PLO's Demands According to Yasser Abed Rabbo

Netanyahu, Clinton, and Abbas

As discussed in the last posting on this blog, Netanyahu’s refusal to extend the freeze on Israeli settlements in the West Bank brought peace talks with the Palestinian Authority to a standstill.  The direct peace negotiations between Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas began September 2 with critical support from the U.S., Egypt, and Jordan.  When a freeze on Israeli settlement in the West Bank expired later that month, Abbas refused to consider further negotiations unless Netanyahu agreed to halt construction.  So far this has yet to happen, and, as has been the case for decades, there are currently diverse and complex positions on both sides of the issue.

The previous posting focused mainly on Israeli sources, so in this post I’d like to discuss some Palestinian ones.  This article from the Palestine News Network, though brief, does bring up some of the complexities inherent in Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. 

The article starts by quoting PLO official Yasser Abed Rabbo as saying that the Palestinians would be willing to recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland provided that the borders of Israel be defined based on those in 1967 and do not include East Jerusalem.  Rabbo is then quoted as saying that, while Palestine has recognized Israel in the past, Israel has not done the same for Palestine.  According to U.S. spokesman Philip Crowley, this is just the kind of thing Palestinians and Israelis need to be discussing.  Secretary of State Hilary Clinton says she is “committed and hopeful” regarding the establishment of a just solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem.

Yasser Abed Rabbo

Rabbo’s clear-cut statement and the optimism of the U.S. State Department belie the intricate complexity of the situation.  For one thing, as is mentioned in the Palestine News Network article, Abed Rabbo’s stance does not reflect that of all Palestinians.  Remarks from Amin Maqboul of the Fatah Revolutionary Council indicated that he and other like-minded Palestinians are not prepared to recognize Israel’s legitimacy.  Furthermore, even if all Palestinians were poised to cheerily accept the existence of Israel given the provisions outlined by Rabbo, there would still be major debates on the issue of borders.  It is fairly unlikely that Israelis would be prepared to relinquish East Jerusalem.  As seen in the last post, to ask anyone to leave a land they feel they have a claim on is a serious and controversial request, whether that land be a holy site or a rugged settlement.  This applies to both Israelis and Palestinians, and these issues come to the fore in the context of the currently stalled peace talks.

The article concludes with a brief summary of the peace talks and the expired settlement freeze.  It states that the international community considers the West Bank settlements illegal, and that their orientation separates the region into 64 disconnected areas making an establishment of a Palestinian state based on the 1967 borders impossible. 

The article is fairly straightforward.  It does not provide a multitude of viewpoints, but it does show what appears to be the official stance of the PLO contrasted with a dissenting position from the Fatah Revolutionary Council.  The article does not address the Israeli position other than to say that the peace talks ended following the expiration of the settlement freeze.  The PNN is an independent news source operated by Palestinians, so it would make sense if it were heavily biased on the Palestinian side.  At least in this article, a major bias is not readily apparent.  If, however, it is contrasted with a similar article (such as this one from Arutz Sheva by Tzvi Ben Gedalyahu), it could be argued that certain elements were left out of the story to make the Palestinian cause seem the more just one.  For example, the tone of the PNN article makes it sound like Palestinians have simple demands and are eager to recognize Israel following their fulfillment.  The Arutz Sheva article stresses the view that said demands are merely an attempt to “throw the diplomatic ball of wax back into... Netanyahu’s court,” and, furthermore, an advisor to President Abbas has been quoted as negating Rabbo’s statement, seemingly making the thrust of the PNN article irrelevant.  Israel's Minister of Regional Cooperation Silvan Shalom is quoted in the Arutz Sheva article as criticizing Rabbo’s demands as a way of getting all he can for Palestine without first sitting down to work out a compromise with the Israeli government. 

Both sides are understandably reluctant to make concessions.  The Palestinians are a people with no homeland, thousands of whom still live in refugee camps.  The Israelis have struggled for decades to establish and secure what they consider to be their own rightful homeland, and to do so by legitimate means.  The result of peace negotiations has the potential to greatly impact hundreds of thousands on both the Israeli and Palestinian sides.  There is certainly no easy answer, but the resumption of peace talks would at least be a step in the right direction.