I am trying to write as clearly as possible and in the simplest words conceivable, as any writer and journalist is supposed to do. The best outline I could reach regarding the indirect talks between Israel and the Palestinians is that they are not a goal per se, and thus they will not fail. The so-called proximity talks cannot succeed either, because the parties involved do not want them. For instance, the Palestinian side knows that it is facing a fascistic Israeli government that wants to expel the remainder of the Palestinians from their own country. However, the Palestinians rely on financial and diplomatic support from the United States and Europe, and hence, cannot reject a U.S request. As for the Israeli side, it can claim that it is engaging in negotiations on its own terms, and not on any American terms. Furthermore, sources in the Netanyahu government leaked that the Israeli Prime Minister ‘tamed' President Obama, and as a result, settlement building continued, while Obama promised Jewish American organizations that the issue of Jerusalem will not be on the table until the last stages of the negotiations. With this background in mind, there are two deadlines that cannot be ignored: first of all, the Arab League's support for the Palestinian Authority's acceptance of going to negotiations, stipulated that something concrete must materialize in a couple of months. And second of all, the Israeli government's freeze on settlements will expire next September. This is while noting that settlement building did not stop at all since Jerusalem was excluded from the freeze- although it is the most important area under question- while building continued in the ongoing projects in the settlements of the West Bank. So, there are two sides that do not want marriage, and yet, they are sitting down to plan the wedding party. What is the way out then? I started by saying that the indirect talks will not fail because I feel that Obama does not want them as a goal per se. Rather, he is seeking such talks to help him draft a framework for the peace plan that his administration will announce in the upcoming few months, and which it will present before an international conference on peace in the Middle East. Such a move will render the plan an international resolution, and not just another American plan. Since the beginning, Obama said that peace in the Middle East is a vital American interest. This was also echoed by the U.S military commanders in the region who said that not resolving the Palestinian cause incites further anti-Americanism among Arabs and Muslims, and harms strategic U.S interests in the entire region. Such a stance by Obama is important because the President took the initiative in this case. Previously, the former U.S presidents would wait until the situation in the Middle East compels them to intervene. However, Obama entered the White House at a time when the talks between the Palestinians and Israel were frozen, and thus, there was nothing to compel him to intervene. Nonetheless, he did, and his first call was with President Mahmoud Abbas and not the Israeli Prime Minister. Furthermore, he will receive Abu Mazen in the White House this month to reassure him that his administration will guarantee the minimum acceptable Palestinian demands, and I can say with confidence that his meeting with the Palestinian president will take place in a much better atmosphere than any meeting with Netanyahu will have. Thus, what is important in the proximity talks is for them to provide President Obama with the necessary information to draft a comprehensive peace plan that starts in the United States and evolve to become an international plan. In my opinion, Israel will reject such an American plan while the Palestinians will accept it with some reservations, most notably regarding the Right of Return. Israel will not allow the refugees to return, and the discussions about this will be focused on a limited number of refugees returning, as part of the old ‘reunion' program. I am writing on the basis of the information available, and on what I personally heard the Palestinian leaders and Arab officials involved in the negotiations say. However, I am pessimistic, and I believe it likely that the Netanyahu government will attempt to turn the table on everyone around it by creating situations that are much more dangerous than the confrontation with the Palestinians. For instance, the Netanyahu government might provoke a military confrontation with Iran that spills over the entire Middle East, or fabricate premises for a war with Hezbollah, and perhaps with Syria and Lebanon. The Israeli and U.S Likudnik cabal managed, through the war on Iraq, to put off peace in the last decade, and a new war will also put it off in the second decade of this century. Also, Israel will always find a majority in both houses of the U.S Congress that supports its war against the Arabs, as we have seen in the summer of 2006, and in the Gaza Strip between late 2008 and early 2009. I am trying to find reasons to expect any breakthrough or limited progress but to no avail. This is because there is a fascistic occupation government in Israel that does not want peace, while the Palestinians are bitterly divided among themselves and so are the Arabs. While Obama indeed wants a resolution to the conflict and he means what he says, the road to the cemetery is often paved with good intentions. [email protected]
