Secretary of State Hillary Clinton preemptively rebuffed yesterday a settlement compromise proposition expected for delivery by Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak on his upcoming trip to Washington, D.C. Israeli seeks U.S. support for natural settlement growth in exchange for the dismantling of illegal outposts. However, at a press conference, Clinton reiterated the official stance of the White House and Administration- an end to all forms of settlements, illegal, expansions, and natural growth. She stated:

“the President was very clear when Prime Minister Netanyahu was here. He wants to see a stop to settlements – not some settlements, not outposts, not natural growth exceptions. We think it is in the best interests of the effort that we are engaged in that settlement expansion cease. That is our position. That is what we have communicated very clearly, not only to the Israelis but to the Palestinians and others. And we intend to press that point.”

The left-leaning Center for American Progress’ Middle East Progress will host a forum on Jerusalem next month. The speakers all have extensive knowledge on Israel-U.S. relations and should provide great insights into the role of the city in future peace negotiations. The United States believes that the city’s status will be determined in final status negotiations whereas Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu recently insisted that Jerusalem would remain in the State of Israel if there happens to be a two-state solution. To RSVP go to: http://zedc3test.techprogress.org/events/2009/06/jerusalem.html

 The Status of Jerusalem

June 3, 2009, 1:00pm - 2:30pm

As Israelis and Palestinians consider reopening negotiations, the final status issues — such as Jerusalem, refugees, security and borders — loom on the horizon. For over a decade, Palestinians, Israelis and others have been working on creative solutions to these seemingly intractable challenges.

Middle East Progress at the Center for American Progress invites you to hear from three experts who have been looking at the issue of Jerusalem, the city at the heart of the conflict: Ambassador Michael Bell, co-director of the Jerusalem Old City Initiative at the University of Windsor, and former Canadian ambassador to Jordan, Egypt and Israel; Marshall Breger, professor of law at the Columbus School of Law, The Catholic University of America, co-author of Jerusalem’s Holy Places and the Peace Process and consultant to the Jerusalem Old City Initiative; and moderator Ambassador Daniel C. Kurtzer, S. Daniel Abraham Professor in Middle Eastern Policy Studies at Princeton University’s Woodrow Wilson School and former U.S. ambassador to Israel and Egypt.

The discussion will focus on the multiple challenges Jerusalem poses to any resolution to the Israeli-Palestinian and broader Arab-Israeli conflict and how they might be resolved.

An upcoming book from State Department Envoy Dennis Ross seems to contradict a new policy regarding linking Iran to the peace process set forth by the Obama Administration. The White House mandates a resumption on peace talks between Israel and the Palestinians as crucial to any solution aimed at preventing an Iranian nuclear weapons program. Many analysts contend that Iran and Israel currently engage in warfare through Iranian proxies Hezbollah and Hamas, thereby a peace negotiation would diminish Iran’s role in the region. Conversely, many Israeli leaders believe that Iran marks the greatest threat to their country and desire an immediate solution to the Iran nuclear problem. 

Ross’s new book Myths, Illusions, and Peace: Finding a New Direction for America in the Middle East, co-written prior to his appointment to the State Department, seems to assert that the peace process remains insulated from the Iran issue. Dissent from Ross to the rest of the administration on linkage could sabotage the goals of the White House or influence a change in approach towards the peace process. A notable quote from the book includes:

“Of all the policy myths that have kept us from making real progress in the Middle East, one stands out for its impact and longevity: the idea that if only the Palestinian conflict were solved, all other Middle East conflicts would melt away. This is the argument of ‘linkage.’”

The Israeli government will reportedly offer the United States a deal: the dismantling of all illegal settlements in exchange for U.S. acceptance of natural growth in existing settlements. Defense Minister and Labor leader Ehud Barak intends to formally offer the compromise during his visit to Washington, D.C. next week. Secretary of State Hillary Clinton recently clarified the U.S. stance that all types of settlement expansion, including natural growth, must end while Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu largely supports natural growth of existing settlements. 

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas stated yesterday his refusal to engage Israel in peace negotiations until the new Israeli administration announces its support of a Palestinian state and ceases all settlement activity. Hamas, though, insisted that it rejects any agreements signed by the Palestinian Authority in upcoming discussions between President Barack Obama and Abbas. This declaration would make any peace process applicable to the West Bank until the ousting of the Hamas government from Gaza.

The United States must include Israel as a major component in any negotiations with Iran, according to a variety of academics speaking at the Tel Aviv University’s Center for Iranian Studies annual conference convened today. 

Due to Israel’s unfortunate status as the principal target of Iran’s nuclear program, some of the analysts concluded that no U.S.-Iran deal could succeed without acknowledging the Jewish state’s unique role in the region. 

In discussing renewed talks with Iran, the Obama Administration repeatedly mentioned the need to tie negotiations to progress in the Israel-Palestine peace process. 

“Don’t believe for a moment that if there is no different situation in Palestine then things can be easier between Iran and Israel,” Prof. Paolo Cotta-Ramusino of the Pugwash Conferences on Science and World Affairs said at the event.

However, former Mossad chief Efraim Halevy stressed the multifaceted relationship between Israel and Iran that compromises far more issues than merely peace negotiations.

Aside from Iran’s nuclear program affecting Israel, the Iranian regime consistently meddles in issues affecting Israel by supporting the terrorist infrastructure of Hamas and Hezbollah. According to Levy, Israel and Iran maintain a conventional war with recent confrontations including Operation Cast Lead, the Second Lebanon War, Israel’s strike on an alleged Syrian nuclear facility, and the destruction of an arms convey in Sudan en-route to the Gaza Strip.

“What we have is an undeclared war.” Halevy said at the event. “It will not be possible to reach an understanding… without Israel being part of this ultimate understanding.” 

Halevy noted that Iran repeatedly emerged “with a bloody nose” from any confrontation with Israel, including the “debilitating blow” to Hamas during Operation Cast Lead. “The Iranians were incapable of lifting a figure from saving the forces in Gaza,” he said. He described the Israeli attack on the convoy in Sudan as “an Iranian setback, and they know it.”

Cotta-Ramusino stated that negotiations could only succeed if all sides receive a positive gain. While the West maintains its nonproliferation objectives, Iran would require a broader role in the Middle East.

Halevy disagreed with the approach of rewarding Iran, stressing the high price the world would pay by elevating the Iranian regime. He also noted that the Obama Administration would refuse this option and, more importantly, opposes this route as a positive approach to the situation.

Harvard University Prof. Steven Miller noted that an era of U.S. pressure on Iran failed, therefore the United States must pursue an alternate approach. He stressed that President George W. Bush employed serious diplomatic pressure while Iran transformed Natanz from a “hole in the ground” into the site of the country’s nuclear program. “When it doesn’t work, maybe its time to try something else,” Miller said, stressing unfortunate reality that a zero-centrifuge outcome for Iran remains unlikely and that the United States should focus on restricted the Iranian nuclear program instead of destroying it.

Cotta-Ramusino concurred, noting that. “All the nuclear activity should be controlled.” However, he expressed hope that changes in Tehran could positively affect the capacity for negotiations. “There are chance the situation will improve on a regional level.”

However, Halevy dismissed the idea of change in Iranian posture towards democracy and human rights, stating facetiously “and maybe apple pie will become a staple.” Instead, Halevy tacitly advocated intense pressure from the United States mentioning his own experience with U.S. negotiators at the bargaining table.  “Its’ not a pretty picnic,” Halevy recalled, noting that he did not “emerge smiling” from the meetings.

The State Department clarified the Administration’s posture towards Jerusalem as a final status issue in the midst of Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu comments that the holy city will remain under Israeli control. 

Question: What is the U.S. response to Prime Minister Netanyahu’s comments that all of Jerusalem will remain under Israeli sovereignty and “will never again be partitioned and divided”?

 

Answer: Jerusalem is a final status issue. Israel and the Palestinians have agreed to resolve its status during negotiations. We will support their efforts to reach agreements on all final status issues.

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu told his cabinet today that building in existing settlements could continue despite U.S. pressure to halt all settlement construction and expansion. Even though the Israeli government agreed to dismantle some illegal outposts following the meeting between Netanyahu and President Barack Obama, many members of the Likud-led coalition expressed a furor over any unilateral Israeli concessions regarding the development of settlements. Last week, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton clarified the U.S. stance that all forms of construction must cease immediately, including permitting natural growth in existing settlements. Netanyahu has repeatedly maintained the need to permit natural growth in settlements,  telling his cabinet,

“We do not intend to build any new settlements, but it wouldn’t be fair to ban construction to meet the needs of natural growth or for there to be an outright construction ban.”

Antisemitism isn’t only relevant when talking about parts of the Arab world and Europe, where hate crimes against Jews remain on the rise. Our readers in and around the United States also assuredly encountered bias directed towards Jewish-Americans, most recently outside Washington, D.C. An elementary school and police car in Bowie, MD were recently spray-painted with swastikas and numbers marking Hitler’s birthday. This recent incident, occurring mere weeks after Holocaust remembrance day and amidst Iranian Holocaust-denying claims, portrays the reason that many Jews herald the need for a Jewish state. After centuries of discrimination and genocide, many Jews claim that anti-Semitism remains an ubiquitous ideology that constantly threatens igniting another mass murder. Israel represents the embodiment of the need for a Jewish state to defend this group of people against another genocide whose roots remain ingrained in societies across the world.

As the Likud-led government prepares to dismantle some illegal outposts in the West Bank, some members of the coalition expressed deep dissatisfaction with the anticipated move. Reportedly, Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister- and Labor Chairman- Ehud Barak agreed to withdraw some of the illegal outposts at Barak’s discretion. The U.S. government repeatedly pressured Israel to halt settlement expansion and the dismantling of the illegal outposts, announced shortly after the Netanyahu-Obama meeting, likely represents the result of additional pressure from the White House.

One Likud Knesset member described the evacuations as a “manhunt” while Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman  stated that evacuations should only occur following any peace agreement, not as a prerequisite. Lieberman defended his stance by noting that both Israelis and Palestinians develop illegal outposts and the government should enforce the law equally, by either cracking down on both settlements or none. 

While Lieberman’s point does have some validity, any two-state solution, advocated by the United States and Europe, would result in Palestinian control over the West Bank. Any Jewish settlements would require evacuation regardless and Palestinian outposts would remain as part of the future Palestinian state. Therefore, all settlements, but particularly the illegal outposts, aggravate any peace plans and continuously create unnecessary tension within the territories.

Even though some reports indicated that the recent talks between Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and President Barack Obama succeeded in establishing a foundation for the renewal of the peace process, some  contadictory reports indicate that the status quo has not changed.

Netanyahu, speaking at a rally in Jerusalem, unequivcally asserted that the holy city remains Israeli and will always belong to the Jewish people, undivided. Most analysts of the peace process assert the need to divide the city based on the creation of a two-state solution with the city either as the capital of both Israel and the Palestinian state or establishing an international organization to administer the city’s affairs.