Under the Radar, Peace Process is no Longer Frozen

by Shlomo Cesana

Kerry, Livni and Molcho have held a long string of meetings in Rome, Amman, Jerusalem and Washington • But will Abbas take the necessary steps to achieve the much-desired agreement? Don't hold your breath.

President Shimon Peres (left), U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbasm this week | Photo credit: Dudi Vaaknin

On the face of things, and judging from the newspaper headlines, it appears very clear that the main diplomatic focus is currently on the regional conflict underway in Syria.

But behind the scenes, without any newspaper headlines, the Israeli-Palestinian issue is also refusing to die down. There are indications of this all the time: After Israel's new government took office in March, U.S. President Barack Obama visited Israel and gave an important speech on the topic of Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations, while Tony Blair, the Quartet's special envoy to the Middle East, has been a constant presence in the background.

On top of that, newly appointed U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has assumed responsibility over American efforts to renew peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians. Ever since assuming the role, Kerry hasn't stopped working at it: He initiated a meeting with Arab League representatives who revived the 2002 Arab peace initiative with non-binding alterations to the 1967 borders; he encouraged Jordan's King Abdullah to become involved in the process; add to that the meeting in Jordan with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli President Shimon Peres and the regular meetings on the issue between Israeli chief negotiator Tzipi Livni and the prime minister's negotiations representative attorney Yitzhak Molcho. 

Kerry, Livni and Molcho have already held a long string of meetings. One of these meetings was in Rome, another was in Amman, and there were others in Jerusalem and in Washington. The meetings were held far from the camera lenses.

Livni claims that there is no specific American proposal on the table -- one that she would have to study and provide a "yes" or "no" answer to. But she insists that there is positive momentum and she is mainly pleased that the process is no longer frozen, and that there is a process at all. The main question is, in the event that talks break down again, will the U.S. issue a document outlining its own criteria for a permanent peace agreement?

A week ago, Kerry summed up his meeting with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu by saying that the time had come for the leaders of the region to make some decisions, and that in two or three weeks' time, a decision has to be made on how to channel all the efforts that have been invested so far.

Generally speaking, after 20 years of peace negotiations, involving every Israeli government, it seems that both sides' expectations are very clear. The central question is, will Abbas take the necessary steps to achieve the much-desired agreement? For many experts on the Israeli side, the answer to that question is very obvious: It will never happen.

Jerusalem will remain unified

The current situation is that Abbas is setting preconditions before agreeing to return to the negotiating table. He defines his demands as "guarantees to ensure the negotiations' success" but in practice he is trying to gain victories that no one has any intention of giving him.

Abbas' list of demands includes a request that Israel present a map with the permanent borders of the future Palestinian state, release all terrorists jailed in Israel before the Oslo Accords (these are people who have spent more than two decades in prison because they were convicted of particularly grievous crimes), and an immediate moratorium on construction beyond the Green Line, including in Jerusalem.

For his part, Netanyahu has made it abundantly clear to both Obama and Kerry that he is willing to sign a historic peace deal. Netanyahu has already declared that he supports the two-state solution, and that he knows that such a solution will involve painful concessions. Israel has no preconditions. All the demands will be raised at the negotiating table, and all the issues will be discussed. The principles that guide Netanyahu are also rather clear: He wants a demilitarized Palestinian state, without a foreign army, between the Jordan River and the sea, in addition to large Israeli buffer zones. The prime minister has remarked that Israel would not seek to govern the Palestinians (there would be full Palestinian control over the West Bank), but that Jerusalem will remain unified, and Israel will retain full control over settlement blocs in the area enveloping Jerusalem, Gush Etzion and Ariel.

At the basis of the peace deal that will end the conflict is an expectation that Palestinian nationalistic aspirations will be confined to the Palestinian state that will be established and Israel's Arab citizens will not seek to define their nationality within the State of Israel. In other words: Palestinian recognition of Israel as the state of the Jewish people. 

'Why so few?'

Over the weekend, journalist Avi Issacharoff published the "napkin map" that Abbas drew in 2008 after meeting with then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. What hasn't been said about the far-reaching concessions that Olmert was willing to make, or about Abbas' refusal of Olmert's generous offer? Olmert agreed to give the Palestinians 98 percent of Judea and Samaria and another 6% of the territory in land swaps for major Israeli settlement blocs in Gush Etzion, Ariel and Jerusalem.

Olmert -- and this is new information -- agreed to relinquish Israeli sovereignty over the Temple Mount. This was the issue that allegedly caused the breakdown of talks between PLO Chairman Yasser Arafat and then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak 13 years ago.

But Issacharoff's interview with Olmert reveals, more than anything else, the dynamics of the interaction. Olmert had waved Israeli and Palestinian flags at the official prime minister's residence on Balfour Street; he sent an armored and secure convoy to accompany Abbas to Jerusalem from the checkpoint in Ramallah; he offered to propose the establishment of a Palestinian state in the U.N. and rally support for this initiative, and more.

When Abbas told Olmert how many Palestinian prisoners he would like Israel to release, Olmert, in all seriousness, asked, "Why so few? Ask for more." Finally, Olmert told Abbas: Just sign here, only your initials, and we have a deal that will put us both in the history books. But Abbas said that he had to "think about it."

Back to 2013. Several days ago, in an open discussion of the Knesset Foreign Affairs and Defense Committee, Livni said that she was taking into account the possibility that a Palestinian state would be established and then be overtaken by Hamas. She said a Palestinian state would be a democracy, and there was definitely a possibility that Hamas would rise to power.

Will that possibility prevent us from signing a peace agreement? No, says Livni. We are doing what is best for Israel, while preserving the principles of security for Israel. According to Livni, Kerry sees eye to eye with Israel on all the security issues.

At the committee meeting, much to the chagrin of committee chairman Avigdor Lieberman, Livni said that unlike Lieberman, she believes that there is no room for interim agreements or temporary borders. The only thing that should be agreed upon is a final deal where all the issues are worked out. This week, at the World Economic Forum in Jordan, Abbas agreed with Livni.

Now, all we can do is wait and see whether Kerry's optimism throughout his visit in the Middle East will bear fruit or end in disgrace.

Shlomo Cesana

Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_article.php?id=9649

Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.