JERUSALEM—U.S. President Barack Obama finally got his wish for a meeting with the leaders of Palestine and Israel on Tuesday. After months of high-level diplomatic pressure, he hosted a highly anticipated meeting with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu in New York.
The meeting did not bear much in the way of results. It ended with a short remark made by President Obama urging the two sides to come together.
“We have to summon the will to break the deadlock that has trapped generations of Israelis and Palestinians in an endless cycle of conflict and suffering,” said Obama in televised comments after the three-way meeting. “We cannot continue the same pattern of taking tentative steps forward and then stepping back. Success depends on all sides acting with a sense of urgency.”
Obama wants to restart negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians and forge a permanent agreement for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. But the problem lies in the unwillingness or the inability of both the Israelis and the Palestinians to soften their basic demands.
The Palestinians are not willing to consider any negotiations with the Israelis until the Israelis freeze all construction of Jewish settlements, including in east Jerusalem. To make matters more complicated, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is paralyzed by his right-wing coalition.
Israel for its part will not sway from its position that Palestinians must formally recognize the State of Israel and the State’s right to build in the holy city of Jerusalem.
During Prime Minister Netanyahu’s meeting with Abbas and Obama in New York, some of his ministers went to support people protesting a settlement freeze. Even if Netanyahu comes up with a formula for a temporary or partial freeze that his government approves, it likely will still be much less than the Palestinians are willing to accept. For now, the two sides are just negotiating the terms under which they will negotiate. It’s difficult to predict what concessions they will have to make when, if ever, real negotiations begin.
More than 15 years have passed since the Israelis and the Palestinians started to negotiate. The standing issues that have continually marred negotiations have not fundamentally changed. Several times the core issues have been debated and negotiated, only to end in frustration or violence.
The failure of the Annapolis process, which was meant to establish a Palestinian state by the end of 2008, left the Palestinians disappointed and pessimistic. As a result, the Palestinians are looking for different ways to further their aims other than through negotiations.
In Palestinian politics, some are talking about renewed violence towards Israel, or some kind of civil resistance. Others, like Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, are looking for ways to establish a Palestinian state unilaterally within the next two years.
Others in Palestinian politics have offered to negate the two-state solution and work towards merging into Israel somehow and fulfilling the aspiration of some Palestinians to have a shared state with the Jewish population.
While those who favor the two-state option, like President Obama, are working hard to achieve it, the enduring problem is that in the end, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians who must agree on a solution together.
The meeting did not bear much in the way of results. It ended with a short remark made by President Obama urging the two sides to come together.
“We have to summon the will to break the deadlock that has trapped generations of Israelis and Palestinians in an endless cycle of conflict and suffering,” said Obama in televised comments after the three-way meeting. “We cannot continue the same pattern of taking tentative steps forward and then stepping back. Success depends on all sides acting with a sense of urgency.”
Obama wants to restart negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians and forge a permanent agreement for the establishment of an independent Palestinian state. But the problem lies in the unwillingness or the inability of both the Israelis and the Palestinians to soften their basic demands.
The Palestinians are not willing to consider any negotiations with the Israelis until the Israelis freeze all construction of Jewish settlements, including in east Jerusalem. To make matters more complicated, Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is paralyzed by his right-wing coalition.
Israel for its part will not sway from its position that Palestinians must formally recognize the State of Israel and the State’s right to build in the holy city of Jerusalem.
During Prime Minister Netanyahu’s meeting with Abbas and Obama in New York, some of his ministers went to support people protesting a settlement freeze. Even if Netanyahu comes up with a formula for a temporary or partial freeze that his government approves, it likely will still be much less than the Palestinians are willing to accept. For now, the two sides are just negotiating the terms under which they will negotiate. It’s difficult to predict what concessions they will have to make when, if ever, real negotiations begin.
More than 15 years have passed since the Israelis and the Palestinians started to negotiate. The standing issues that have continually marred negotiations have not fundamentally changed. Several times the core issues have been debated and negotiated, only to end in frustration or violence.
The failure of the Annapolis process, which was meant to establish a Palestinian state by the end of 2008, left the Palestinians disappointed and pessimistic. As a result, the Palestinians are looking for different ways to further their aims other than through negotiations.
In Palestinian politics, some are talking about renewed violence towards Israel, or some kind of civil resistance. Others, like Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad, are looking for ways to establish a Palestinian state unilaterally within the next two years.
Others in Palestinian politics have offered to negate the two-state solution and work towards merging into Israel somehow and fulfilling the aspiration of some Palestinians to have a shared state with the Jewish population.
While those who favor the two-state option, like President Obama, are working hard to achieve it, the enduring problem is that in the end, it is the Israelis and the Palestinians who must agree on a solution together.
Friends Read Free