Stan187

Oct 2, 2007
'Summit failure may ignite new intifada'
By KHALED ABU TOAMEH

A failure in the upcoming US-sponsored Middle East peace conference would have more dangerous repercussions than the botched Camp David summit in 2000, Fatah officials warned on Tuesday.

This was the first time senior Fatah officials hinted at a possible wave of violence if the conference - expected to be held in Annapolis, Maryland, next month - did not meet the Palestinians' demands.

"If we don't prepare well for the conference so that it will result in something positive, the repercussions will be more dangerous than what happened after the failure of Camp David," said Azzam al-Ahmed, head of the Fatah parliamentary list. He is closely associated with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas.

The Palestinians might decide to stay away from the meeting, Ahmed warned. "If the [Israeli and Palestinian] negotiators don't reach an agreement before the conference, there will be no point in holding it," he said. "Let's bear in mind that invitations to the conference have not been issued yet."

US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice still hadn't answered many of the questions about the conference that were presented to her by the Palestinians, Ahmed said.

"In the beginning, we were surprised by [US President George W.] Bush's invitation," he added. "Then Rice came to the region and didn't provide us with clear answers about the conference."

He said the initial Palestinian reaction to the conference proposal had been exaggerated. "We rushed to welcome the call for the conference, although we did not know much about it," the Fatah official said.

Referring to Wednesday's planned meeting between Abbas and Prime Minister Ehud Olmert, Ahmed said the PA president was more optimistic than ever.

"After the last summit, I heard Abbas say that there was room for optimism. Today, President Abbas is 90 percent to 95% optimistic, especially after his visit to New York last week," Ahmed said.

Another top Fatah official warned against raising expectations on the eve of the conference. He pointed out that the second intifada erupted a few months after the Camp David summit.

"People then had high expectations," the official told The Jerusalem Post. "But then they realized that Israel was not serious about achieving peace with the Palestinians. The failure of next month's conference could bring another catastrophe upon us."

Hafez Barghouti, editor of the Fatah-controlled Al-Hayat Al-Jadeeda daily, said pent-up frustration among the Palestinians could be vented if the US-sponsored event failed.

"Those who want the conference to succeed know the conditions for success," he said. "But those who want this fall's conference to be followed by a fall of wrath know the size of the accumulated anger [among Palestinians]."

The PLO executive committee, which met here Tuesday, called for "serious and positive" preparations to ensure the success of the conference. It said the agenda must be based on the Arab League peace plan from 2002, Bush's two-state vision, the road map and all United Nations resolutions on the Israeli-Arab conflict.

At its meeting, which was headed by Abbas, the executive committee also called for increased coordination between the Palestinians and the Arab countries ahead of the conference.

"We call for a unified Arab-Palestinian role that will be effective in overcoming all obstacles," the committee said. "The major obstacle remains Israel's desire to undermine the conference's role to prevent it from serving as a launching pad for a just and comprehensive settlement."

Meanwhile, Nabil Amr, a top adviser to Abbas, said the PA would hold a national referendum on any agreement reached with Israel. He added that the current PA strategy was to intensify pressure on Israel to revive the peace process.

Amr also dismissed as "untrue" charges by Hamas that Abbas did not have a mandate from the Palestinians to strike a deal with Israel over core issues, such as the status of Jerusalem, the borders of a Palestinian state and the problem of the Palestinian refugees.

Abbas was quoted by The Washington Post this week as saying that he had the right as a refugee to return to his home in the Galilee.

"This is my right, but how I will use this right is up to me and to the refugees and to the agreement which will take place between us," Abbas told the paper, which interviewed him last week.

"We want to find a permanent solution," he added. "The Israelis want security, and we are in need of independence. How can we deal with these two pillars? There is a gap between the two sides. We want to bridge the gap during the negotiations."

----------------------------------------------

So, does anyone else think this is just plain and straight extortion? Sign a peace agreement with us, or we'll begin some new wave of attacks!

Gee, sounds like a bargain with a high margin.

__________________
In Iran people belive pepsi stands for pay each penny save israel. -urmomma158
The Russian Navy is still a threat, but only to those unlucky enough to be Russian sailors.-highsea

astralis

stan,

actually, sounds to me like a cheap negotiation trick i see at flea markets. raise the initial price real high, so that when negotiations begin and the price gets whittled down, even the agreed-on price is still quite good for the seller.

in any case, i think the PA is bluffing more than anything else here. as the other articles you've posted show, the israelis have figured out how to minimize and largely cope with palestinian terrorism. of course, israel can't push this advantage too far- if the pallies lose too much face, they'll just go right back to the same crappy lifestyle they've got going. "they never miss a chance to miss a chance."

__________________
Never let the future disturb you. You will meet it, if you have to, with the same weapons of reason which today arm you against the present.

-Marcus Aurelius, Meditations

Stan187

As someone who I talked earlier said, this is just like the Syrians, they want full agreement prior to negotiations, otherwise they don't want to sit at the table because there are no guarantees that they will get what they want.

omon

no wonder we have problems with them.

__________________
"Democracy is two wolves and a lamb voting on what to have for lunch. Liberty is a well-armed lamb contesting the vote!" B. Franklin

RamHammer

This is true.

Although there was a cease fire between Israel and Hezbollah last summer, I do not believe that they have gotten their 3 kidnapped soldiers back.

It was an unconditional aspect of the treaty.

__________________
I stand with Israel.

Bluesman

Trying to guarantee maximalist demands be met BEFORE negotiations begin is quite simply stupid. The Pallies just aren't very good at this game; the negotiations table ain't the bazaar, and these guys that think they're sharp wheeler-dealers better get used to this one over-riding fact when they sit down across from an Israeli: that guy you're facing is not bargaining for something extra. He's negotiaiting for his very survival. You're NOT going to get the best of him, because he can't afford it.

__________________
"The quickest way of ending a war is to lose it, and if one finds the prospect of a long war intolerable, it is natural to disbelieve in the possibility of victory."
- George Orwell

Stan187

That's why negotiations with Arabs have seldom worked. The don't want peace for peace. They want peace for piece.

Zinja

What i don't get is how is a Palastinean state going to function as two patches of land with another nation between them? I think what the Palestineans should do is give up one of the lands (Gaza or West bank) and in return Israel conced more land to their chosen patch and the two can live happily ever after (hopefully) as two independent nations.

Stan187

That would involve moving, which is much easier said than done. Logistically it is a very hard task. Politically, it is probably impossible.

Zinja

I think these are sacrifices that need to be considered if ever there could be a lasting solution to this impasse. Sooner or later this issue is going to come up. Having Israel in between palestinean territories will make Palestine vulnerable to Israel and sooner or later this will play into the hands of extremism and cause for another round of conflicts. But then of cause i realise that such a package can only be successfully implimented if there is an all-encompassing political settlement between Palestine and Israel. The more one looks at this the more one is convinced that the Isael-Palestine issue is far from over.

Stan187

It is completely unrealistic. Either one or the other is going to not be contigous.

As far as lasting solution, there isn't one. That's just reality.

Zinja

Just 5 years ago it was considered unthinkable for Israel to pull out of Gaza but 3 years later it happened. It may be controversial but its a price that might be worth paying.

Stan187

What you are offering has never been proposed as an option, let alone considered.

Zinja

True. I think this is largely due to short sightedness on the part of the mediators in the mid-east process. This issue will come up you will see. Consider the following remarks by Israel: "Israel wants to keep its major settlement blocks in the occupied West Bank, in exchange for giving the Palestinians equivalent amounts of land elsewhere" Palestinians want return of all occupied land: Abbas - Yahoo! News UK

Whilst this is in a limited sense and Abbas still insists on all 'full' teritories, my idea is not far fetched.

Stan187

So what you're saying is that you are one of the smarter human beings/politicians/diplomats on the planet, because you thought of the best idea, and no one else has ever considered before.