I believe that the direct negotiations between the Palestinians and Israel, with the participation of the United States, are quite likely to begin in the upcoming few weeks. This is because following the failure of the Obama administration in forcing Benjamin Netanyahu's government to stop the construction of settlements, the administration switched to its contingency plan of conducting negotiations over a final settlement, which will comprise all the elements of an exhaustive solution, including the issue of the settlements itself. While I know that these forthcoming negotiations were not what Abu Mazen wanted and sought after, I believe that he is being subjected to tremendous pressure from the United States and which he will not be able to withstand for much longer. I have no doubts about President Obama's desire to work out a miracle and achieve the two-state solution, and I believe that his administration indeed means what it says, and truly attempts to turn its deeds into actions. Nonetheless, I will feel more reassured when the American President issues a statement detailing the conditions of the negotiations (or when he addresses a letter to the parties of the negotiations), which would include the elements of the required settlement, as set out in his speech at the UN General Assembly. Perhaps the Americans felt that Netanyahu's insistence upon the settlements is due to his fear that his right-wing coalition would collapse, and that for this reason, he was hindering the required peace negotiations, as long as the Arabs were demanding the settlements to be frozen prior to the negotiations. In this context, the decision to circumvent this Israeli obstacle was taken, where the settlements issue would definitely be an item on the negotiation table; in fact, President Obama admitted in his private meeting with the Palestinians that he had tried to stop the settlements, but that he failed. Meanwhile, I met with most of the Foreign Ministers who participated in the meeting of the UN General Assembly, and I will summarize some of the views that I heard from them below: - The Arabs have given all what is in their ability to offer for the sake of the peace effort, and will not provide anything more, such as confidence building steps that the Americans are seeking. However, I fear that the Arabs may become subjected to further pressure from the Obama administration in the upcoming few weeks, prompting them to cave in and take some “confidence building” steps as required of them. - From the above, it follows that the Arab foreign ministers who were asked to meet with Netanyahu or the Israeli foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman have refused to do so, including the foreign ministers of Morocco, Qatar, Bahrain and the United Arab Emirates. - The Arabs have nothing to offer except the Arab peace initiative presented by His Royal Highness King Abdullah bin Abdulaziz, the then crown prince of Saudi Arabia. This initiative was unanimously adopted at the Arab Summit in Beirut in 2002. If the Palestinian National Authority decides to enter into negotiations with Israel, this will be solely based on the terms set forth by the Arab Peace Initiative. - There cannot be a peace accord with Netanyahu's government (I heard this view from six Arab foreign ministers, and had I asked the other ministers, I would probably have heard the same answer). The last point I want to make, and which is also the same as the opinion I have expressed in this column each time the issue was the conflict with Israel, is my fear that in the upcoming negotiations, Netanyahu will not have made any concessions. Perhaps he feels that he has won and that he can continue rejecting, since all the compromises so far have come from the American, and subsequently, the Palestinian side. Last May, the Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said that President Obama “wants to see a stop to settlements — not some settlements, not outposts, not ‘natural growth' exceptions.” However, Obama did not succeed in fully, or even partially, freezing the settlements. He opted to say instead in New York, following the tripartite meeting, that the Palestinians have enhanced their security procedures but that they need to do more to stop the incitement... I want to say here that the Palestinian National Authority does not need to provoke anyone against the occupation, as the latter provides enough provocation. President Obama also said that the Israelis have provided greater freedom of movement for the Palestinians, and looked into steps to reduce settlement activity, but that they need to make concrete steps on the ground in what regards these and other issues. Here, I also say that the Israelis are occupying, murdering and destroying, and have taken no positive steps that would encourage us to be optimistic about a solution. Also, my personal opinion is that there can be no solution as long as Netanyahu is in power, and I hope I am wrong. What they have done so far instead, is something that I want to rephrase from a statement given by Amr Moussa, the Secretary General of the Arab League, in a press conference he held at the UN Headquarters last week following a question about the negotiations without any preconditions. He asked whether stopping the settlements as per the International law was a precondition. Is asking to put the question of Jerusalem on the negotiation table a precondition? Is dealing with the question of refugees - this humanitarian question - a precondition for negotiations? The fact of the matter is that if there are any preconditions in this situation, they are definitely coming from Israel, because refusing to negotiate over Jerusalem, the refugees or to stop building settlements are all Israeli preconditions that torpedo the entire peace process. Nevertheless, we remain reassured by the intentions of the Obama administration, if not its ability; we shall see what will transpire.
