Two decades of secret Israeli-Palestinian accords leaked to media worldwide

[shaayecanaan]

"Al-Jazeera TV and The Guardian revealed Sunday the details of 1,600 confidential documents on negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians over the last two decades.

The documents leaked so far mostly reveal secret concessions offered by Palestinian negotiators on the issues of the right of return of Palestinian refugees, territorial concessions, and the recognition of Israel.

According to Al-Jazeera, Palestinian negotiators secretly agreed to concede almost all of East Jerusalem to Israel.

The Palestinian Authority reportedly offered in 2008 that Israel take control of all neighborhoods in Jerusalem except Har Homa, the first time in history the Palestinians made such a proposal, one that they refused to during the Camp David summit.

Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, also proposed in an October 2009 meeting that Jerusalem's Old City be divided, giving Israel control over the Jewish Quarter, part of the Armenian Quarter, and part of the neighborhood of Sheikh Jarrah.

Further details reveal that the Palestinian agreed that solely 10,000 Palestinian refugees return to Israel as part of the Palestinian right of return, and that Erekat agreed to the Israeli demand that Israel be recognized as a Jewish state."

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/two-decades-of-secret-israeli-palestinian-accords-leaked-to-media-worldwide-1.338768

If this is true, and Israel turned all of this down, I really don't see how a 2-state solution can be reached with Israel's present government.

[shaayecanaan]

1. Another story

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/leaked-document-shows-what-the-palestinian-authority-really-thinks-of-netanyahu-1.338776

The PA have denied the authenticity of the reports. But then again, they would:-

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/middleeast/2011/01/2011123234940952149.html

[shira]

2. "The Palestine Papers". Fabrication of the Day.

Several people have asked me what I think about the new “Palestine Papers” which have been "obtained" (that means the PA gave it to them) by al-Jazira, the Guardian, and perhaps others, in imitation of Wikileaks.

It purports to show that the PA made Israel a big offer of peace and Israel rejected it. Naturally, this is being accepted by these and other newspapers as true without verification or considering how these claims stack up against other information. Also claimed is that the PA was ready to accept Israel as a Jewish state, again something it has totally opposed.

My reading is that this is a Hamas or hardline Fatah hoax to weaken the PA's current leadership, and that's how the PA's current leadership is reading it.

MUCH MORE...
http://rubinreports.blogspot.com/2011/01/palestine-papers-fabrication-of-day.html

[shaayecanaan]

3. What a load of cobblers...

just one blowhard quoting another.

Tell you what, I\'ll bet you another $50 that the documents turn out to be authentic. You might be able to win back the last $50 that you lost and still havent paid. Unless of course you\'re too gutless to back up your own blather.

[shira]

4. I guess fans of al-Manar will believe pretty much anything...

If the PA was going to just give up on almost all of E.Jerusalem and the settlements, then why would they (actually Obama, if he knew all this) insist on a settlement freeze for territory which the PA would gladly cede to Israel?

Moreover, Olmert offered joint rule of the Old City, but the PA said "No, let's just give away parts of it to Israel"???

Come on. Seriously?

:eyes:

It's as absurd as Israel controlling sharks in Egyptian waters, sending spy vultures into Saudi Arabia, and corrupting Gazan youth with sex gum. Par for the course with al-Manar, al-Jazira, etc.

[shaayecanaan]

8. Then you\'ve got a chance to make an easy fifty bucks, right?

Or at least wipe out your debt from the last time you were foolish enough to put your money where your mouth was.

[oberliner]

9. What do you think is the motivation to release these documents now?

Timing seems suspect - do you think it's designed to weaken/destroy the PA?

[shaayecanaan]

11. I dont think either I or anyone else could care less...

and I dont think you quite appreciate the gravity of these revelations. If they are true (and Im willing to wager that they are), then a whole lot more than the tenure of Palestinian politicians is at stake.

[oberliner]

12. No one could care less? Not even if it brings about the end of the PA?

You don't think that could have serious repercussions for the Palestinian people and the region as a whole?

Certainly Abed Rabbo cares:

Abed Rabbo blasts Emir of Qatar

Excerpt:

In a press conference in Ramallah, Abed Rabbo said Al-Jazeera's release of the documents was a political campaign directed by Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa al-Thani.

"We thank the Emir of Qatar for giving Al-Jazeera the green light to start this campaign, because it can't be the responsibility of Wadah Khanfar alone."

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=353750

[shaayecanaan]

13. You\'ve made 10 posts speculating about the motives of those who released the papers

and not one actually addressing their substance.

Perhaps you\'d like to share your views on that. Do you think that the Palestinians have a peace partner?

[oberliner]

15. I've made a total of 5 posts on this topic, including this one

Clearly the substance of the papers themselves are off base and/or taken out of context as is evidenced from the comments of the Palestinian negotiators themselves.

It seems that the real story here is the potential fallout and manner in which these documents have been released. Clearly someone (or some group) is out to embarrass and/or bring down the PA.

And from the looks of it, mission (partially) accomplished.

[shaayecanaan]

17. Y ou consider that a corpus of 1700 documents are being taken out of context?

It seems that the real story here is the potential fallout and manner in which these documents have been released.

I imagine that a photocopier was involved. Probably also one of those USB thingies. I dare say there was a disaffected and disgruntled PA employee, and a journalist who was quite happy to listen to him.

In other words, this leak was just like Watergate, the Pentagon papers, Wikileaks and a thousand other leaks that have happened over the years. Summoning outrage at the newspapers for publishing the papers (ie shooting the messenger) didnt work for Richard Nixon. I don\'t think it is going to work for you either.

I notice you have criticised al-Jazeera for publishing the papers, but not the Guardian newspaper in Britain that is publishing them in tandem with al-Jazeera. Is there a reason for that?

[oberliner]

18. A photocopier was involved?

I'm not sure if you are trying to be amusing or just misunderstood the point that I and Abed Rabbo are making.

To clarify - the "manner" in which these documents have been released - is a reference to the claim by Abed Rabbo "of falsifying the documents, changing the text and adding pictures of people who were not involved with talks."

That the documents were "full of distortions and fraud" - again according to Rabbo.

All of the criticisms that I've read by Rabbo, Erekat, and Abbas are directed against Al-Jazeera. In fact, their (Al Jazeera's) offices have since been vandalized reportedly.

Just to clarify, you are claiming that these three Palestinian leaders are lying when they claim that documents have been falsified - is that right?

[shaayecanaan]

21. Do you accept what Rabbo is saying?

Currently the Americans are saying that \"they\'re checking the veracity of the documents\". Lieberman has made a statement more or less accepting that the documents are genuine. The rest of the Israeli establishment are curiously silent.

Im not sure how vandalism of al-Jazeera\'s offices affects whether the documents are authentic or not.

[oberliner]

25. Two separate points

I do believe Rabbo/Erekat/Abbas. Seems logical to me that some of the information was mixed up or misrepresented. Certainly doesn't sound like the sort of thing they would've proposed considering their comments on E. Jerusalem and other related issues over the past few years.

The vandalism of the offices doesn't affect the authenticity of the documents; it just illustrates the potential fallout and impact.

[shira]

33. If these documents are authentic, the PA was willing to recognize Israel as a Jewish state

....one full year before the issue really came up:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/24/palestinian-negotiators-jewish-state-papers

:eyes:

It means the PA was willing to offer MORE than what Olmert asked of them.

:eyes:

It means the PA is suicidal for caving in and being more 'Zionist' than Olmert, while simultaneously incurring the wrath of most Palestinians and the hardliners for being traitors.

:eyes:

Not to mention that the PA has never once hinted or talked any such concessions in Arabic (or English) to whatever audience they were addressing.

This is without any question a hoax.

If all this were true, the PA would have accepted Olmert's 2008 offer and Obama (had he known of all this) would have never pressed for a settlement freeze that would put a moratorium on most areas that would be ceded to Israel. This makes Obama out to be a complete idiot, had he known of all this, which he obviously didn't.

It's all bullshit.

[oberliner]

68. The agenda here is to discredit the PA and strengthen Hamas

And it seems to be working.

[shira]

76. Agreed. NT

[Donald Ian Rankin]

19. You view the denial from the negotiators as proof? I think your confidence is misplaced.

If force to bet, I would guess that these papers are probably misrepresentations, but I certainly wouldn't take the fact that the negotiators claim they are as proof.

[oberliner]

26. I don't view anything as proof

It seems pretty clear to me, however, that something is amiss.

Of course, it is possible that Abbas, Erekat, and Rabbo are all lying.

[shira]

32. When they bash Israel, Abbas, Erekat, and Rabbo are all truthtellers, but.... N/T

[ProgressiveMuslim]

47. Here is my take

There is currently a war being waged for control for Fatah between Abbas and Dahlan. Dahlan was losing this war up until 2 days ago!

[shira]

30. The last time we bet, I was right and you were wrong as Hamas confirmed 700 militants killed

...which matches the IDF reckoning.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/hamas-admits-600-700-of-its-men-were-killed-in-cast-lead-1.323776

Meaning you and most Israel bashing NGO's (like PCHR) who had faith in Hamas' account were all wrong.

Of course, facts are meaningless to the al-Manar crowd so I doubt you're able to admit the IDF was right all along. No amount of proof, therefore, would ever be enough to convince you these latest "Palestine Papers" are a fabrication. You'll believe what you wish to believe.

So what's the point?

:shrug:

[Name removed]

34. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shira]

35. The IDF numbers of Hamas killed (700) was accurate while all Israel bashing NGO's were wrong...

You believed all those false reports and thought the IDF was wrong, didn't you?

But you were wrong, weren't you?

Of course I was wrong about the IDF imminently releasing a list of all 700 names, however Hamas has confirmed what the IDF has maintained all along and that was my main point, even if it wasn't the actual bet.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

6. These documents are undoubtedly authentic. They spell the death of Fatah.

Tune in today to find out how those bastards were willing to sell out the refugees.

[bemildred]

14. Hi PM.

:-)

I will only say, with respect to the "Palestine Papers", that none of what I have read so far is a surprise. Rather like the US' diplomatic cables, just confirms and adds detail to what one already knew, what was already obvious.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

43. What I would like a reporter to ask is:

"how were you planning to see this to the people of Palestine if Israel agreed?"

My husband's theory is that Dahlan is the secret source, as there is currently a struggle for leadership of Fatah. Abbas has proven less willing to cave and it seems the US support is shifting to Dahlan. These will be interesting times indeed.

[oberliner]

52. That question is what suggests these documents might not be what they seem

As Abbas suggested, perhaps Israeli proposals have been mixed up with Palestinian ones.

Clearly there is no way this could have been sold to the Palestinian people if Israel agreed.

[bemildred]

53. Dahlan certainly has well established credentials as a weasel.

And it makes sense that this would occur in the context of internal disputes within Fatah, which would seem overdue.

[oberliner]

16. The death of Fatah and possibly the end of the PA as we know it

Whatever next!

[Donald Ian Rankin]

20. How do you know they're authentic? N.T.

[azurnoir]

22. ah while I agree that these papers are most likely true

take a deep breathe they are a sword that cuts both ways

[shira]

31. If they're authentic, why didn't the PA agree to a deal with Olmert in 2008?

According to these 'leaks', the PA was willing to give more than what Olmert offered.

Olmert: Here's my offer, do you accept?
Abbas: We'll do you one better, we'll offer more than what you're asking.

:eyes:

[shaayecanaan]

49. Olmert wasnt prepared to concede Ariel

which is in the middle of the West Bank and would effectively result in it being cut in two if it remained in Israeli hands.

[Recursion]

50. They did; Olmert didn't want it

Olmert never wanted to negotiate a settlement with the Palestinians.

[shira]

62. Right. Olmert and Livni weren't desperate to survive politically and accept a deal similar to....

...what they offered in 2008.

:eyes:

[Name removed]

69. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[shira]

70. So what do you think was the PA's best offer to Israel, based on your reading so far?

Be specific, please.

Take your time.

[shaayecanaan]

85. This one, obviously...

All of what Israel sought in Jerusalem except for Har Homa, fully demilitarised state, right of return limited to 10,000 people. And Israel knocked it back without so much as a counter offer.

Apart from Har Homa and minor differences on the maps the offer was almost a direct copy of the Geneva Initiative.

[shira]

90. Which one? What year/month? What were all the details? n/t

[shaayecanaan]

94. June 15, 2008

June 15, 2008

Meeting in Jerusalem with Condoleezza Rice, the then-US secretary of state, Tzipi Livni, the then-Israeli foreign minister, Ahmed Qurei, the Palestinian Authority former prime minister, and chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat.

Mr. Qurei: “We proposed that Israel annexes all settlements in Jerusalem except Ja bal Abu Ghneim . This is the first time in history that we make such a proposition ... We cannot accept the annexation of Ma’ale Adumin, Ariel, Giv’at Ze’ev, Ephrat and Har Homa settlements....

“If we agree on the concept I think that in three weeks we can reach an agreement on borders and land issues.”

Bear in mind that you don't have all the details for Olmert's offer, it was never published and the most detailed account of it was published in the Guardian based on Saeb Erekat's account.

[shira]

96. Nothing about refugees, the Temple Mount, security? All deal-breakers. n/t

[shaayecanaan]

98. Olmert's 2008 offer didnt contain anything on the Temple Mount either

it just said that negotiations on the holy basin would be delayed until a "later stage".

[azurnoir]

5. Crowley: US cannot vouch for 'Palestine Papers' veracity

responding to Al Jazeera's release of over 1,000 PA documents relating to negotiations with Israel, US State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said that the US cannot verify the documents, via his Twitter account.

"The US government is reviewing the alleged Palestinian documents released by Al-Jazeera today . We cannot vouch for their veracity," Crowley tweeted. Several hours later, in the early hours of Monday morning, he added that the US "remains focused on a two-state solution and will continue to work with the parties to narrow existing differences on core issues."

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=204970

should we act surprised at the US response here?

[oberliner]

7. This will strengthen Hamas and possibly bring down the PA

They have already started to try to take advantage:

Hamas: Al-Jazeera leaks reveal PA's 'ugly face'

http://english.ahram.org.eg/NewsContent/2/8/4691/World/Region/Hamas-AlJazeera-leaks-reveal-PAs-ugly-face.aspx

Hamas blasts PA-Israel 'cooperation'

http://www.presstv.ir/detail/161706.html

[shaayecanaan]

10. Well, Israel has been strengthening the hand of HA and Hamas for a long time now (nt)

[oberliner]

27. Israel has been doing the exact opposite

In fact, the popularity of Hamas had been continuing to sink since the beginning of the implementation of the Gaza blockade.

[shaayecanaan]

38. Certainly Hezbollah has gone from strength to strength...

This was from Nasrallah's remarks in December last year:-

"Now, Israel has again left Lebanon. It took twenty years to get rid of them the first time, it only took 35 days the second time. They even moved their border posts just to make sure they did not encroach onto Lebanese soil. Now, let us be clear, this was not because Israel has become polite. This was because we sent enough of their sons to the grave, and they no longer had the stomach to fight us.

In other places, they prefer to talk with the Israelis. I never said a word to them, I let my rifle do all the talking for me. I spoke to the Israelis through the barrel of a gun, and after 35 days every last Israeli soldier had heeded the call. Some others have spoken to the Israelis for twenty years across an American bargaining table, and twenty years later not a single Israeli soldier has left because of it. I say to my Arab brothers, the lessons to be learned are clear. The only language Israel understands is that of force, that of dread, that of its own dead. This is the only language that they understand."

Do you think that Israel's cynical actions are likely to make Arabs more receptive to statements such as these?

[LeftishBrit]

39. I don't think that Israel have been making Hamas unpopular.

I think that Hamas have been making Hamas unpopular.

[Lithos]

23. I doubt so...

Hamas has already damaged their own reputation. Plus if you read WikiLeaks there is a sort of overtone that Israel seems to prefer Hamas in a large light mostly because they are fairly predictable and a dead end for Palestine.

IMHO, the most likely benefactors are the young "Lions" of Fatah as well as Barghouti, both of whom are in opposition to Abbas and old Fatah.

[shaayecanaan]

24. Pretty much everything looks like a dead end for Palestine...

I dont think Barghouti or anyone else can change that in the slightest, particularly from the confines of an Israeli prison.

Israel has shown that it can stonewall the Palestinians and effectively weather the resultant diplomatic storm. There is no incentive for them to change course. Its a case of the strong doing what they can and the weak doing what they must.

[oberliner]

29. So what course of action would you recommend?

Or are the Palestinians doomed to resign themselves to the dead end fate you are ascribing them?

[Lithos]

41. Not saying Barghouti can do much

Just that his support is likely to go up.

I don't think you can also lay this on the feet of Israel. The leadership of Israel and other countries certainly are taking full advantage where they can. Such is how Real Politik works. IMHO, the problem is the huge Palestinian leadership gap which I also blame a great deal on Arafat and those who enabled him. Yes, he helped serve as a central figurehead and cause celebrity for many years, but he also never built anything which could succeed him.

[shaayecanaan]

42. The Palestinians did everything one could ask of them...

they built a security service, proved that they could arrest and detain militants, co-operated with Israel on security, compromised on the right of return, on the settlements and were willing to recognise Israel as a Jewish state. As Erekat himself said there was literally nothing more that they could do.

I am fully aware that Israel is taking advantage of Palestinian weakness, and I recognise that is how international relations work. But blaming them for their weakness is like blaming American Indians for fighting with bows and arrows against Howitzers. It is intellectually lazy in the extreme.

Lebanon's western allies have just suffered a humiliating defeat after receiving only timid support against an opposition with determined Iranian assistance. The Palestinians attempted to cultivate Western support and to embark on a peace process but have had it thrown back in their faces. The Iranians themselves made a peace overture to George Bush in 2003 that was rebuffed, as was Saddam's attempts to negotiate a truce with the US prior to the invasion.

The overall narrative taking hold in the minds of the Arab public is that it is pointless to align with the West, that they are unreliable and untrustworthy as allies and that, if anything, they tend to make greater concessions to their enemies than to their friends.

[Recursion]

51. As unpopular as this is, their problem is they gave up violence

That was their only leverage, and they renounced it.

[oberliner]

56. "Their proplem is they gave up violence?"

Am I really reading this on a Democratic/progressive/liberal message board?

[Recursion]

57. Well, what other leverage did they have?

[LeftishBrit]

59. Isn't this the argument always used by countries for building up the arms race, getting nukes,

attacking other countries 'pre-emptively' etc.?

Warmongering may be seen as a country's 'only leverage', but it is not progressive, and generally just leads to escalation. As both Israeli and Palestinian violence have generally done in this conflict.

Terrorism is just violence without an official army, as warmongering is just terrorism with an official army. Not to be supported by liberals IMO!

[Recursion]

60. Mostly I was thinking that a people that get a state almost always have to use violence...

...to get it. Throughout history.

[shira]

63. Choosing terror vs. Israel has been disastrous for Palestinians.

On a similar note, here's a "respected" Professor writing a letter published by the Guardian:

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/26/critics-should-respect-my-decision

"The revelations in detail (Report, 25 January) of the intransigent greed, the escape from decency, of Israeli governments in negotiation with our selected leaders of the Palestinians, serve one purpose among others. They provide a further part of what is now an overwhelming argument for a certain proposition. It is that the Palestinians have a moral right to their terrorism within historic Palestine against neo-Zionism. The latter, neither Zionism nor of course Jewishness, is the taking from the Palestinians of at least their autonomy in the last one-fifth of their historic homeland. Terrorism, as in this case, can as exactly be self-defence, a freedom struggle, martyrdom, the conclusion of an argument based on true humanity, etc."

Funny that.

A "Progressive" Professor in the comfort of his Ivory Tower in Britain willing to fight until the last Palestinian is dead.

Classy.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

45. I agree with you. Whom do you regard as Arafat's enablers?

[Lithos]

54. Arafat's enablers...

IMHO, were the Western Media. For the most part, whenever Palestine came up, you would more than likely see a picture of Arafat. I don't think it was a conspiracy or anything like that, but rather their response to trying to sound bite a very complicated situation. His image was approachable and fit the stereotypes that Westerners have, especially wearing his kiffeyah and looking a lot like Ringo Starr.

Arafat was always more popular outside of Palestine than inside. So, whenever Western politicians did anything, they almost invariably involved Arafat as the figurehead for the Palestinian people - not so much because he was in demand by the Palestinians, but because they were playing as much to their own populace. I remember many talking heads (back when they did do real analysis) say that Foreign Policy, especially in the US, is usually secondary, and done in reaction to help bolster ratings during periods when the President needs to distance himself from what's happening locally.

L-

[ProgressiveMuslim]

55. I think he was genuinely beloved by the Palestinian street prior to 1995.

The US also has a penchant for dictator-types over whom we can exert lots of pressure....

[ProgressiveMuslim]

46. Hence the necessity for worldwide BDS. It's the only way.

[oberliner]

28. Hard to know

This could play out in a number of different ways.

Hopefully the end result will be an independent Palestinian state living side by side at peace with Israel.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

44. My husband's theory is that Dahlan is the source. nt

[Prometheus Bound]

36. The Guardian concludes: But senior PLO sources accepted privately that the documents were genuine.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/24/papers-palestinian-leaders-refugees-fight

[shira]

37. The Guardian falsely claimed the PA accepted a Jewish state

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/24/palestinian-negotiators-jewish-state-papers

Compare the headline to the article.

[LeftishBrit]

40. I think that it will be some time beforewe know what all this indicates

Could be a genuine reflection of united PA actions; or could be faked; or -most likely in my view- an indication that the PA is deeply divided and some were prepared to make these concessions and some weren't.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

48. You forgot: it indicates that even the "most generous" offer from the PA wasn't enough for Israel.

Time for world-wide BDS!

[shira]

58. Please. Even Erekat said that if the PA proposed what al Jazeera reports, Israel would've accepted.

"If our positions are as they claim, why didn't Israel agree and why we did we not reach an agreement with them?"
http://translate.google.com/translate?hl=en&sl=ar&u=http://www.palpress.ps/&ei=mFQ_TfLXGMrogQe9z4iVAw&sa=X&oi=translate&ct=result&resnum=1&ved=0CCQQ7gEwAA&prev=/search%3Fq%3Dpalpress%26hl%3Den%26client%3Dsafari%26rls%3Den%26prmd%3Divns

[whosinpower]

61. That isn't what he said

He did not say Israel would of accepted. He asked WHY didn't they agree.


It is an interesting blip on the affairs of the so called peace process...truth or not. You appear ever so quick to jump to the conclusion that it must be fake. Abbas and Erekat are fighting for their political lives, and possibly their physical ones. Have the Israeli's declared the papers fake? Has Livni come out with a statement of denial?

Abbas being further marginalized can only leave open a door for Hamas. I cannot help but wonder why the Netanyahu government does not stand up for their "partner to peace." I suppose any indication of support for Abbas would be used as proof of collusion to certain elements within the palistinian politic who want Abbas gone.

I heard on the radio this AM where it was stated that after 20(?) years of negotiations, and the peace process....the process itself has become its own self fulfilling industry - and settlement will mark the death of that industry.

[shira]

64. Look at these 2 examples of deliberate distortion by al-Jazeera and the Guardian...

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=342199&mesg_id=342253

Now tell me why you don't have reason to suspect anything fishy going on here.

:)

And seriously, do you really believe the USA had no idea about this and that US policy wouldn't adapt to these far-reaching Palestinian concessions? Or worse, that they're collaborating with Israel vs. the PA?

Really?

This is all laughable.

[whosinpower]

65. Jpost, CNN, Haaretz have all jumped on the bandwagon

Among others, selling Al Jazeera's story.

I have yet to hear Livni state that the story is false. Oh, I heard her complain that her proposal was not like Lieberman's...but not that she never made such a proposal.

If the papers are false, fake, forgeries, etc....it is easy for the other parties who WERE at the table to say so....but they don't. Do they? Have they? No they are silent, and they leave Abbas swinging in the wind.

Now, some in the Israeli public may say this is great! It shows the depth of palistinian desperation and division for all the world to see.It also shows that even if the palistinians give up their right of return to all but 10 000 refugees, give up most of East Jerusalem, give up their holy site, and agree that Israel is a jewish state - still it is not a good enough deal for the Israeli's. I have not heard a single Israeli minister come forward and say that if the palistinians trully offered that, we would of accepted.....not one. And yet these same people refuse to state unequivicably that the papers are false.

And you point out somewhat murkily that given the US policy has not adapted to these concessions, which Israel refused, it must mean these concessions never existed. If the concessions never existed, why does Israel not state so? And, more importantly, in what way should the US have adapted, pray tell. Obama came out with strong language against the settlements, and nothing changed, a mere slow down, not a total stop. You know this just as well as I. You also know the depth and strength of pushback against Obama at this time, calling him anti-semitic, an enemy of Israel, etc, etc, etc. And when they started up again, what was Obama supposed to do precisely?

Should he have told the world the offer the palistinians made that the israelis refuse to accept?

It is all just a game Shira. A game of optics with no end in sight. There is an entire industry built, created, for two parties who refuse to deal with each other. Billions of dollars spent every year....on arms....on aid....on infrastructure....humanitarian cause.....if peace broke out, Israel and Palistine would be stone cold flat broke, and hundreds of thousands would be out of work.

If there were any person who would be able to successfully negotiate peace and a settlement between the Israeli's and the palistinians - that person would be bigger than Jesus Christ himself. Maybe that is who Netanyahu is waiting for.

[whosinpower]

66. Livni concedes the papers are real

snip - She confirmed the report that she told Qurei that Israel could not allow Ma’aleh Adumim to come under Palestinian control as he had offered, because the Palestinians would murder its residents.

“I never promised that we would suddenly have peace in the form of a new Middle East,” Livni said. “We live in a bad neighborhood.”

She said the Palestine Papers proved that there was a partner that Israel could make a deal with while safeguarding its strategic interests. She said the reports gave people new hope, but she accused Netanyahu of quashing it.

http://www.jpost.com/DiplomacyAndPolitics/Article.aspx?id=205364

[oberliner]

67. Livni: No crisis in Gaza Strip

Tzipi Livni, Israel's foreign minister, has again rejected a French proposal for a ceasefire to allow aid into the Gaza Strip saying there is "no humanitarian crisis".

Israel's foreign ministry quoted Livni as having said in a statement during a trip to Paris that "there is no humanitarian crisis in the Strip, and therefore there is no need for a humanitarian truce."

http://english.aljazeera.net/news/europe/2009/01/20091115532645312.html

[azurnoir]

71. candidates say all kinds of things shortly before an election

and when there is still another 20 days to go that a lame duck supporter will be out of office in his country

[whosinpower]

72. What does that have to do with the palestine papers?

Nothing.

There is truth in the palestine papers, even as some would try to obscure that fact.

When the Israeli's state there is no partner to peace - this is not true.
When the Israeli's state the palestinians are not interesting in conceding, or sacrificing for the sake of peace - this is not true.
When the palestinians state right of return, the holy sites, East Jerusalem are non negotiable - this also have been proven utterly false.

What this has clearly shown is that the palestinian people are divided between the radicals, with religious undertones who seek to oust and dismantle Israel and those who wish to find ways to live together in peace. The same can be said of the Israeli's - one faction who would also try to find ways and means to live together on a tiny strip of land, and another who works towards never allowing the palestinians their own right to self determination, would rather displace, disenfranchise and hope against all hopes that the neighboring states would simply absorb the stateless.

Instead of embracing and empowering the palestinians who wish to find ways to live together, and at the very least acknowledging their desire for a true two state solution, the current Israeli government stick their heads in the sand. Abbas/Erekat have already submitted plans and maps for a two state solution to the Obama administration, and Netanyahu refuses to even look at it. HE WILL NOT EVEN LOOK AT IT.

And if the two state solution is trully dead in the water - then what? One state? Fools.

[oberliner]

73. Just because Livni says something does not mean that it is true

Therein lies the relevance.

[shira]

74. Can't admit how al-Jazeera and the Guardian are distorting the record, can you?

Contemplate this for a moment...

"Indeed, Israeli and Palestinian negotiators live and die by the "nothing is agreed until everything is agreed" rule. That enables a negotiator to probe, offer up all kinds of positions and trial balloons, and to look for flexibility by demonstrating your own. All of this can occur without committing yourself to positions locked into concrete. Nobody was selling the farm or giving away the store. They were negotiating."
http://www.latimes.com/news/opinion/commentary/la-oe-miller-palestinian-leaks-20110126,0,3104329.story

How does one leap from the PLO tossing out trial balloons in negotiations, to locking into positions they commit themselves towards? You recognize the difference? One day the PLO says limited RoR but they keep most of the settlement areas, the holy places, and all of E.Jerusalem. The next, it's the opposite and they want full RoR by giving up almost all the settlement areas, E.Jerusalem, etc. That's negotiating. That's not locking in or being committed to one reasonable position. You don't have any idea how much a peace partner the PLO is based on these papers. All we see in the PA press is more incitement to hate, non-compliance and intransigence WRT the peace process, celebrating terrorist achievements, etc. Nothing about being a serious peace partner.

In fact, what was the actual package deal the PLO submitted to Israel that shows they're serious peace partners?

Where is it? Show me. Let's compare it to Barak 2000 and Olmert 2008.

We know what Barak committed to in 2000 and Olmert in 2008. What has the PLO committed to in one package deal? If you think they were ever committed to giving the whole store away, you must think they're suicidal or that they'd miraculously fare better than Sadat and Rabin. They'd be crucified for offering the whole store and they damn sure know it! The reason the Obama administration hasn't reacted to such an accomodating and reasonable PLO position is because that position simply doesn't exist and there's not a shred of evidence proving it does.

[houstonintc]

102. Actually No

Had they publicly been willing to make that deal maybe,

but fact is if these papers are true and Abbas/Fatah are denying it then clearly they were not serious and had no intention of doing it. Either out of cowardice in knowing their own population would likely not accept anything short of total victory of the Jews.

[azurnoir]

75. Lol the fav-o-rite memes of some the "Pro-Israel" crowd have been

kicked in teeth here, the first being that the Palestinians demanded full RoR watching the twist spin and denial is nothing short of entertainment or would be if it were not so sad

[shira]

77. Prove the PLO has dropped full RoR, as well as giving away the rest of the store.

Where's this magnanimous offer?

You're acting like you've seen it and know exactly what the PA has offered.

[azurnoir]

78. you have been removed from ignore, but you can not convincingly prove

the fallacy or the truth of these "papers" it is only the opinion of others that you post in lieu of your own, and really neither constitutes proof positive
'

[shira]

79. I've proven how the Guardian and al-Jazeera have intentionally distorted the record...

WRT the PA recognizing Israel as a Jewish State...
WRT Livni being against International Law...
http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=342199&mesg_id=342253

Why do you trust all that's being reported given proof of outright distortions in the reporting thus far?

=======

And again, how do you know that the PA minimized RoR as part of a package deal offered to Israel at some point 2 years ago? What else was part of this big magnimous offer? Do tell.

[azurnoir]

80. yes in your own opinion you have but as for the rest of us?

I think the audience would be quite divided

[shira]

81. LOL! n/t

[azurnoir]

82. I'm glad you think it's funny or is it an indication

that really you have nothing but your opinion that you attempt to give weight with someone elses?

[shira]

83. If it's only 'opinion' that al-Jazeera and the Guardian intentionally distorted the leaks...

....then I await a substantive, rational reply from you or anyone else here WRT the following:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_mesg&forum=124&topic_id=342199&mesg_id=342253

In that link,

1. Al-Jazeera claims Livni is against International Law. I included the context of Livni's conversation showing she was against including any mention of Int'l Law in a joint written resolution with the PA, not that she's generally against International Law.

Try defending al-Jazeera.

2. The Guardian claimed the PA would recognize a Jewish state. Look throughout that article at the Guardian and you'll find no such thing.

Try defending the Guardian for that one.



Take your time.

:)

[azurnoir]

84. The PA reognized Israel long ago, you seem unable to

produce much besides someone elses biased opinion, what no thought of your own? However until there is some conclusive proof that these papers are indeed fake, no an op doesn't count I'll take them as real thank you

[shira]

88. Not as a Jewish State, so the Guardian headline is misleading. N/T

[azurnoir]

93. it said privately but Israel seemed wanted it in conjunction with the transfer of Israeli Arabs

to Palestine

[Bodhi BloodWave]

105. exactly why should the Palestinians have to recognize

Israel as a Jewish state? The Palestinians has no reason to do so since that is an internal Israeli matter, as far as I'm concerned the Palestinians only have to recognize the Israeli state which they have done

[azurnoir]

86. oh I forgot Livni seems she's for international law except when it's applied to Israel

that seem a pallid denial

[shira]

89. The context shows Livni didn't want to include mention of Int'l Law in a resolution...

...not that she's against it when it applies to Israel.

[azurnoir]

91. the resolution is against Israel isn't it? hence she is against it

when applied to Israel

[shaayecanaan]

87. I think you're probably right...

This blows a massive hole in the narrative usually posited by the right-wing posters here, which I imagine is why they're having such a tough time simply maintaining a consistent story.

ie the papers are fake,
okay so they're not fake but they tell us nothing new
alright so they're real and they're new but they've been taken out of context, Im sure the rest of the papers are filled with generous Israeli offers to the Palestinians...

[shira]

92. It's too early to tell if everything reported is authentic or within context, etc...

What is known, and for some reason denied by many, is that al-Jazeera and the Guardian shouldn't be trusted WRT these documents, for reasons explained already.

But if that wasn't enough, consider...

1. Seamus Milne of the Guardian is their associate editor and he just wrote this...

“It’s a tragedy for the Palestinian people that at a time when their cause is the focus of greater global popular support than ever in their history, their own political movements to win their rights are in such debilitating disarray.”

“It’s a study in the decay of what in Yasser Arafat’s heyday was an authentic national liberation movement. Try to imagine the Vietnamese negotiators speaking in such a way at the Paris peace talks in the 70s – or the Algerian FLN in the 60s – and it’s obvious how far the West Bank Palestinian leadership has drifted from its national moorings.”

It's fine for al-Jazeera (or al-Manar) to opine like this. We've come to expect such garbage. But a "progressive" voice like the Guardian?


===========================

2. The Guardian allowed this in their letters section:

The revelations in detail (Report, 25 January) of the intransigent greed, the escape from decency, of Israeli governments in negotiation with our selected leaders of the Palestinians, serve one purpose among others. They provide a further part of what is now an overwhelming argument for a certain proposition. It is that the Palestinians have a moral right to their terrorism within historic Palestine against neo-Zionism. The latter, neither Zionism nor of course Jewishness, is the taking from the Palestinians of at least their autonomy in the last one-fifth of their historic homeland. Terrorism, as in this case, can as exactly be self-defence, a freedom struggle, martyrdom, the conclusion of an argument based on true humanity, etc.

Ted Honderich

London

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2011/jan/26/critics-should-respect-my-decision


3. Not to be outdone, the Guardian posted an OP-ED from Hamas:
http://www.guardian.co.uk/profile/osama-hamdan

===============================

The folks at al-Jazeera are cheerleaders for the Muslim Brotherhood. What's the Guardian's excuse?

The politics championed by the Muslim Brotherhood, Hamas, Iran, etc.. have zero in common with liberal values. So what's with these "Left Wingers" whose politcal views are indistinguishable from the 3rd world (fascist) far Right? WRT Israel/Palestine, the Guardian reads a lot like al-Jazeera these days. So with all this in mind, why do you continue to trust the Guardian and al-Jazeera?

:shrug:

[shaayecanaan]

95. Its "too early to tell"? I thought you said the papers were fake?

In fact, I believe that you said that the prospect of them being authentic was as laughable as Israel attacking Egyptians with "remote-controlled sharks".

This is routine for you. You make wild, lurid claims that are frequently shown to be false. When this happens, you then histrionically throw around terms such as "blood libel" with a disregard that would make Sarah Palin proud.

You read screeds by Bary Rubin, who alternates between writing slabs of anti-Arab boilerplate and Glen-Beckesque diatribes against George Soros. When your predilection for reading and sourcing far-right wing, racist websites is brought up, you claim you only read them for "the facts, not the opinions".

Given the above, do you honestly feel that well-equipped to lecture the Guardian newspaper on trust? Do you think that there is a single, reasonable person out there who would give any credit whatsoever to your ramblings?

[shira]

97. Your silence WRT obvious distortions/fabrications speaks volumes. We can continue...

....once you address those issues.

[shaayecanaan]

99. We can continue once you get your story straight...

are the papers fake or not? You can't simply pick the bits that you like and dismiss the rest because you don't like al-Jazeera.

[whosinpower]

100. so true nt

[shira]

101. Quite false. All these leaks show is that the PA talked concessions,not that they offered them.

Meanwhile, Barak and Olmert not only talked about concessions but actually offered them.

This isn't rocket science. Talking about concessions, tossing trial balloons in negotiations doesn't mean a thing.

Do you really think the PA will ever offer the whole store and then face the Palestinian street? If so, I have a bridge to sell you.

[whosinpower]

103. Olmert offered and Netanyahu refused and campaigned against the deal

He even went so far as to say any deal signed would be null and void given Olmert's criminal charges and utter lack of credibility.

Why do you insist on not including that critical detail, one has to wonder.

The papers show that the palistinians were far far far more conciliatory than previously exposed in the media and talking heads. The papers show that even with this, the Israeli's politely refused. The papers show that both sides work well together in making sure that peace and a two state solution never occurs, because they know full well the other party will refuse. The papers show these peace talks and overtures...over the past 20 years to be a sham and a fraud. The papers show rather conclusively that there is nothing Israel will agree to and the two state solution is dead....and with it, the nightmare of a single state a distinct reality.

By the way, in less reported news, the palistinians have, in spite of renewed settlement construction, have come up with a written offer. They gave it to the americans. Netanyahu was notified and refuses to look at it. He will not even dare take a peak. Given all they offered in the past, it is no wonder he is afraid to look at it.

Your right of course. None of this should be earth shattering.

[shira]

104. The papers ONLY show the PA talked about concessions, not that they offered them.

Here's something recent about Olmert's offer to Abbas, who walked away rather than making a counter-offer...
http://www.nytimes.com/2011/01/28/world/middleeast/28mideast.html
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4020432,00.html

If Abbas had agreed, the International pressure on Netanyahu, Israel's cabinet, and the Knesset would have been enormous.

Instead he walked away.

Another thing to remember is that unless all is agreed to, nothing is agreed to. The PA to this day will not publicize ANYTHING they have locked into, for obvious reasons. It's just talk. They also know the Palestinian public (and Hamas' fans worldwide) would never accept it and the PA leaders would be lynched for conceding so much. It's hopeless. Worse, the PA still incites terror throughout their press (TV, radio, political speeches, schools, religious sermons). This is in the West Bank, all state-sponsored. In no way whatsoever are they preparing Palestinians for peace.

Here's a recent article on the PA being peace partners...
http://www.hudson-ny.org/1837/palestinians-peace-partners

Olmert essentially offered the Geneva Initiative and Abbas walked away. The GI is taken very seriously by liberals of all stripes, including Palestinians like Sari Nusseibeh, Jimmy Carter, and Noam Chomsky. In fact, the GI organization endorsed Olmert's offer, so Israel's effort was hardly a sham.

Meanwhile the "moderate peace partner" PA is still inciting terror and hatred, as well as celebrating it and rewarding it.

[whosinpower]

106. There is an offer - waiting in America

That Netanyahu will not even glance at. You gloss over that.

[shira]

107. Can't be much of an offer when the PA knows conceding things will get them lynched. N/T