and it has no chance of succeeding.
Of course they repeated the mantra that "[e]veryone knows the basic outlines of a peace deal" but they omitted to say, that neither of the parties agrees to it.
This is the first time an administration official acknowledged the linkage between solving this problem with solving the problem of
Apparently, after spending a year on making settlement construction and
The administration believes that the formula for success requires them to "take on the absolute requirements of Israeli security and the requirements of Palestinian sovereignty in a way that makes sense." Sorry, but
On the Palestinian side, Obama wants to satisfy the "requirements of Palestinian sovereignty in a way that makes sense". This tells us nothing about what he thinks the Palestinians should get.
But last year, after arduous shuttle diplomacy, the following "terms of reference" were agreed upon:
"Today's announcement [partial temporary freeze] by the government of
In order to reach agreement on these terms, the administration had to allow for considerable diplomatic ambiguity. So much so, that there was no agreement at all. The Arabs still resist recognizing
Even within the confines of these terms of reference, the difference between the parties' positions is enormous. How can borders based on the '67 lines, even with mutually agreed swaps, be reconciled with "borders that…meet Israeli security requirements." Besides,
Look for a great deal of pressure on Bibi to capitulate.
Netanyahu has demanded that final status issues be negotiated without preconditions. When speaking to the UNGA last September, Obama said, "… the time has come to re-launch negotiations without preconditions that address the permanent status issues"
What Netanyahu meant was that he rejected starting with previous Israeli offers and Obama evidently agreed. Yet in the position presented in the Ignatius article, Obama intends to start with what the parties almost agreed to. Furthermore the most generous offers
Throughout the entire peace process
Obama, for his part will not suggest that the Arabs compromise much because it would undermine his Muslim outreach and the Arabs would never do so. Therefore his plan will favor the Palestinians by a country mile. It will align with the Saudi Plan.
Finally, there is the small matter of
If Obama does in fact announce his Plan, he will be ending the peace process. The Oslo Interim Accords provided "Neither side shall initiate or take any step that will change the status of the
Were Obama to announce such a plan he would be plunging his administration into a battle royale with the American people just when the fall elections are underway. Even the Democratic candidates will be against it.
Announcing such a plan is one thing, enforcing it is another. No doubt the EU, the Arab League and the UN will sing its praises. The EU and the Arab League are already on record of threatening an imposed solution. Thus expect a UN Charter Chapter VI resolution to be passed by the UN imposing such a Plan. Next would come a Chapter VII resolution providing for sanctions and/or military intervention. Congress and Senate will not authorize either. Without their cooperation, there can be no effective enforcement.
Of course if the UN limited itself to the Chapter VI resolution, it could expel
The attempt to link
Pie in the sky, if you ask me.
Ted Belman,
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment