Early Obstacle, and Test, at Start of Mideast Talks

[Paranormal Inquirer]

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/08/30/world/middleeast/30summit.html?_r=2&ref=middleeast

[Doctor Evil]

The question of settlement construction during the talks is a symptom, rather than a basic problem in itself.

The underlying problem is the following:
Both sides simply do not believe that the talks will succeed. Unfortunately, this is a self fulfilling type prophecy. Both leaders would try to manoeuvre so that the other side will be blamed for the failure of the talks. This in turn will make the US administration job much harder, as they will spend most of their time trying to put out fires, instead of trying to discuss the main obstacles for a final agreement.

Why are the two sides so pessimistic? One factor is a complete lack of trust. (And, I may add, also lack of trust in the US administration.) The other is the fact that there were serious talks between the sides which failed two years ago, after Olmert gave Abbas a proposal which he rejected. Even if Netaniahu is serious he would never match that offer. And Abbas already rejected a deal which is better than he would get from any current Israeli leader.

So, I am not optimistic about the chances of this round of talks. (I would love to be proven wrong - but this is my assessment.) I have no idea why the current administration insist on having talks which are more likely to fail than to succeed. I can only home they know what they are doing, but suspect they have no clue.

[Thunder]

it would be nice if they could first decide on final borders, so that the PA and the Israelis could say,

"this will be the final line, therefore Israel can build settlements within this line but no further".

such would take care of the issue of continued building in the settlements.

once that issue is solved, the other issues could be dealt with for as long as it takes.

[Doctor Evil]

A little kvetch:

So here we are. A thread with no responses. The subject is much more important than, for instance, what some Rabbi said or not. And yet, the latter generates many pages of bickering and the former generates no discussion.

Sometime I wonder what is the point of the discussion here? Anyone can enlighten me?

[Diazo]

The issue is that I'm pretty sure that your first post (second in the thread) is something that most everyone is in agreement with, including myself.

With everyone on the same side, discussion on this topic would be limited.

The Palestine/Israel situation in general has also been discussed quite extensively in other threads recently so there's not much new, beyond these talks, at the moment. (That I am aware of anyway.)

If anyone actually has information on the talks beyond what gets into the newspapers I'd love to read it though.

D.

[Doctor Evil]

The issue is that I'm pretty sure that your first post (second in the thread) is something that most everyone is in agreement with, including myself.

With everyone on the same side, discussion on this topic would be limited.

The Palestine/Israel situation in general has also been discussed quite extensively in other threads recently so there's not much new, beyond these talks, at the moment. (That I am aware of anyway.)

If anyone actually has information on the talks beyond what gets into the newspapers I'd love to read it though.

D.

First thank you for the response. I partly agree, but also partly disagree.

I suspect that there are many who will disagree with my previous post. For instance, many would not be aware of the offer made by Olmert two years ago. (And what it means to the current round of talks.) Others would think that one leader is interested in talks while the other is not, based on their favourite side. And so forth ...

So there is much to discuss here. Unfortunately, it is my observation that there is absolutely no discussion about such topics here. What is referred to as discussion is in fact some weird shouting match where people try to somehow demonstrate that their side is 'good' while the other side is 'bad'. I am not impervious to that trend, as various factual inaccuracies and logical fallacies cause me to get involved.

Anyway, at one time I hoped for better, but now I think that the level of obsession shown by some is so high that there is no hope for a level headed discussion on this topic. As some said, the politics forum is where critical thinking goes to die. (Or something like that.)

[Thunder]

i blaim the Israelis for continuing settlement building, and the Palestinians for using it as an excuse to NOT negotiate.

every new house that is built by Israel, is another 1,000 sq. ft. of land that will never become part of Palestine.

[bigjelmapro]

The only issue I have here is, and which is stated in the NYT article and a number of other media outlets, is that for the first time, the issue of settlements and building in E. J'lem is now all of a sudden a precondition to talks, when in all previous peace initiatives never made this a precondition to talks.

Abbas is trying to retain the upper hand in making demands for preconditions and setting up the obstacle of demanding an extension to Netanyahu's moratorium, knowing full well that preconditions to peace initiatives, especially when dealing with core issues, is an underhanded attempt to retain some face for the PA and doom the talks before they even begin. We can discuss ad nauseum the issue of settlements, albeit some settlement blocs are accepted to be part of land swaps, but setting up a precondition to peace initiatives is just selfish politiking.

[DC]

im very pesimistic, to much politics and not enough will to find a solution and make progress towards peace. Is there a solution?

[Virus]

Is there a solution?

Not really.

[Aepervius]

*shrug* I don't know about the offer Olmert has done to Abbas, I can only tell you one thing, I doubt either side are interested into talks or solving the issue.

[Aepervius]

Not really.

There are certainly a few solutions. All involve to some degree inhuman actions or massive population resettlement.

They are simply not humanely acceptable solution

[Doctor Evil]

A very pessimistic blog post (http://www.zionism-israel.com/log/archives/00000755.html) by Ami Isseroff:
One certain indication that the peace talks must fail is the flood of mail that I have gotten of late from Palestinian peace and dialog groups, and from every Palestinian or other Arab who ever spoke out for peace or sanity. They beg me to remove this or that article or section from a Web site where they are quoted as advocating peace with Israel or coexistence. They say - not for publication - that they are subject to a reign of terror: Emails; Hints; Phone calls in the night; Officials of the '"clean-as-a-whistle" "moderate" "not-like-Arafat" Palestinian National Authority (http://www.mideastweb.org/Middle-East-Encyclopedia/palestinian_authority.htm) telling them they had better toe the line - or it will be bad for their organization or their personal health.

My Palestinian and Arab friends and others who have asked me to remove their Web pages and demanded that I be silent about it, can be thankful that I do not follow their wishes: Speaking out is the only way to expose state terror. My advice to all those who are threatened is to speak out, loud and clear. But it is their decision. I will not name names. I can only decide what is right for myself.
Isseroff is, IMO, very knowledeble, and someone whose opinion should always be taken into account. He knows his stuff.