Obama To Meet With Netanyahu, Abbas

WASHINGTON — President Barack Obama will host a meeting Tuesday with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas in an effort to lay the groundwork for renewed negotiations on Mideast peace.

The meeting comes at a time when U.S. efforts were encountering strong resistance in the region.

The three-way meeting will take place immediately after Obama meets separately with each of the two leaders, White House press secretary Robert Gibbs said Saturday.

Special Envoy George Mitchell says it is another sign of Obama's commitment to comprehensive peace. The meetings will take place in New York on the sidelines of the United Nations General Assembly meeting.

No announcement is expected at the meeting of the three leaders, according to an administration official. But Obama scheduled the meeting to show his personal commitment to making progress, said the official, who spoke on condition of anonymity given the sensitivity of the discussions.

On Friday, the possibility of a three-way meeting had been in doubt because Mitchell failed to bridge wide gaps between Israelis and Palestinians.

Obama has set the renewal of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks as a major goal of his young presidency, and dispatched Mitchell as a White House envoy to soften the ground on both sides. Mitchell has had a hard go, with a new hawkish Israeli leader on one side and an increasingly dispirited Palestinian leader on the other.

Over four days, Mitchell met twice with Abbas and four times with Netanyahu, including twice on Friday before Mitchell left the Middle East.

The key disputes are over Israeli settlement expansion and whether peace talks should begin where they left off under Netanyahu's predecessors.

Israel has balked at a U.S. demand that it freeze settlement construction in the West Bank and east Jerusalem, war-won territory the Palestinians want for their state. Under a U.S.-sponsored plan from 2003, Israel is required to freeze all such construction.

If next week's three-way meeting is not based on a settlement freeze it will mark a further setback for the already weakened Abbas.

Netanyahu wants to continue building about 3,000 housing units on the West Bank, while offering to curtail other construction for several months. Nearly half a million Israelis have moved to the West Bank and east Jerusalem since Israel captured the territories in the 1967 Mideast War, and Palestinians fear the growing settlements will make a viable state impossible.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has been the most forthright member of the Obama administration in demanding a full stop to Israeli settlement in the West Bank and East Jerusalem. She has insisted on a halt to "natural growth," the Israeli term for expansion to accommodate the children of the already large settler population.

Netanyahu and his defense minister, Ehud Barak, are veterans of past peace talks who took office this year as hardliners opposed to new concessions to the Palestinians. Abbas had begun peace talks with Netanyahu's scandal-tinged predecessor, Ehud Olmert, with little to show for it.

Barak is due to meet Defense Secretary Robert Gates on Monday.

The Bush administration had hoped to draw Olmert and Abbas into serious talks about issues that had not been on the table for years, including the borders of an eventual Palestinian state. Abbas was weakened from the start by an internal Palestinian division, and Olmert by his own political troubles. Their meetings were cordial but superficial, and more substantive staff-level discussions looked promising but ended up in a fizzle.

Abbas is locked in a power struggle with the Islamic militant group Hamas, which overran the Gaza Strip in 2007, leaving him only in control of the West Bank. Hamas has used lack of progress in negotiations to try to discredit Abbas.

___

Associated Press writer Ben Feller contributed to this report.

Comments

[Tony Andrews]

12:59 PM on 09/21/2009

Mitchell would think it an achievement if Israel agreed to halt further building for a while. That would be to collude with Israel's illegal activity.
Israel must be TOLD to STOP its illegal building, removing "settlers" that are already there. They must be brought back into line with the law.
White phosphorous shells, F-15s, F-16s, guided bombs, tanks, Hellfire missiles, Apache helicopters, DIME bombs, Cobra helicoptors, goodness knows what else, are parts of the military aid (in excess of $22 BILLION during Bush's tenure) that continues to be enjoyed by Israel (Obama projects around another £20 BILLION over the next 10 years).
Complaints about unreliable rockets that deliver a payload of 5 lbs of home made fertlizer explosive, anyone??
That America should level the balance by giving the same amount of military aid to the Palestinians is unconscionable.
The only reasonable alternative is to stop all military aid to Israel, at least for the time-being.
The international community has pussy-footed around with Israel for far too long.
No wonder that Israeli politicians, specially Netanyahu, believe that they can do whatever they want and away with it. They always have done.
It is long past the time the world got insistant with a state (Israel) that has become a law unto itself.
Whatever goes on between Obama, Abbas and Netanyahu, unless absolute insistence is made that Israel withdraw from the illegal settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem and the blockades are removed, peace is unattainable.

[skialethia]

04:27 PM on 09/20/2009

There has been more than enough talk and no action except for hundreds of thousands more settlers moving to the West Bank, and while they talk tens of thousands more will be moving in.

There will never be peace without justice, and that's a reality that seems to escape the "Israylis".

[WBMD]

04:49 PM on 09/20/2009

How about this for an idea. Accept P.M. Netanyahu's offer for a Palestinians state, as a start. Think about it. A Palestinian state for the first time in history. Determine their own fate. No more "settlers". All they have to do is accept what the Israelis are offering. But they won't. Because that is not what they want.

[jwcmass]

05:19 PM on 09/20/2009

They are not being offered a "state" ( in the modern sense of that word ) or anything close to it.

If Israel is serious, all she has to do is HALT the settlement expansion and get talks underway.

Of course, Netanyahu has two reasons for choosing this course.

1. his government would fall if he DID freeze wettlement expansion-- since it ie a narrow right coalition, and those settler parties would pull out.

2. by continuing to build, Bibi undermines Abbas position and strenghtens Hamas. Then Bibi has an excuse for nto talking-- he can turn and say-- "See? we have no partner to negotiate with!"

I don't believe Ntanyahu has any real intention to bargain-- not unless the pressure is turned up by the US and he is left with no choice. I have never trusted Netanyahu. I find him to be -- how shall I say this generously?-- playing fast and loose with the facts.

his track record on undermining Oslo is crystal clear.

[Tony Andrews]

02:25 PM on 09/21/2009

Enough of the "settlements" being temporarily paused.
They are ILLEGAL.
To compromise on their cessation and the vacating of them by Israeli "settlers" is to collude with their ILLEGAL existence.
Obama, and the rest of the world should not be looking to them to be paused for a while, he, and they, should be insisting that Israel STOP and remove their "settlers".
What about the poor "settlers" who will lose their homes?
Is a thief entitled to keep the proceeds of a robbery? Is the fence who buys those proceeds?
No.
They are required to give up those proceeds, and the "settlers" will have to go back whence they came, outside the 1967 borders.
Military aid?
White phosphorous shells, bombs, Hellfire missiles, F-25s, F-16s, Apache helicopters, Cobra helicopters, tanks, DIME bombs and much else besides come from America's aid programme.
Over $22 BILLION during Bush's watch and projected $20 BILLION more over the next 10 years.
Unreliable rockets that deliver a 5lb homemade fertilizer charge anyone?
Level the playing field by giving Palestinians equal military aid?
I don't think so.
CEASE all military aid to Israel until peace has been established.





Read more at: http://www.huffingtonpost.com/2009/09/19/obama-to-meet-with-netany_0_n_292503.html

[murphy80]

03:49 PM on 09/20/2009

this is right out of the bush adm. playbook

have a meeting a accomplish nothing and set the stage for another nothing meeting

i can recall when meetings of heads of states announced significant events that were

carefully worked out in advance.

sorry i voted for him.

[OB08]

05:54 PM on 09/20/2009

Wow..you voted for just one issue. There will never be peace between Israel and the Palestinians if Israel continues with their arrogance. If Israel don't want peace, than America should stop all the money that we are sending to them. That money can go towards boosting our economy. Israel can't have their cake and eat it too. It's time America stop supporting them financially.

[dukeitout]

02:21 PM on 09/20/2009

This plan to meet with both sides in the same timeframe is wonderful strategy for the U.S. Government in dealing with both parties. Good move Mr. President.

[vanbenthuysen]

02:20 PM on 09/20/2009

Just start the conversation with a simple question: "Do you want peace?"

[RightToThePoint]

01:23 PM on 09/20/2009

This meeting is a waste of time. If anything, Obama will try to sell out Israel. He's no friend of theirs. he's always on the wrong side!!

[skialethia]

04:40 PM on 09/20/2009

Yes, and obviously you're on the "right" side. Too bad it's the side that's losing all credibility.

[WBMD]

12:25 PM on 09/20/2009

Back again to point out that "international law" that is not applied equitably to all is no law at all. Yeah, I know,. Disgusting, isn't it?

[BoudainKing]

11:43 AM on 09/20/2009

Careful BiBi, you will be surronded by Muslim extremist.

[skialethia]

04:44 PM on 09/20/2009

If that's the case then, we'll take back those billions in funding and military shipments, thank you!

[mcantwell]

10:22 AM on 09/20/2009

Interesting. Apparently something changed fairly quickly since yesterday.

[jefffG]

09:41 AM on 09/20/2009

Hopes about Obama have faded already.....dangereously.
Will he restore his authority and credibility on the israelo-palestinian topics .
We can hope....
it would be great !

[mcantwell]

10:25 AM on 09/20/2009

Mitchell is only one of the mediators. Ultimately, it is for the two sides to agree to a Peace Treaty.

[MGarin]

09:35 AM on 09/20/2009

Like chicken soup, it couldn't hurt. So talk already!

[WBMD]

09:44 AM on 09/20/2009

The Palestinians refuse to talk unless Obama gives them what they could not get on their own - a total freeze on building in Jerusalem or the disputed territories. Oh yes, and they want the current Israeli government to offer what the last government offered, but the Palestinians refused, as the basis to START talks from again.

[clsez]

12:56 PM on 09/20/2009

Okay, so are you HPs version of Glenn Beck? ........ No?

[jwcmass]

04:28 PM on 09/20/2009

At least you are putting your finger on the heart of the problem-- the continuing building of illegal settlements.

If that building continues, it will completely undermine Abbas' position among his own people.

Hamas will make the argument that cooperating with Israel gets the Palestinians nowhere-- in fact it makes the situation worse -- as more land is seized and more buildings and infrastructure is built.

Like it or not the settlements (and we're not even talking closing them, just stopping their expansion) ARE the biggest roadblock to peace.

Isrel has a choice, they can have the land (and all those new Israeli citizens) -- or they can have a GENUINE two-state solution around which a peace agreement can be built.

They cannot have both.

[Lee Andrew]

09:27 AM on 09/20/2009

Game ON!

[popman]

07:56 AM on 09/20/2009

I wonder what type of beer Obama will be serving ?

[James Redmond]

06:34 AM on 09/20/2009

As surely as the leadership of any body of people, would deny a greater opportunity for a future built upon an actual, a real, tangible and comprehensive peace, through adopting strategic measures of conflict resolution, so shall an example be made of an entire generation that a heightened sense of maturity was not an option; that a people were not worth peace, but whose lives were worth naught more than a maintenance of that level of diplomatic inaction, bodies born to fall too soon, because differences have overcome the few in power, when those leaders are in fact removed from understanding. Removed from the battlefield, removed from the suffering they witness occurring, removed from a true sense of their own words that are designed not to enlighten humanity, in general, towards the fact of peace's simplicity, but to cater to those who in fact profit at the loss of life, at the destruction of real, loving families; it's not reasonable to expect leaders to full fathom their destructive ways. That's why the make them, because they can't understand.
We shall long remember rather than soon forget, those opportunities to set the precedent today for what is interpreted as the 'business' of tomorrow. This is an enormous opportunity for these men, to simply accept, for their people, for the future, the very real, albeit difficult, perhaps, truth that peace exists without trying. Leadership should not find itself between peace and any people. What will the future bring? What we give it.

[ZenJu]

05:31 AM on 09/20/2009

Just read where Haniyeh and Hamas have already rejected, a priori, any positive measures that may come out of any talks. Nice. How can there be peace, when a sizeable and influential part of Palestinian society will not accept a reasonable solution that leads to peace and the chance to build a viable, productive society worth safeguarding? I do not mean to imply that the Palestinians will get all that they wish; neither will some Israelis...but a deal that allows both sides to live without fear and terror, that allows all people in the region to get on with things like education and bettering their lives and the lives of their children--isn't that worth peace and mutual recognition? Sadly, I do not imagine this happening until a real culture shift happens in much of Palestinian culture.

[alysheba 3]

05:34 AM on 09/20/2009

How can there be peace when Israel keeps stealing land?

[WBMD]

07:38 AM on 09/20/2009

Israel did not "steal land" when Jews lived on it for the last 2000 years, or when the Zionists started buying more land, for money, at the end of the 19th century. It did not "steal land" it was granted for a renewed homeland in 1917, or or in 1947. It did not "steal" the land when it was attacked in 1948, or in 1967. How much land will return to Muslim rule is in inverse proportion to the amount of time the Arabs continue to fight for "all or nothing."

[ZenJu]

07:46 AM on 09/20/2009

Peace is a choice. It is a decision to behave in a certain rational manner. And if the Palestinian leaderships would scrap all the hate language and all the talk about dismembering Israel, they might find much greater international support for developing a free and prosperous nation, rather than investing in fruitless violence. It would be a smart first step.

[jwcmass]

06:35 AM on 09/20/2009

First of all, we are at the beginning of this process, not the end. I never thought I would see the day that the IRA and the extreme Ulster parties would ever come together, but it has happened.

I would add that there needs to be a "culture shift" on the part of BOTH Palestinians and Israelis-- particularly those on both sides who wish to use violence, and and end on both sides to the "OCCUPATION MENTALITY"-- This occupation (and remember there are two components to it-- military and settler-- guess which will be harder to uproot) has gone on so long that entire generations have grown up under it.

And make no mistake, it is harming the Israelis (destroying their democratic political process, for one) as well as the Palestinians.

But what would be MOST helpful is a radical improvement in the daily lives of Palestinians. They live under conditions that no American (and few people anywhere0 wouldd tolerate.

It would lead to radical movements in any society, for those movements feed on the despair that grips the Palestinians -- and most of those conditions are not the fault of the great majority of Palestinians-- they are the ones occupied, after all.

But this isn't going to be solved with one meeting or short summit. It's going to take time and effort.

[WBMD]

05:02 PM on 09/20/2009

In reply to your comment above, the Egyptians committed an act of war by closing the international waters of the Straits of Tiran to Israeli shipping.

The loss of that war, initiated by the Arabs, brought the disputed territories under Israeli control. Since those territories did not come under the sovereignty of any country, It was Israel's right to build there, especially after the Arabs refused to accept their return in Khartoum.

Oslo SPECIFICALLY omitted any reference to settlements, both in spirit and in letter.

Nevertheless, there is still time for the Arabs to have their Palestinian state if they take up P.M. Netanyahu's offer now. Can't promise the same several years from now.