The secret talks between US and Israeli officials, aimed at convincing the Israelis to change their position regarding the settlement freeze, started to smell more and more like a bribe, with some media reports calling it the $3 billion bribe.
The amount is in reference to the cost of the 20 advanced US fighter planes that the Obama administration is promising to give Israel in return for the Netanyahu government's agreeing to a mere three-month freeze of illegal settlements on Palestinian land.
If anyone thinks that this is a mere sweetener to support Israel's security, one needs to ask why this issue did not come up until after the rightwing Israeli government declare its total rejection of the extension of the 10-month moratorium on settlement activities in the occupied territories, excepting Jerusalem and a few other places.
Anyone involved in a bribe is always afraid that the actual exchange of money or goods is documented. Funny enough, the current problem with this particular "bribe" has been the issue of documentation. The Israelis want it in writing, while the Americans, suffering a major economic crisis, appear ashamed to put in writing a promise that they have made in secret to the Israelis.
What the Americans are obviously worried about is the quid pro quo issue, that is the Israeli change of behavior. The danger in this latest American bribe is that it comes not as a reward for progress in talks, but as an incentive to the Netanyahu government to agree to stop carrying out actions that are considered illegal by the entire international community, including the US.
The Americans' insistence on rewarding the party that puts obstacles in the way of peace only encourages that party to come up with even more obstacles as the talks enter more difficult stages. So if the cost of suspending settlements will cost the US taxpayer in an economically challenged season $3 billion, what will removing settlers cost?
East Jerusalem being an exception in the deal presents yet another problem. If the Israelis are not willing to stop their illegal building in occupied East Jerusalem, how will they agree to quit East Jerusalem and allow it to become the capital of the Palestinian state?
Israel is acting in an unusually arrogant manner, haggling with Washington as if it were one of America's 50 states rather than a foreign country. Perhaps Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu feels emboldened by the recent victories of like-minded ultra-rightwing candidates, and therefore he chose to challenge Barack Obama to say no to the tea party's favorite, Israel.
It is ironic that the term bribery, used to describe what was happening between Washington and Tel Aviv, was first introduced by a former American official who happens to be a devout Jew.
The term bribery was first used by former American ambassador to Israel and senior Obama adviser during his presidential campaign Dan Kurtzer, who is now affiliated with Princeton University's Woodrow Wilson School for International Studies. Kurtzer, who was a senior adviser to Obama during his presidential run and who stated his opposition to Washington's haggling with the Israelis, sharply criticized what he called the US rewarding Israel's bad behaviour with the settlement freeze deal. "Washington will ?lmost certainly come to regret bribing Israel; Israel may regret receiving such bribe even more," he says.
While the price of the bribe is very high, the expected result is minor. If the cost of this bribe is a 90-day extension to the settlement freeze, what will happen on the 91st day?
For Israelis, the answer came in the form of a statement by the racist leader of the rightwing Land of Israel party. Avigdor Lieberman, who heads the foreign ministry (that doesn't always represent the government of Israel) said that the resumption of the peace talks is in the interest of Israel and of the Palestinians.
Peace, and not peace talks, is certainly in the Palestinians' interest. But for the Israelis, the number one priority is to project a semblance of a process of peace rather than pay the price of peace. And if this process can be renewed with a nice $3 billion bribe, why not?
Follow Daoud Kuttab on Twitter: www.twitter.com/daoudkuttab
The settlements are suddenly an issue and obstacle to peace or so you Zogby and Levine have bemoaned in their recent articles. Pre 1967 the WB was no settled by Israel, yet the Palestinians found no desire for peace. In Oslo, Arafat walked away from as perfect of a deal as the Palestinians will EVER get, and chose violence, terrorism and targeting innocent civilians.
It's 2010 a month away from 2011 and still the Palestinians are coming up with excuse after excuse as to why they wont negotiate.
Tell me Doud, at which point do we start holding the Palestinians accountable?
at what point do we disallow the Palestinians to milk their refugee status?
Palestinians are dying to negotiate but on what terms on continuation of an illegal occupier stealing their lands and extending this theft. Read International Court of Justice reply on the wall to see how settlements are illegal according to international law. For sure the last thing that should be done is to reward them. THis is appeasment at its most obvious way
Pre 1967 there were NO settlements in the areas that we are discussing. That's almost 20 years since Israel became a sovereign entity. Since 1948 the Palestinians (Arabs) terrorized innocent Israeli civilians, what was their reason for not wanting peace up until 1967.
My point is this.
We can pretend that the Palestinians are interested in peace or are dying for peace as you say, but the reality is different.
With each attempt at negotiating, the Palestinians create new reasons as to why negotiating isn't possible.
Each and every time when Israel gave up land it got more terror instead.
This time Israel wants the Palestinians to be held accountable, they want a guarantee, they don't want to be fooled into more empty promises.
The money actually never gets to Israel. It goes directly to the manufacturers of these weapons. In whose districts are these manufacturers reside? Whose votes did Obama get in return for these paybacks?
Obama thinks his purpose is to negotiate with lobbyists. The trouble is, no one's negotiating on the other side. So, the lobbyists basically say "we want this", and Obama gives it to them.
Its extortion and theft from the American taxpayers, plain and smple, to recursively prove how Israel DOES NOT want peace anymore than does Hamas. Some friends...
Blame blame blame :)
Fact--The ONLY reason U.S-Israel negotiations were needed is because of PA refusal to negotiate without being granted this preconditions! I don't see how it is even possible to write on this subject by sweeping this basic fact under the rug.
PA, yet again, is dispensing with rational negotiation strategy by trying to get Americans to do negotiations on their behalf. This technique of proverbial grabbing of chestnuts out of fire with someone else's hands dooms negotiations before they even started.
As if recent PA pronouncement that Western Temple Wall isn't important to Jews and belongs to Palestinians wasn't enough already.
No, I am not for throwing money to everyone in the "have nots", but when we see the number of children who are now homeless and hungry it seems that we should be more concerned with them than with sending more military aid to other countries - plus, of course, the bribes of billions of our tax dollars.
Seems like we have enough problems of our own to take care of - then, if we have something left to give, let it be in the form of humanitarian aid, not military aid.
Are fighter planes and armament more important than food, medicine, shelter for people who are suffering from hunger, epidemics, natural disasters? Why is it always our money and military supplies and equipment sent to many countries?
- Dr. Martin Luther King Jr.
-------------------
You can doubt it all you want. You only display how ignorant you are when you do that.
2) UN Security Council Resolution 242 reads that Israel should relinquish land only if it is in the context of a "peaceful and accepted settlement."
3) UN Resolution 242 requires that all states in the area recognize Israel's "right to live in peace with secure and recognized borders free from threats or acts of force."
F&F
5 Arab League declaration on the invasion of Palestine- 15 May 1948
15 May 1948
VOLUMES 1-2: 1947-1974
II. THE WAR OF INDEPENDENCE
5. Arab League declaration on the invasion of Palestine, 15 May 1948:
The State of Israel came into being on the evening of Friday, 14 May 1948. On the night of 14-15 May, the regular forces of Jordan, Egypt, Syria and Lebanon invaded Palestine. The Egyptian Foreign Minister informed the Security Council that "Egyptian armed forces have started to enter Palestine to establish law and order" (his cable to the Security Council, S/743, 15 May 1948). The Governments of the Arab League States issued a statement on 15 May 1948, as their forces were advancing into Palestine:
http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/Foreign+Relations/Israels+Foreign+Relations+since+1947/1947-1974/5+Arab+League+declaration+on+the+invasion+of+Pales.htm
Notice it says Palestine and not Israel. Israel was already a state. If it was Israel that was attacked please post the link to the UNSC resolution condemning the act. Good luck finding it because there wont be one.
Why hasn't the bulldozing of a Mosque yesterday in the West Bank been written up by someone on the Huffington Post?
Just got back from a demonstration called by the local chapters of Jewish Voices for Peace and Jews for Global Justice. There were a dozen Jews, a dozen of us goyen and a half dozen Palestinian peace activists present at the local lighting of the town square Christmas tree. We spoke out on our bullhorns against the illegal occupation of the West Bank and in particular the horrendous bulldozing of a Mosque in the West Bank.
Our reception from 3-4 thousand attendants at the lighting was excellent. Scores of people approached us signifying support. One Israeli partisan confronted me, holding a STOP FUNDING ISRAELI APARTHEID sign. He said I was sick. I asked him if he supported bulldozing of Mosques in the West Bank. He said yes, proceeding into incoherent invectives. The crowd intervened on my behalf. I am called him a fascist, it was a visceral response, not helpful. But I was gratified this moral midget got nothing but scorn from the assembled crowd.
America is waking up. I suggest all on this blog who support peace spend less time trying to joust with the brainwashed hasbara element and more time educating the public to the hideous facts of the illegal occupation and the dangers to world peace presented by the Israeli ethnic cleansers and expansionists.
You've lost face and credibility.