Thursday, December 12, 2013

Kerry’s plan will fail, and for three simple and straightforward reasons

...Kerry claims that the basic principles of a solution have been known since the Clinton parameters of 2000. This is nonsense — in fact the issues that prevent a solution have been known for years, by both sides.
12 December '13..

News item:

Israeli and U.S. officials said on Wednesday that Kerry began discussing a “framework agreement” for a peace treaty with Justice Minister Tzipi Livni and the head of the Palestinian negotiation team, Saeb Erekat, in Washington on Monday. …

[Kerry] said the solutions to each core issue are known from pervious negotiation rounds. He cited the outline presented by former U.S. President Bill Clinton in December 2000 and the Annapolis talks in 2007-2008 as a basis for these solutions.

“It is essential, in my judgment, to reach for a full agreement and to have a framework within which we can try to work for that. … A basic framework will have to address all the core issues – borders, security, refugees, Jerusalem, mutual recognition, and an end of claims. And it will have to establish agreed guidelines for subsequent negotiations that will fill out the details in a full-on peace treaty,” Kerry said.

This represents a departure from the philosophy of the Oslo agreement that informed previous American attempts to broker a solution, in which the the “core issues” were left for the end. The original idea was to build trust with small steps, so that ultimately it would be easier for both sides to make the ‘hard choices’ that would be required.

This failed for several reasons. One was that the PLO was incapable or unwilling to repress the extremist elements in Hamas, Fatah and other factions, so that continuing terrorism made it impossible to build trust on the Israeli side.

In turn, Israel’s actions to protect its population — the security barrier, etc. — were considered to be aggression by the Arabs. The PLO leadership also claims that construction in eastern Jerusalem and within existing settlements in Judea and Samaria is evidence that Israel isn’t serious about reaching an agreement, but I believe that this is only a pretext and their real opposition rests on the issues listed below.

Kerry claims that the basic principles of a solution have been known since the Clinton parameters of 2000. This is nonsense — in fact the issues that prevent a solution have been known for years, by both sides. They are:

1. A truly (or even partly) sovereign Palestinian state in Judea and Samaria is inconsistent with Israel’s security. Israel will never offer a degree of sovereignty that will be acceptable to the PLO.

2. Any Jewish sovereignty between the Jordan and Mediterranean is inconsistent with the PLO’s reason for being. The PLO will never recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people, and will never stop trying to end the Jewish state.

3. The PLO is unstable, corrupt, and incapable of protecting itself against radical elements (Hamas, Salafists, etc.) and therefore could not deliver peace in return for concessions, even if it wanted to.

No degree of prodding by the US can overcome these facts.


Updates throughout the day at If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.Twitter updates at LoveoftheLand as well as our Love of the Land page at Facebook which has additional pieces of interest besides that which is posted on the blog. Check-it out! 


  1. While I agree that a two state solution is not going to happen, I do not think point #2 is true. The P.A. has repeatedly stated (as has the Arab Peace Initiative of 1992 that they would accept and formally recognize the State of Israel as soon as Israel provided the conditions for the establishment of a Palestinian state that was acceptable to them. And Hamas has taken the position that they would agree to whatever a majority of the Palestinian people in a fair election voted for. But because of #1 Israel will not offer such conditions and therefore these negotiations will fail. Then the struggle for a bi-national state will begin in earnest as the status quo is unacceptable to either side though some in the present Likkud coalition may think it can be maintained.

    1. There are two problems with your comments. One, you make once again, like so many others before you, the classical mistake of assuming that because the P.A. made promises, they will honor them. Newsflash: they never have, and don't intend to in the future either. Check their history. Two, Hamas is an Islamic dictatorship that has no intention to accept the results of any elections. You want proof? They were elected in 2006, but we are now on the eve of 2014, and there has been no other elections in between. How many governments in the world do you know that stay in power for 8 straight years without elections in-between? Besides, they're making demands of Israel that they know fully well the Jewish State cannot accept, so yes, there will never be a TSS, but the responsibility of its demise rests entirely the Palestinians' refusal to make any concession to Israel.

    2. You don't understand that there are no conditions that are acceptable to them if it includes a single Jew living in our land.