News
Clinton prods Netanyahu on Mideast peace talks
Reuters
Published: 13.08.10, 18:56
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
23 Talkbacks for this article
1. TEH DIRECT TALK IS THE SOLE EFFORT BY BIBI NOT OBAMA/CLINTON
BENJAMIN ,   SINGAPORE   (08.13.10)
LET BENYAMIN NETANYAHU PUT IT !
2. This could be the only way....
Mark from Georgia ,   USA   (08.13.10)
We know the Palestinians really don't want peace, otherwise they would have come to the table long ago. The stalling tactic the Palestinians use is adding unrealistic "Pre-conditions" they know Israel can't accept. Then attempt to shift the blame to Israel. But I think people have caught on to that, and now realize the Palestinians are not sincere. With a new, long, "interim agreement", something even Hamas has already agreed to...they offered a 10 year Hudna (ceasefire), w/o agreeing to peace or even recognizing Israel...Israel can use this to trap the Palestinians into 1) a true peace or 2) reveal the Palestinians true motives (to destroy Israel). Now Israel has already pulled out of Gaza, and the world watched as Hamas seized power, started a civil war.. cla.ming the lives of at least 1,436 Palestinians...including dozens of women and children. So that is on the record. Fast forward. Israel can cut a deal in the WB, leave open the EJ issue and a couple of others. If the Palestinians begin to use the WB as a base of attack, and we have repeat of Gaza i.e. Hamas attempts to seize power, or does take power. If rockets, mortars, snipers, suicide bombers etc. continue, Israel is free at that point to stop negotiations. World opinion would change...except for the antisemitic...Israel will be perceived as justified in any and all actions taken. The Palestinians will lose their opportunity to ever have country. At that point the Palestinians will have no excuse to blame Israel.
3. Remember the lords covenant
Galut ,   selah   (08.13.10)
it is on that table ...about to be carved up....I trust that he will have a lot to say about it..... may the lords covenant prevail
4. At least we know who is in charge
Marcel ,   Florida   (08.13.10)
The poodle Netanyahu always does what he is told. Is there no one in Israel who can say no to the Plantation Masters who dismantle Israel piece by peace ?
5. good luck !
Salma ,   Palestine   (08.13.10)
Invite Mark and Chelsea to the new party talks , it will be a unique Honeymoon, you can invite Abu Mazen too :))
6. HEY ABBAS! TAKE THE QUARTET AND FIDDLE OFF!
stude ham   (08.13.10)
YOU'RE NEVER GOING TO GET ANY PART OF JERUSALEM... OR FOR THAT MATTER ANYTHING OF ISRAEL'S RECLAIMED TERRITOTRIES. IN FACT YOU WON'T EVEN GET HAMASLAND!
7. the u.s. state dept is using TWITTER for peace talks. UNREAL
debra ,   usa   (08.13.10)
8. rights never taken by direct talks
wael Dardoun ,   Hebron , Palestine   (08.13.10)
Diplomacy without force is useless.the only way to get our rights is Unity, defence forces ,and nukes
9. The only basis for talks must be UN Security ..
Jehudah Ben-Israel ,   Qatzrin, Israel   (08.13.10)
Council Resolution 242, and an accommodation of peaceful coexistence between Arab and Jew, between the Muslim-Arab world and the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel must be by applying 242, as is, now. While 242 calls upon Israel to withdraw its armed forces to "secure and recognized boundaries", not to the 1949 armistice (green) line, it does so based on the assumption that the sides will negotiate that withdrawal. Also, 242 does not call for the setting of an additional state in the region, nor does it mention concepts such as "Palestine", "Palestinians" or a "Palestinian state". 242 was passed unanimously at the UNSC and has been accepted by all relevant parties to the Arab Israeli conflict. And, 242 has been the basis of ALL peace talks to date and the basis for agreements already signed between Israel and Egypt, and Israel and Jordan. Attempting to re-invent the weal is not only not useful, it is distractive to ever bringing about an accommodation of peaceful coexistence between Arab and Jew, between the Muslim-Arab world and the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel.
10. to #2
ophir ,   nyc   (08.13.10)
although you are theoretically correct, history has taught us that there will never be a possibility where the west bank run by hamas will be a green light for IDF to bombard more 'innocent civilians' / 'human shields' or what have you. the world (mostly the NY times and co) sees the gazans as they saw the poor african villagers in sudan and etheopia - helpless victims.
11. Wrong move by Hillary
Brod ,   USA   (08.13.10)
Hillary Clinton is making the wrong move. She should be pressuring the PA Islamist-Jihadists to comply with Israel's stand. The fact is Judea and Samaria are Israel's liberated historic homeland-Land of Israel. It is GOD-GIVEN and GOD-RESTORED to Israel. Why should Israel give away its liberated historic homeland to the PA Islamist-Jihadists on a silver plate? The PA Islamist-Jihadists already have a large country called Jordan where 70% of the population are Palestinians.
12. Demand the Vote, and '67 borders, in Palestine Israel
Steve Benassi ,   Silver Bay, MN USA   (08.13.10)
This solves right of return, and settlers. Jews and Arabs can live in Palestine, or Israel, or both, just like in the 50 United States. And maybe, a future EU like political union of the Middle East. Do not fear peace, Zionism does not have to be Apartheid and Racism, it can be integration and cooperation.
13. Jehudah at #9
Mark ,   Lodz, Poland   (08.13.10)
Jehudah you do realize that you are in for one hell of a let down if both sides of the conflict ever agree on a final peace agreement? Each week without fail you repeat your own personal understanding of resolution 242, it is like a mantra you need to keep repeating to reinforce your belief that the Palestinians will never have their own state. Well Jehudah I have news for you the Palestinians are determined to have their own state and until they do they will keep attacking Israel by any means possible. Are you willing for Israel to endure another sixty years of terror attacks just so you can continue to talk about peaceful coexistence between Arab and Jew without addressing the core national aspirations of the Palestinians? You can repeat your thoughts on of resolution 242 for the zillionth time and believe me we all got the idea the first time but until you can propose a peace solution that addresses the Palestinians desire for self determination which will stop them from attacking Israelis you are just banging your head against a wall.
14. #10;ophir, While that was true...
(08.13.10)
There has been a subtle shift in thought recently, After the flotilla incident the leaders came out and admitted the goal was NOT to deliver the aid but to break the the Israeli Naval blockade. The implication was the aid was NOT really needed. This has been followed up with an abundance of pictures and video's of life in Gaza. Revealing new Water Parks for kids, new 4TH l Luxury Hotel just opened, the New Mall: with stores full of every product imaginable including Israeli made goods, Food courts filled with a wide variety and abundance of food. As we see here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=R-okjIj8MSY&NR=1 Pallywood has had years to trick people and take advantage of people of "good will". But slowly they are catching on they have been taken advantage of, their feelings cynically manipulated. So the victim charade is going to vanish
15. re 9: UNSC 242 is vague and easy to twist but UNSC 181 isnot
Bloodyscot ,   Dallas, Texas   (08.14.10)
UNSC 242 was created in 67 but recognized boundaries could also apply to Israel's 47/48 borders. UNSC 181 is more clear and was used by Israel to become a state. Nothing is really clear cut in this but Quartet and Arab countries seem to have reached agreement, it will be an uphill climb for either Israel or PA to make major changes to it.
16. # 13 The Palestine Liberation Organization/PLO accepted 242
Jehudah Ben-Israel ,   Qatzrin, Israel   (08.14.10)
and has made it the basis for ALL talks and negotiations with Israel. The PLO may have done so despite the main thrust of this organization which has always been the elimination of Israel - note, the PLO was set up in 1964, three full years before Israel captured the now disputed territories. Which part of "Palestine" was this organization to "liberate"? And why between the years 1948 and 1967 when these territories were "cleansed" of their former Jewish residents, all of them, a state was not set up there and Jerusalem was not proclaimed its capital city...?? The Muslim-Arab world, local and regional, has no intention of ever accepting Israel's right to be, and it will bring its demise the moment the opportunity arises. Thus, the need for an international intervention if we are ever going to see an accommodation of peaceful coexistence. And the best legal intervention is the application of United Nations Security Resolution 242, as is. 242 passed unanimously at the Security Council. It has been accepted by all relevant parties to the conflict. It has the basis for all talks to date and for the Israel-Egypt and Israel-Jordan peace agreements. So, why not apply 242, as is, at present time...??!!
17. P.S. to my post # 16: The conflict we face is NOT, I repeat,
Jehudah Ben-Israel ,   Qatzrin, Israel   (08.14.10)
it is not an Israeli Palestinian one, although some would want us to view it this way. It is rather a conflict between the Muslim-Arab world, local and regional, and the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel. It is a conflict between those who perceive Eretz Israel (Land of Israel) as dar al-islam (sphere of Islamic control) thus no non-Muslim and/or non-Arab political entity is permitted. And this the Jewish people and the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel, are non-Arab and no-Muslim, thus a conflict. It was, note, a coalition of a number of Muslim-Arab states, backed by the Arab League, that set out to extinct the life of Israel upon its proclamation, 1948 It was the Arab League of States that set up the Palestine (not Palestinian...) Liberation Organization (PLO) to "liberate" the country, that is Israel, in 1964. In 1967 once again it was a coalition of three Muslim-Arab states that set out to accomplish what they failed 19 years earlier: the demise of Israel. So was the case in 1973, also with the backing of the Arab League, Egypt and Syria set out to eliminate the only national home of a tiny people. And these days the major threat comes in the form of a Iran-Hizballah-IslamicJihad-Hamas-Syria coalition that has been calling and preparing to wipe Israel off the face of earth. To be sure, there is local Muslim-Arab component to this conflict, but fundamentally, it is one between the Muslim-Arab world and the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel, and this is how it should be approached and dealt with,. Unless we face reality for what it is and not based on wishful thinking we shall never be able to tame this conflict, let alone bring it to an end.
18. # 15
Jehudah Ben-Israel ,   Qatzrin, Israel   (08.14.10)
General Assembly Resolution 181, 29 Nov., 1947 was totally and categorically rejected by all the relevant parties to the conflict between the Muslim-Arab world and the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel. United Nations Security Council Resolution 242, on the other hand, was ACCEPTED by all relevant parties to the same conflict and has served, with much success as the basis for talks and peace treaties. It is now time to finish the job and apply to those parts of the conflict not settled yet.
19. P.S. to # 18
Jehudah Ben-Israel ,   Qatzrin, Israel   (08.14.10)
"General Assembly Resolution 181, 29 Nov., 1947 was totally and categorically rejected by all the relevant parties to the conflict between the Muslim-Arab world and the nation-state of the Jewish people, Israel". The only party that accepted it in the region was the Jewish community, within and without Eretz Israel (Land of Israel). The Muslim-Arab world rejected it, and as it had done so many times before and has done so many times since, it accompanied its verbal rejection with deadly attacks against the Jewish civilization population of the country with knifes, guns, explosives and mass murders of convoys of Jews delivering food and other supplies to far away Jewish villages.
20. DIRECT TALKS
vitenberg ,   saint-mandé FRANCE   (08.14.10)
only one framework: resolution 242 accepted and initialed in 1967 by all parties, "id est" in english version, and not in french one. everything else would be preconditions imposed by arabs and their "munich" friends. Bibi, be careful!!
21. DIRECT TALKS
vitenberg ,   saint-mandé   (08.14.10)
I red with great pleasure several talkbacks from yehoudah ben israel, who think too that 242 is the lone and good basis for direct talks. The 242 is very clear, a good framework, and more details the reason for direct discussions. Out of the 242 it will be a new retreat, a new oslo without consulting Israel people, a new "pitshipoi" dream! It is time to build a "242 gush"!
22. # 20 & 21 Thank you for your kind words. Also, please note
Jehudah Ben-Israel ,   Qatzrin, Israel   (08.14.10)
that there is little if any difference between the English and French versions of UN Security Council Resolution 242 in that Israel in both cases is called to withdraw its armed forces to "secure and recognized boundaries" without specifying those boundaries. Thus, there is no mention what-so-ever of the 1949 armistice (green) line and therefore the new boundaries must be decided through negotiations and not imposition. Thus, whether we talk about "territories" or "all territories (English vs. French versions) becomes an academic question. The one element that 242 is missing however is good intention. So far we have witnessed "0" amount of good intention on the part of the Muslim-Arab side...!!
23. "territories" or "all territories"
vitenberg ,   saint-mandé FRANCE   (08.14.10)
Dear yehoudah, the 242 tells us: "peace against territories" I agree with you: peace they don't want to give us. But as a lawyer, I'm obliged to discuss So peace, and we can get full peace, half a peace, a quarter of a peace ( like with egypt), a 1/8, a 1/16, may be less. And in return, we give all? It's no more a discussion but a diktat! And the jordan valley?, the security? You can't get security with your quarter of a friend 20 km from the sea. You don't know if you get a flat with 2, 3 or 5 rooms but you already know you have to pay 1 million dollars It's no serious! so why we accept such a proposition for discussion? What fears Bibi? what fear the others politicians? They think to be "ioter haram"? Best regards
Back to article