- No mas: Principal bans Spanish language in intercom announcement
- Hacking software could put ‘zombie drone army’ in user’s hands
- Support for stricter gun laws drops: poll
- 10 whales dead, 41 others stranded in Everglades
- John Boehner faces bipartisan pressure to allow gay-rights vote
- Martin Bashir resigns from MSNBC over ‘ill-judged’ comments about Sarah Palin
- Rep. Duncan Hunter: While Obama prays for Iranian change, U.S. should ready its nukes
- Best company ever? Veteran Beer Co. exists to employ vets, provide quality beer
- Iran official: Sanctions ‘utterly failed’ to stop nuclear program
- ‘Black Santa’ display at IU sparks student outrage
Netanyahu, Abbas seek ‘framework’
Face-to-face meeting is prelude
Palestinian and Israeli leaders agreed Thursday to pursue an interim understanding, or framework agreement, before ironing out a peace treaty during the first direct talks between the two sides since 2008.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met for 1 1/2 hours behind closed doors with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas at the State Department, along with Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton and Mideast envoy George Mitchell, who described the talks as cordial.
“The purpose of a framework agreement will be to establish the fundamental compromises necessary to enable them to flesh out and complete a comprehensive treaty that will end the conflict and establish a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians,” said Mr. Mitchell, a former Democratic Senate majority leader.
For now, the most tangible result of the meeting is the agreement for the two leaders to meet again on Sept. 13 and 14 in the Egyptian resort of Sharm el Sheikh. Both leaders also agreed to meet every two weeks or so and to try to finish the negotiations within a year.
The thorniest issues between the Israeli government and the Palestinian Authority include the status of East Jerusalem, a city both sides consider their capital, and the ground of holy sites for all three major Abrahamic faiths.
Also on the list will be a compromise on Palestinian refugees. Palestinians have long asserted a “right to return” for the people and relatives who fled Israeli territory in the 1948 war that established the Jewish state. In 2000, Israel’s then-Prime Minister Ehud Barak offered to compensate financially the families of Palestinians who fled in exchange for ending their claims to territory inside pre-1967 Israel.
“The parties agreed that in their actions and statements they will work to create an atmosphere of trust that will be conducive to reaching a final agreement,” Mr. Mitchell said.
Nonetheless, the two sides have yet to agree on a moratorium on Israeli settlement construction in the West Bank. A current freeze on building there will expire on Sept. 26, and Mr. Netanyahu has said he will not extend the freeze. Mr. Abbas has said he will leave the talks if the freeze is not renewed.
“The atmospherics were positive and both leaders made an effort to say things designed to appeal to the other side,” said Alan Elsner, director of communications for the Israel Project, an international nonprofit group that provides information about Israel.
“This was as good a start as could have been expected. Substantively, all the hard work remains ahead, it is unclear what will happen when the moratorium expires,” Mr. Elsner said.
The framework agreement approach was tried at the very end of the Clinton administration in 2000 after the breakdown of the Camp David peace talks. The result was a guideline for the conflict that came to be known as the “Clinton parameters,” which allowed for swaps of land between the Palestinians and Israelis for the major settlement blocs in and around Jerusalem to remain part of Israel’s final borders.
The Camp David talks ended in failure, and soon thereafter, a new war, or intifadah, broke out between the Palestinian Authority and the Israeli government. Many of the preventive security services established during the peace process were military targets for Israel. Meanwhile, documents seized by Israeli forces in 2002 found that those same security services were aiding terrorists attacking Israeli civilians.
When asked about how this process was different from others in the past, Mr. Mitchell said: “Our view is this is an effort that will try to learn from the lessons of the past, take the best and bring them forward, but not be bound by any label or category or previous process.”
He added also that President Obama is the first president to take up the issue at the beginning of his presidency and not the end.
© Copyright 2013 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.
About the Author
- Inside China: Nuclear submarines capable of widespread attack on U.S.
- Hola: Boehner prepares to push amnesty bill through House
- Kill team: Obama war chiefs widen drone death zones
- Apple wins facial recognition patent for iPhone 6
- MILLER: Obamas EPA closing smelter will not affect ammunition supply
- NYC alarms with notice: Immediately surrender your rifle
- Pentagon may give recruits 'a shot to start over' after shameful social media posts
- Allen West warns Obamas backdoor gun control is moving forward
- U.S. pilot scares off Iranians with 'Top Gun'-worthy stunt: 'You really ought to go home'
- Puerto Rico caravan honoring Paul Walker ends in 6 drunken-driving arrests, 72 speeding tickets
Independent voices from the The Washington Times Communities
Playing Through covers the world of PGA golf, as well as tips your the average golfer to play better.
The only thing broken about our immigration policy has been our collective cowardice as a nation to enforce our current immigration laws
Al Maurer provides a common sense, conservatarian, Constitutional conservative perspective from the battleground state of Colorado
Criticism may not be agreeable, but it is necessary. It fulfills the same function as pain in the human body. It calls attention to an unhealthy state of things.