The Periscope Post

Peace talks between Israel and Palestine balance on the knife’s edge today and look poised to fall after Palestinian officials threatened to refuse indirect negotiations unless Israel retracted plans to building in occupied territory.

The Times reported today that Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas will boycott the US-mediated indirect talks out of anger at Israel’s announcement that it will construct 1,600 Jewish settlements in occupied East Jerusalem.

So much for US Vice President Joe Biden bringing peace to the Middle East. Biden had had reason for optimism: Abbas and other members of the Arab League agreed to the proxy negotiations only last week. But just hours after Biden earnestly claimed that a “moment of real opportunity” for peace had arrived and reiterated the Obama Administration’s commitment to Israel’s security, Israel’s announcement threw the whole thing into a tailspin.

The move is prompting international observers to ask just what is Israel playing at? The Independent, in a leading editorial today, wrote that the announcement shows just what Israel thinks of the peace process: “[Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu] may be willing to go through the motions of peace talks, but his priority is to create facts on the ground that no subsequent negotiation can roll back.”

Uri Dromi, spokesman for the Rabin and Peres governments from 1992 to 1996, wrote in an op-ed for the International Herald Tribune yesterday that Israel’s persistence in settling in occupied territory is “folly”: “Beside the blunder of rubbing it in the face of your best friend and ally, there lies a much more substantial error: By expanding settlements instead of separating from the Palestinians while we still can, we Israelis are dooming ourselves to lose the Jewish and democratic state that has been won with so much sacrifice.”

Meanwhile, Biden is reportedly trying to put the furore behind him, The Jerusalem Post reported today. During a talk today at Tel Aviv University, Biden said that the talks need to go forward as planned, urging, “We can’t delay because when progress is postponed, extremists exploit our differences.”

The New York Times, in a leading editorial today, seems to agree that Biden needs to push through, writing that Biden’s claim that America will hold both sides “accountable for any statements or actions that inflame tensions or prejudice the outcome of talks” is a “very important start.”

“We also hope that if progress lags, the administration will be ready to put forward its own proposals on the central issues of borders, refugees, security and the future of Jerusalem,” the paper opined. “[President Barack] Obama has another chance to move the peace process forward. This time he has to get it right.”

Biden also appeared to have accepted Netanyahu’s explanation that he didn’t know about the plans and that actual construction on the buildings wouldn’t take place for several years. But media haven’t entirely accepted Netanyhu’s apology, especially since it appears that he’s only saying sorry for the timing of the announcement, not the substance.

“This is simply not good enough,” wrote The Telegraph in a leading editorial today. “The international community is investing a great deal of time, effort and money in seeking to bring peace to the region; and while the Israelis may have their concerns over the direction of travel, as no doubt do the Palestinians, it is incumbent on all parties to avoid such provocation while the initiative is under way.”

At the same time, Israeli op-ed writers put this recent impasses squarely in the lap of the “insatiable Palestinians,” whose “great territorial appetite” is the root of the problem: Wrote Efraim Inbar, professor of political science at Barllan University, in The Jerusalem Post, “[T]he Palestinians’ goal is to extract concessions without negotiations, hoping that Washington and/or the international community will pressure Israel into accepting Palestinian demands.”