There will be a peace summit at Annapolis after all. The date has been set: November 27, 2007.
Talks and preparation towards the summit have brought forth birds of ill-omen from both sides. Yet, because the stakes have never been higher, a few voices are hopeful. “[P]eace is within reach,” says veteran peace activist Gershon Baskin.
Here’s a run-down of sorts of some developments surrounding this event.
Making the inevitable happen [Via The Magnes Zionist]
What’s brewing in the US? From Prospects for Peace: Annapolis and Beyond: What (Not) to Expect and the follow-up.
What’s brewing in Israel? A spoiler is working hard, it seems, to sabotage the whole process (see here and here).
In Palestine, Khalid Amayreh is prepared for disillusionment. Yet, there’s a sense in his column that he is not utterly convinced that it will not work this time around.
We shall know soon enough.
[Other details at Wikipedia … and on the conference itself here]
Related material:
A Canadian view.
Debate erupts among Jewish groups over Annapolis [Via Open Left]
Likudnik hawks work to undermine Annapolis
Update: See also Annapolis: Saudi and Palestinian dimensions from Helena Cobban of ‘Just World News”.
The Camp David negotiations in 2000 and the Taba talks began with the Israeli position: “settlements are off the table.” It has since been said many times, how can there be a Palestinian state, a sovereign nation, when you have a half million Israelis living in Israeli only villages, towns, and cities, interconnected with Israel by Israeli only highways systems, and necessarily protected by IDF, the Israeli military, in the West Bank?
Olmert recently stated that he would be willing to remove the “illegal” settlements, trailer camps that comprise about a thousand Israelis, scatter here and there. By international law, all of the settlements are illegal. Concerning the major settlements? Nothing is heard. About the Jordan Valley, which is presently being emptied of Palestinians, who have lived there for centuries, nothing is likewise heard.
Here are some maps of the situation which gives food for thought and a reason why nothing will again come of negotiations, this time in Annapolis. Israel is just not interested in a Palestinian state, except possibly in bantustan communities, and believes that it can take the remaining 22% of Palestine, which was stolen from the Palestinian Arabs beginning in 1948, and continued after 1967.
Maps of West Bank
Restricted area of Palestinian land in the West Bank
Areas of the West Bank controlled by Israel and the Palestinian Authority
Three alternative disengagement maps from the ICAHD site.
UN Map of the West Bank showing areas of Israeli control.
Map of Israeli Settlements in the West Bank-Anna Baltzer’s site
Palestinian Autonomous Areas in the West Bank
Another Settlement Map from B’Tselem
Thanks, Shergald! But don’t you think that we have all reached a point where what is happening in the region is no longer acceptable? And that may be the primary factor driving THIS conference? I think so and because of that, I have a very faint hope that this may be it (or at least the beginning).
Agreed. “what is happening in the region is no longer acceptable”
but that is not “the primary factor driving THIS conference”
It’s the 3 blind mice. All 3 needing photo-ops and distractions. There’s nothing serious here.
‘Bush Olmert Abbas are too weak for Annapolis to work’
– Money line – “the story of impotence, powerlessness and incapability.”
Let’s look at the players:
Bush: he always draws a blank… the best that can be said, a lame duck at 27%.
Olmert: 4 weeks ago was at 3% in the polls and under criminal probes: It is reported in Debka that President Shimon Peres has contradicted Olmert, saying, “there was no way to finalize an accomodation with Palestinians before the end of the Bush presidency.”
Abbas: exiled in the West Bank, without a mandate, is hardly in a position to agree to any deal.
and where is the good faith gesture to Palestinians in the Gaza or is this peace conference only for the West Bank islets and the “Jewish state”? There’s none.
Really! Humanitarian harm? Is anyone listening? Are we that stupid?
It is reported today Syria will not attend. The US extended invitations to 50 countries but the Golan Heights is not on the agenda.
It seems Syria will attend after all unless there is a surprise.
I need to clarify my comment above both in light of your response & that of Shergald below. Of course, the situation has been unacceptable for a long time. How about from the very beginning! What I meant by saying that it is ‘no longer’ acceptable is that world communities can’t and won’t ignore any longer what is happening in the OPT, thus putting pressure on governments to take action. In the US, now that the Lobby has been ‘outed’ and ever more American Jews are speaking out against its nefarious activities, it is just a matter of time before there is a turnabout. Indeed, it has already begun. For the ultra-Zionist project, it’s all downhill from now on, either towards compromise (which will be good for Israel/Palestine) or violence.
No, you’re right. The quote is quite the contrary: “Syria will not go unless there is a surprise […].” My mistake.
Syria, won’t attend, here’s the link
“Syria has decided not to attend the Annapolis conference next week, because the issue of the Golan Heights is not mentioned on the agenda of the meeting,” Army Radio quoted the Arabic-language publication as saying.
According to Al-Hayat, Syria is waiting for the outcome of a meeting of Arab foreign ministers, to be held in Cairo on Thursday, before officially announcing its intention not to attend next week’s summit.”
It appears Syria is under pressure to attend.
Here’s the other view that Syria is caught between a rock and a hard place. Could it be this conference is designed to isolate Iran, Hizbullah and Hamas, meaning move Syria from Iran’s umbrella?
The next few days are going to be interesting, to say the least.
Robert Fisk: Darkness falls on the Middle East
Now, I’m puzzled. Here’s a this banner published by Ha’aretz today, 24 November;
Rice: Israel PA conflict must be resolved outside regional context
Why the 50 invitees to Annapolis? What’s missing?
From Ha’aretz
“Israel and the Palestinian Authority have failed to agree on a joint statement to be presented at next week’s U.S.-sponsored Middle East peace conference, PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas told a meeting of Arab League foreign ministers on Friday.”
sooo
“Should the teams fail in that final effort to formulate a statement, the summit will conclude with a statement by U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza, and not a joint Israel-PA statement.”
should be interesting…this little distraction. And naturally,with a dallop of fear as
“US federal authorities urge heightened awareness of Annapolis terror threats”
I agree with Fisk’s observation that we have reached a truly hellish point in world politics. The world cannot take this amount of barbarity and uncertainty much longer. But where he is pessimistic and disillusioned, I feel there is still room to be hopeful (if not optimistic). I’ve just added a link to the post above of an article that contains some very interesting ways to overcome some of the most difficult propositions of a peace settlement between the two parties. It is this one.
Something else IMO warrants hope here. In all the critics of Annapolis that I’ve read, I have not seen any consideration given to the personal, which I think will weigh fairly heavily here. Both Bush, and perhaps even more so Rice (because she is more knowledgeable and conscious of history than Bush), have a lot riding on this conference, and not only in terms of policies.
I also think that we need to read the negative (and positive) spins of Annapolis as part of the strategy, with each side trying to up the ante in terms of the hurdles and the level of compromise that it may have to face. In other words, those are the end words. A lot can happen between now and the end of the conference.
[…] those ARE NOT the end words.
Mr. Palestine.
I believe the Israelis view Bush as a puppy with a big tail trying to become a full-fledged dog by going ahead with this conference, which they did everything possible to avoid. Olmert, who carried water for Sharon, now has the onus of avoiding the next peace advance.
The best Israel will ever do is offer a bantustan state of Palestine, which will maintain the Palestinians under a seige, just like the one seen in Gaza. In the meantime, the cement keeps pouring in the West Bank, home demolitions continue, as does the killing of Palestinians who may or may not resist. Most of the 457 Palestinians killed in the past year were innocent civilians, a quarter of them children (B’Tselem). It has become axiomatic: you have to look at what Israel does, not what it says. And right now that doing is taking the form of reinforcing and enlarging the 200 plus Israeli only villages, towns, and cities on the West Bank. Want a West Bank home, there are realtors in New Jersey and London, who will sell you a home with swimming pool, cheap.
The campaign for Palestinian freedom will undoubtedly go on for many years, decades, to come. And surely it is their own fault, as the propaganda will claim, since we, the Israelis, offered them another “generous offer” at Annapolis. Instead, they preferred conflict, no, terrorism.
According to these two, shergald, there won’t be any ‘offer’ at Annapolis. It’s already known what has to be ‘offered’ owing to the previous confabs on this issue. As Helena Cobban writes in her column here,
In other words, how do they plan to go from here to there.
Kissinger pretty much said the same thing recently. The resolution to the IP conflict is there waiting for the appropriate parties to emerge to execute it.
But people like Kissinger also gloss over just what that resolution consists of. It does not address the grievances of the refugees. His idea is that Palestinian refugees go to Palestine; Jews go to Israel. But more importantly, the alleged resolution does not address the Israeli settlements on the West Bank, whether Israeli only cities and towns beyond the wall will be relinquished. It also does not address the Jordan Valley and the question of sovereign borders for the state of Palestine. In other words, Kissinger may be a bantustanista in the disguise of a peace maker. West Bank aquifers, not addressed. The fate of Palestinian towns along the wall isolated and turned into prison camps by encircling walls and barbed wire not addressed.
do you really give credence to that profile by the Economist – this late in his presidency? As I noted upthread all 3 – Bush Abbas and Olmert – are powerless to make a deal. And then there’s AIPAC and other neocon Zionists.
These issues run deep. Palestinians have suffered a theft of immense proportions. I can’t imagine the Mideast states would now give consent to selling out the Palestinians.
Israel is not prepared to give back stolen property and are now demanding recognition of the “Jewish State” – ethnic cleansing affirmed!
Here’s a link to an essay by William A. Cook on the making of the intransigence.
do read the whole thing.
The Myth of Middle East Peace
Deception as Truth
Thanks for the link, idredit! Very comprehensive article that does provide the appropriate background to events unfolding there today. I would say, though, that while such knowledge might help sway public opinion away from Israel, in its predatory practices, it would have little impact on current attempts to find solutions to the conflict. I may be wrong but at this point that is my contention.
Re. “Mr. Palestine” – It’s not a matter of giving credence to Bush turnabout. I posted it just because I had noted above that I had yet to see an analysis devoted to the personal motivations of the actors involved. I thought that was one.
Off subject….why are the comments running into the advertisements making them impossible to read?
The military occupation, which has been pursued for 40 years while Israel colonized West Bank land, last estimate 46% of it, has been unacceptable for decades. Israel has been good at avoiding peace initiatives for so long, on so many occasions, that it is hard not to be cynical about Annapolis. What excuse this time?
This copyrighted article on the Electronic Intifada
Likudnik hawks work to undermine Annapolis
Jim Lobe, The Electronic Intifada, 22 November 2007
Read the rest here:
http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9116.shtml
a bit OT perhaps, especially since l’m not that knowledgeable in these issues, but l found this article interesting:
from the bbc: US storm over book on Israel lobby
you’re probably way ahead of me on this.
lTMF’sA
Mearsheimer and Walt’s book, released a few months ago, followed their article published in 2006. It is opening up discussion about the role of the Israel Lobby in a whole lot of things relating to American foreign policy.
The Lobby, which includes AIPAC, AJC, and ADL, and over 120 PACs, and other orgs, is really has a minority proLikud bias, and it is not likely positive toward Annapolis. But if Olmert indicated that he was (only) ready to remove illegal trailer settlements in the West Bank, nothing will come of it anyway. It will be dragged out until forgotten during the next US election cycle.
But I don’t think Israel’s betting on the pressure from the attending arab community….nor the saudi talk of pegging oil off of the dollar.
US and Israel caved to Saudi and Syria pressure. Golan Heights added to agenda so Syria will participate.
What is the rationale for the ‘big fig leaf party’ since promoted as a venue for opening of discussions?
Expect No negotiations. There was failure between Olmert and Abbas to agree on the joint statement that was to be read at the end of the party.
The real topic? declining US $
And Saudis are now backing al-Maliki.
And: