12 nov 2017
The US President Donald Trump and his Middle East advisors have begun to formulate the basic frameworks of a renewed peace initiative to the Israel-Palestinian conflict, according to a report in the New York Times.
The report states that the initiative is expected to differ from past US peace pushes as Trump seeks to achieve what he has repeatedly described as the “ultimate deal.”
Since entering the White House in January, Trump has dispatched his main advisors Jason Greenblatt—along with his other special Middle East advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner—to the region to acquaint themselves with the complexities of the conflict, shuttling between private meetings with top regional leaders to lay the groundwork for ending the seemingly intractable conflict.
According to White House officials, Trump and his team are now preparing to announce concrete steps they intend to take in a bid to achieve “what has eluded all his predecessors.”
While Trump has never explicitly endorsed the two-state solution that has served as the cornerstone of US policy since the inception of the conflict, the new plan is expected to address settlements and the future of Occupied Jerusalem and not necessarily stray too far from traditional US policies.
Nevertheless, Greenblatt insisted that while Washington aspires to achieve peace, an agreement would not be forced on the two warring parties.
“We have spent a lot of time listening to and engaging with the Israelis, Palestinians and key regional leaders over the past few months to help reach an enduring peace deal,” said Greenblatt.
“We are not going to put an artificial timeline on the development or presentation of any specific ideas and will also never impose a deal. Our goal is to facilitate, not dictate, a lasting peace agreement to improve the lives of Israelis and Palestinians and security across the region.”
In February, Trump said during a joint press conference in Washington with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he would not be wedding his administration to conventional policies, but would be pursuing new ideas as long as both the Israelis and Palestinians could agree.
"I’m looking at two-state and one state. And I like the one that both parties like," Trump said when asked whether he had abandoned the notion of a two-state solution.
The core four-member team drafting the plan includes Kushner, Greenblatt, Dina H. Powell, a deputy national security adviser, and David M. Friedman, the ambassador to Israel. They are consulting with Donald Blome, the consul general in Jerusalem, and others from the State Department and National Security Council. Officials said the effort may take until early next year.
According to the New York Times, Trump and his team make no bones about being pro-Israel. The president has boasted of being Israel’s “biggest friend” and Kushner, Greenblatt and Friedman are all Orthodox Jews with ties to Israel.
The report states that the initiative is expected to differ from past US peace pushes as Trump seeks to achieve what he has repeatedly described as the “ultimate deal.”
Since entering the White House in January, Trump has dispatched his main advisors Jason Greenblatt—along with his other special Middle East advisor and son-in-law Jared Kushner—to the region to acquaint themselves with the complexities of the conflict, shuttling between private meetings with top regional leaders to lay the groundwork for ending the seemingly intractable conflict.
According to White House officials, Trump and his team are now preparing to announce concrete steps they intend to take in a bid to achieve “what has eluded all his predecessors.”
While Trump has never explicitly endorsed the two-state solution that has served as the cornerstone of US policy since the inception of the conflict, the new plan is expected to address settlements and the future of Occupied Jerusalem and not necessarily stray too far from traditional US policies.
Nevertheless, Greenblatt insisted that while Washington aspires to achieve peace, an agreement would not be forced on the two warring parties.
“We have spent a lot of time listening to and engaging with the Israelis, Palestinians and key regional leaders over the past few months to help reach an enduring peace deal,” said Greenblatt.
“We are not going to put an artificial timeline on the development or presentation of any specific ideas and will also never impose a deal. Our goal is to facilitate, not dictate, a lasting peace agreement to improve the lives of Israelis and Palestinians and security across the region.”
In February, Trump said during a joint press conference in Washington with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that he would not be wedding his administration to conventional policies, but would be pursuing new ideas as long as both the Israelis and Palestinians could agree.
"I’m looking at two-state and one state. And I like the one that both parties like," Trump said when asked whether he had abandoned the notion of a two-state solution.
The core four-member team drafting the plan includes Kushner, Greenblatt, Dina H. Powell, a deputy national security adviser, and David M. Friedman, the ambassador to Israel. They are consulting with Donald Blome, the consul general in Jerusalem, and others from the State Department and National Security Council. Officials said the effort may take until early next year.
According to the New York Times, Trump and his team make no bones about being pro-Israel. The president has boasted of being Israel’s “biggest friend” and Kushner, Greenblatt and Friedman are all Orthodox Jews with ties to Israel.
10 nov 2017
A top US official has denied presence of any new developments regarding Washington’s intent to move its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem.
The Hebrew radio quoted a White House official as saying on condition of anonymity that there was no change in the position of US president Donald Trump on moving the embassy to Jerusalem.
However, the official ruled out the possibility of moving the embassy to the holy city at the present stage.
The Hebrew radio quoted a White House official as saying on condition of anonymity that there was no change in the position of US president Donald Trump on moving the embassy to Jerusalem.
However, the official ruled out the possibility of moving the embassy to the holy city at the present stage.
9 nov 2017
Former US Secretary of State John Kerry and the US administration’s Middle East envoy expressed disappointment at the Israeli occupation leaders’ position on peace, PNN reports.
He said, in a recording published by Channel 10 Hebrew TV: “No one among the Israeli leaders wants peace, That is why his efforts for the peace negotiations failed.”
Israeli PM Netanyahu’s office immediately replied by saying that” John Kerry did not understand that it is the Palestinians who do not want peace. ”
Kerry said, “Jordan agreed to keep US troops on the border, but Israel rejected all the proposals,”
He added that he “will not be surprised if there is no Palestinian leader, after 10 years, who believes in nonviolence and says ‘I want peace,’ especially because he will tell the generations after him that ‘we tried and tried for 30 years to negotiate with Israel but our efforts failed.’
Palestine will not be immune to human rights movements that will call for equal rights. This result is certain after the failure of the negotiations and the reason for the failure of the negotiations is the absence of any Israeli leader.”
Among the attendees was the head of the joint Arab list, Ayman Odeh, and the leader of the Israeli opposition, Herzog.
He said, in a recording published by Channel 10 Hebrew TV: “No one among the Israeli leaders wants peace, That is why his efforts for the peace negotiations failed.”
Israeli PM Netanyahu’s office immediately replied by saying that” John Kerry did not understand that it is the Palestinians who do not want peace. ”
Kerry said, “Jordan agreed to keep US troops on the border, but Israel rejected all the proposals,”
He added that he “will not be surprised if there is no Palestinian leader, after 10 years, who believes in nonviolence and says ‘I want peace,’ especially because he will tell the generations after him that ‘we tried and tried for 30 years to negotiate with Israel but our efforts failed.’
Palestine will not be immune to human rights movements that will call for equal rights. This result is certain after the failure of the negotiations and the reason for the failure of the negotiations is the absence of any Israeli leader.”
Among the attendees was the head of the joint Arab list, Ayman Odeh, and the leader of the Israeli opposition, Herzog.
29 oct 2017
A US official on Sunday expressed the US administration's opposition to the Israeli government's vote on a controversial bill that entails a de facto annexation of West Bank settlements to Jerusalem.
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that the US is discouraging the actions that it believes will distract the concerned parties from focusing on the advancement of peace negotiations.
He continued that the Jerusalem expansion bill is considered one of those actions, Reuters reported.
Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, on Sunday decided to delay the vote on a draft law to include a number of West Bank settlements under the Israeli-controlled Jerusalem municipality.
Chairman of the Israeli government coalition, David Bitan, announced, based on Netanyahu's instructions, that the vote on Greater Jerusalem bill will be delayed until political coordination with the US is made despite that fact that a ministerial committee was scheduled to vote on the bill on Sunday to expedite its submission to the Knesset to be ratified.
The official, who spoke on condition of anonymity, said that the US is discouraging the actions that it believes will distract the concerned parties from focusing on the advancement of peace negotiations.
He continued that the Jerusalem expansion bill is considered one of those actions, Reuters reported.
Israel's Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, on Sunday decided to delay the vote on a draft law to include a number of West Bank settlements under the Israeli-controlled Jerusalem municipality.
Chairman of the Israeli government coalition, David Bitan, announced, based on Netanyahu's instructions, that the vote on Greater Jerusalem bill will be delayed until political coordination with the US is made despite that fact that a ministerial committee was scheduled to vote on the bill on Sunday to expedite its submission to the Knesset to be ratified.
26 oct 2017
Although highly nationalistic in their politics, these right-wing parties are very similar to each other. They share an Islamophobic and xenophobic ideology, and very interestingly, they all share a strong support for Zionism and for the state of Israel.
Michael Colborne wrote an article for the Haaretz newspaper with the title “Rise of a New Far-right: The European ‘Philosemites’ Using Jews to Battle Muslims,” to address the seeming contradiction in the European far-right.
Indeed, there really is no difference between philo-Semitism and anti-Semitism. There is no such thing as positive racism. The far-right groups did not replace their hatred of Jews with the hatred of Muslims. They continue to hate both groups.
Richard Silverstein told The Real News about how the election of President Trump emboldened those groups in the United States.
R. SILVERSTEIN I think that the anti-Semites in the United States are affiliated with the alt-right movement that you correctly associated with Breitbart, and this alt-right movement includes a very big cadre of anti-Semites, and they feel empowered by Trump’s victory and his nativist, kind of populist, extremist kind of views. That’s why a lot of the anti-Semitic attacks are happening, and they’re very much linked to the attacks on the Muslim community, which is why American Jews should really be making common cause with Muslims.
SHIR HEVER: White nationalism has its roots in Europe in the 19th century as it developed and took form in order to serve as justification for European colonialism. In those European countries that had smaller and fewer colonies, such as Germany, Italy, and Hungary, white nationalism turned inwards in the form of fascism, implementing the strict, hierarchical, colonial structure on their own citizens. It sought to find its enemies within and turned on minorities.During the Second World War, an unprecedented industrial genocide was perpetrated against Jews, against Sinti and Roma, against homosexuals and lesbians, against people with mental disabilities, and against others who were deemed enemies of the state.
Since Jews were targeted above all other groups during this genocide, and since the State of Israel, which was founded three years after the Holocaust, defines itself as a Jewish state, it raises the question of why does the European racist right-wing support the State of Israel? Aren’t they on completely opposite sides?There are two explanations for this. One is that the Zionist movement and the State of Israel seek to convince Jews from all over the world to migrate to the State of Israel. The prospect of European Jews and North American Jews leaving their homes and moving to the Middle East appeals to many racist groups. The second explanation for the alliance between the Western far-right and the State of Israel is that Israeli policies towards immigrants, towards Arabs and towards Muslims, are precisely the kind of policies that the European and North American far-right would like to implement.President Trump, during his campaign for the presidency, commented on Fox & Friends on how the US can and should imitate Israeli racial profiling.
DONALD TRUMP: Our local police, they know who a lot of these people are. They’re afraid to do anything about it because they don’t want to be accused of profiling, and they don’t want to be accused of all sorts of things. You know, in Israel they profile. They’ve done an unbelievable job, as good as you can do.
SPEAKER: Sure.
DONALD TRUMP: But Israel has done an unbelievable job, and they’ll profile. They profile. They see somebody that’s suspicious, they will profile, they will take that person and they’ll check out, “Do we have a choice?” Look what’s going on. Do we really have a choice? We’re trying to be so politically correct in our country, and this is only going to get worse.
SHIR HEVER: In the European context, fear of immigration fuels the extreme right. Lia Tarachansky told The Real News how Israeli policies towards asylum seekers inspire the European right.
L. TARACHANSKY: The African refugees like the Palestinian laborers pay taxes to the State of Israel, while they receive absolutely no services whatsoever from the State of Israel. They don’t get shelters. They don’t get basic food supplies. They don’t get health care. Zero, nothing. On top of paying taxes to a government that does not provide them with any services, they are now going to have these wages taken, and as far as I know, and I’m of course not a refugee expert, no other country does that.Now, you have to understand that Israel actually promotes itself to Europe, which is currently seen as in a crisis of migration, as the frontier of effective policies on how to basically prevent migrants from coming into your borders. Israel is using this as yet another tool in its marketing campaign that it’s trying to convince other Western nations, other developed nations, to adopt in their attack on globalized migration.
SHIR HEVER: The current wave of right-wing nationalism in Europe has adopted the prejudice that all Jews are Zionists. They invite European and American Jews to join their movement against what they perceive is the common Muslim enemy. The vast majority of European and American Jews, however, reject this invitation. They may be invited to the feast for now, but they know that it is the Jews themselves who will be served for dessert.
Michael Colborne wrote an article for the Haaretz newspaper with the title “Rise of a New Far-right: The European ‘Philosemites’ Using Jews to Battle Muslims,” to address the seeming contradiction in the European far-right.
Indeed, there really is no difference between philo-Semitism and anti-Semitism. There is no such thing as positive racism. The far-right groups did not replace their hatred of Jews with the hatred of Muslims. They continue to hate both groups.
Richard Silverstein told The Real News about how the election of President Trump emboldened those groups in the United States.
R. SILVERSTEIN I think that the anti-Semites in the United States are affiliated with the alt-right movement that you correctly associated with Breitbart, and this alt-right movement includes a very big cadre of anti-Semites, and they feel empowered by Trump’s victory and his nativist, kind of populist, extremist kind of views. That’s why a lot of the anti-Semitic attacks are happening, and they’re very much linked to the attacks on the Muslim community, which is why American Jews should really be making common cause with Muslims.
SHIR HEVER: White nationalism has its roots in Europe in the 19th century as it developed and took form in order to serve as justification for European colonialism. In those European countries that had smaller and fewer colonies, such as Germany, Italy, and Hungary, white nationalism turned inwards in the form of fascism, implementing the strict, hierarchical, colonial structure on their own citizens. It sought to find its enemies within and turned on minorities.During the Second World War, an unprecedented industrial genocide was perpetrated against Jews, against Sinti and Roma, against homosexuals and lesbians, against people with mental disabilities, and against others who were deemed enemies of the state.
Since Jews were targeted above all other groups during this genocide, and since the State of Israel, which was founded three years after the Holocaust, defines itself as a Jewish state, it raises the question of why does the European racist right-wing support the State of Israel? Aren’t they on completely opposite sides?There are two explanations for this. One is that the Zionist movement and the State of Israel seek to convince Jews from all over the world to migrate to the State of Israel. The prospect of European Jews and North American Jews leaving their homes and moving to the Middle East appeals to many racist groups. The second explanation for the alliance between the Western far-right and the State of Israel is that Israeli policies towards immigrants, towards Arabs and towards Muslims, are precisely the kind of policies that the European and North American far-right would like to implement.President Trump, during his campaign for the presidency, commented on Fox & Friends on how the US can and should imitate Israeli racial profiling.
DONALD TRUMP: Our local police, they know who a lot of these people are. They’re afraid to do anything about it because they don’t want to be accused of profiling, and they don’t want to be accused of all sorts of things. You know, in Israel they profile. They’ve done an unbelievable job, as good as you can do.
SPEAKER: Sure.
DONALD TRUMP: But Israel has done an unbelievable job, and they’ll profile. They profile. They see somebody that’s suspicious, they will profile, they will take that person and they’ll check out, “Do we have a choice?” Look what’s going on. Do we really have a choice? We’re trying to be so politically correct in our country, and this is only going to get worse.
SHIR HEVER: In the European context, fear of immigration fuels the extreme right. Lia Tarachansky told The Real News how Israeli policies towards asylum seekers inspire the European right.
L. TARACHANSKY: The African refugees like the Palestinian laborers pay taxes to the State of Israel, while they receive absolutely no services whatsoever from the State of Israel. They don’t get shelters. They don’t get basic food supplies. They don’t get health care. Zero, nothing. On top of paying taxes to a government that does not provide them with any services, they are now going to have these wages taken, and as far as I know, and I’m of course not a refugee expert, no other country does that.Now, you have to understand that Israel actually promotes itself to Europe, which is currently seen as in a crisis of migration, as the frontier of effective policies on how to basically prevent migrants from coming into your borders. Israel is using this as yet another tool in its marketing campaign that it’s trying to convince other Western nations, other developed nations, to adopt in their attack on globalized migration.
SHIR HEVER: The current wave of right-wing nationalism in Europe has adopted the prejudice that all Jews are Zionists. They invite European and American Jews to join their movement against what they perceive is the common Muslim enemy. The vast majority of European and American Jews, however, reject this invitation. They may be invited to the feast for now, but they know that it is the Jews themselves who will be served for dessert.
20 oct 2017
by Dina Badie, Huffington Post/Days of Palestine
Trump’s decision to withdraw from UNESCO is a flagrant attempt to punish Palestinians for doing what Israel has done all along. Israel has monopolised the “facts on the ground” debate through government-sanctioned settlement expansions into the West Bank, including an announcement this past week about new developments, including in the city of Al-Khalil (Hebron).
Recent estimates of the Jewish settler population living within the internationally-recognised pre-1967 “green line” territory of the West Bank number in the 300,000-400,000 range. Israel does not exactly recognise the green line as the future boundary between the two states, and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has increasingly distanced himself from even discussing a two-state solution in his hard turn toward the right-wing fringes of Israeli politics.
Even prior to Netanyahu’s return to power, Israeli leaders who at least rhetorically favoured a two-state solution consistently discussed the need for “land swaps” to accommodate the growing number of Jewish settlers residing outside of Israel’s officially recognised boundaries.
With the Israeli occupation having marked its 50th year anniversary this past summer, the facts on the ground are, in fact, likely here to stay. At the same time, the peace process has been in utter disarray over the last 25 years or so, with the 1993 Oslo Accords having marked the last real diplomatic breakthrough.
Despite other negotiations having taken place since, there has been little progress in resolving the increasingly convoluted final status issues of borders, Jerusalem, refugees and security, in part because of Israel’s “facts on the ground.” Nonetheless, over 70 per cent of the world’s nations, excluding the United States, Israel, and much of Europe, recognise Palestine as a state.
Widespread bilateral recognition is no consolation for continued occupation and a lack of official international recognition at the United Nations. Without it, the Palestinians have no political or legal recourse.
At the same time, Palestinians are both politically and territorially divided, with the Palestinian Authority maintaining control of the West Bank, and Hamas preserving control over Gaza. Though a unity agreement was just signed between the two sides, previous attempts at presenting a united front have failed because of competing priorities and irreconcilable disagreements. Moreover, Israel, especially under Netanyahu, will not negotiate if Hamas is in the picture.
With a long-stalled peace process, the Palestinian Authority, under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas began to look for alternatives to the direct negotiation with Israel. In 2011, he mounted a statehood campaign at the United Nations, which was, of course, bound to fail because of the American veto. Nonetheless, he found ways to establish a new set of “facts on the ground,” by gaining Palestinian accession to a number of international organisations, including UNESCO.
If Palestine could gain membership in these organisations, it could accrue tangible benefits while helping to consolidate a norm of recognition by working as a state alongside other nations. The US sought to undermine Palestine’s moves by ending financial support for these institutions, and now, the Trump administration announced its complete withdrawal from UNESCO.
This decision is yet another illustration of the American double standard when it comes to the Arab-Israeli conflict, including on the issue of “facts on the ground.” While the US has long condemned Israel’s expansion of settlements, its criticism has been muted and rhetorical and the special relationship has survived countless announcements of settlement construction.
When the Palestinians lay their “facts on the ground,” which are by most reasonable measures less provocative than the physical movement of Israelis into West Bank territory, the US reacts with punitive economic and diplomatic manoeuvres reserved for only one side of the conflict (and by extension, the international organisations that recognise them).
Considering the organisation’s mission, there is nothing fundamentally threatening about Palestinian participation in UNESCO. The United States and Israel are instead fearful of the possibility that what talks like a state and walks like a state may eventually be universally recognised as a state in more influential venues such as the UN and the International Court of Justice (ICJ). That, of course, is the point of laying facts on the ground. There comes a time when a norm – be it settlers or institutional membership – becomes so entrenched that it is nearly impossible to backtrack.
If any American administration is going to play a relevant role in brokering a solution, it must recognise facts on the ground for what they are… facts on the ground. That the Trump administration withdrew from UNESCO to punish Palestinian membership in the same week that Israel announced new settlements in Al-Khalil is absurd. Either condemn them equally or allow both sides to stake their claims as they see fit.
Dina Badie is an Assistant Professor of Politics and International Studies at Centre College. Her expertise is in American Foreign and Security Policy in the Middle East and Asia.
VIDEO: 10/15/17 US and Israel Show UNESCO their Anti-Palestinian Bias
Trump’s decision to withdraw from UNESCO is a flagrant attempt to punish Palestinians for doing what Israel has done all along. Israel has monopolised the “facts on the ground” debate through government-sanctioned settlement expansions into the West Bank, including an announcement this past week about new developments, including in the city of Al-Khalil (Hebron).
Recent estimates of the Jewish settler population living within the internationally-recognised pre-1967 “green line” territory of the West Bank number in the 300,000-400,000 range. Israel does not exactly recognise the green line as the future boundary between the two states, and Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu has increasingly distanced himself from even discussing a two-state solution in his hard turn toward the right-wing fringes of Israeli politics.
Even prior to Netanyahu’s return to power, Israeli leaders who at least rhetorically favoured a two-state solution consistently discussed the need for “land swaps” to accommodate the growing number of Jewish settlers residing outside of Israel’s officially recognised boundaries.
With the Israeli occupation having marked its 50th year anniversary this past summer, the facts on the ground are, in fact, likely here to stay. At the same time, the peace process has been in utter disarray over the last 25 years or so, with the 1993 Oslo Accords having marked the last real diplomatic breakthrough.
Despite other negotiations having taken place since, there has been little progress in resolving the increasingly convoluted final status issues of borders, Jerusalem, refugees and security, in part because of Israel’s “facts on the ground.” Nonetheless, over 70 per cent of the world’s nations, excluding the United States, Israel, and much of Europe, recognise Palestine as a state.
Widespread bilateral recognition is no consolation for continued occupation and a lack of official international recognition at the United Nations. Without it, the Palestinians have no political or legal recourse.
At the same time, Palestinians are both politically and territorially divided, with the Palestinian Authority maintaining control of the West Bank, and Hamas preserving control over Gaza. Though a unity agreement was just signed between the two sides, previous attempts at presenting a united front have failed because of competing priorities and irreconcilable disagreements. Moreover, Israel, especially under Netanyahu, will not negotiate if Hamas is in the picture.
With a long-stalled peace process, the Palestinian Authority, under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas began to look for alternatives to the direct negotiation with Israel. In 2011, he mounted a statehood campaign at the United Nations, which was, of course, bound to fail because of the American veto. Nonetheless, he found ways to establish a new set of “facts on the ground,” by gaining Palestinian accession to a number of international organisations, including UNESCO.
If Palestine could gain membership in these organisations, it could accrue tangible benefits while helping to consolidate a norm of recognition by working as a state alongside other nations. The US sought to undermine Palestine’s moves by ending financial support for these institutions, and now, the Trump administration announced its complete withdrawal from UNESCO.
This decision is yet another illustration of the American double standard when it comes to the Arab-Israeli conflict, including on the issue of “facts on the ground.” While the US has long condemned Israel’s expansion of settlements, its criticism has been muted and rhetorical and the special relationship has survived countless announcements of settlement construction.
When the Palestinians lay their “facts on the ground,” which are by most reasonable measures less provocative than the physical movement of Israelis into West Bank territory, the US reacts with punitive economic and diplomatic manoeuvres reserved for only one side of the conflict (and by extension, the international organisations that recognise them).
Considering the organisation’s mission, there is nothing fundamentally threatening about Palestinian participation in UNESCO. The United States and Israel are instead fearful of the possibility that what talks like a state and walks like a state may eventually be universally recognised as a state in more influential venues such as the UN and the International Court of Justice (ICJ). That, of course, is the point of laying facts on the ground. There comes a time when a norm – be it settlers or institutional membership – becomes so entrenched that it is nearly impossible to backtrack.
If any American administration is going to play a relevant role in brokering a solution, it must recognise facts on the ground for what they are… facts on the ground. That the Trump administration withdrew from UNESCO to punish Palestinian membership in the same week that Israel announced new settlements in Al-Khalil is absurd. Either condemn them equally or allow both sides to stake their claims as they see fit.
Dina Badie is an Assistant Professor of Politics and International Studies at Centre College. Her expertise is in American Foreign and Security Policy in the Middle East and Asia.
VIDEO: 10/15/17 US and Israel Show UNESCO their Anti-Palestinian Bias
Hamas on Thursday leveled heavy criticism at the US Envoy to the Middle East, Jason Greenblatt, saying he is trying every possible effort to obstruct inter-Palestinian reconciliation.
Hamas said Greenblatt’s statements represent an attempt to meddle in Palestinians’ home affairs and impede national reconciliation.
Hamas vowed to leave no stone unturned until the terms of the national reconciliation deal materialize on the ground.
Sometime earlier, Greenblatt said Hamas must recognize Israel and proceed with disarmament if it wishes to be part of consensus Palestinian government.
Hamas said Greenblatt’s statements represent an attempt to meddle in Palestinians’ home affairs and impede national reconciliation.
Hamas vowed to leave no stone unturned until the terms of the national reconciliation deal materialize on the ground.
Sometime earlier, Greenblatt said Hamas must recognize Israel and proceed with disarmament if it wishes to be part of consensus Palestinian government.
Members of the Palestinian security forces loyal to Hamas march during a graduation ceremony in Gaza City on December 4, 2014.
US President Donald Trump’s Middle East Peace Envoy Jason Greenblatt released a statement on Thursday, echoing statements by the Israeli government on the recent Palestinian reconciliation deal signed earlier this month by the rival Hamas and Fateh movements.
According to Ma’an, Greenblatt, who has visited Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory a number of times since Trump took office in January, began his statement by saying that “all parties agree that it is essential that the Palestinian Authority be able to assume full, genuine, and unhindered civil and security responsibilities in Gaza and that we work together to improve the humanitarian situation for Palestinians living there.”
“The United States reiterates the importance of adherence to the Quartet principles: any Palestinian government must unambiguously and explicitly commit to nonviolence, recognize the State of Israel, accept previous agreements and obligations between the parties – including to disarm terrorists – and commit to peaceful negotiations,” Greenblatt said.
“If Hamas is to play any role in a Palestinian government, it must accept these basic requirements.”
Shortly after the Palestinian unity government was formed, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reacted with similar sentiments, conditioning the acceptance of the deal on recognizing Israel and disarming Hamas, which Israel considers a terrorist organization.
According to Ynet news, Israel set a series of conditions that must be met before it would recognize the agreement. The condition included Hamas seizing all tunnel digging and missile manufacturing, “an end to terror attacks against Israel,” and the immediate release of Israeli citizens and return of the remains of Israeli soldiers being held by Hamas in Gaza.
Netanyahu’s statement following the agreement marked a significant softening of tone, compared to comments he made in 2011 during reconciliation talks, saying “if Hamas joins the Palestinian government we will not hold negotiations with the Palestinian Authority.”
The disarmament of Hamas and the future of its military wing has also been prioritized as a key issue in the deal by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who said he does not want a Hezbollah situation in Gaza, where the Fateh-led Palestinian Authority (PA) would administer the territory and Hamas would maintain its military power.
Numerous attempts have been made in the past to reconcile Hamas and Fateh since they came into violent conflict in 2007, shortly after Hamas’ 2006 victory in general elections held in the Gaza Strip.
US President Donald Trump’s Middle East Peace Envoy Jason Greenblatt released a statement on Thursday, echoing statements by the Israeli government on the recent Palestinian reconciliation deal signed earlier this month by the rival Hamas and Fateh movements.
According to Ma’an, Greenblatt, who has visited Israel and the occupied Palestinian territory a number of times since Trump took office in January, began his statement by saying that “all parties agree that it is essential that the Palestinian Authority be able to assume full, genuine, and unhindered civil and security responsibilities in Gaza and that we work together to improve the humanitarian situation for Palestinians living there.”
“The United States reiterates the importance of adherence to the Quartet principles: any Palestinian government must unambiguously and explicitly commit to nonviolence, recognize the State of Israel, accept previous agreements and obligations between the parties – including to disarm terrorists – and commit to peaceful negotiations,” Greenblatt said.
“If Hamas is to play any role in a Palestinian government, it must accept these basic requirements.”
Shortly after the Palestinian unity government was formed, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu reacted with similar sentiments, conditioning the acceptance of the deal on recognizing Israel and disarming Hamas, which Israel considers a terrorist organization.
According to Ynet news, Israel set a series of conditions that must be met before it would recognize the agreement. The condition included Hamas seizing all tunnel digging and missile manufacturing, “an end to terror attacks against Israel,” and the immediate release of Israeli citizens and return of the remains of Israeli soldiers being held by Hamas in Gaza.
Netanyahu’s statement following the agreement marked a significant softening of tone, compared to comments he made in 2011 during reconciliation talks, saying “if Hamas joins the Palestinian government we will not hold negotiations with the Palestinian Authority.”
The disarmament of Hamas and the future of its military wing has also been prioritized as a key issue in the deal by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who said he does not want a Hezbollah situation in Gaza, where the Fateh-led Palestinian Authority (PA) would administer the territory and Hamas would maintain its military power.
Numerous attempts have been made in the past to reconcile Hamas and Fateh since they came into violent conflict in 2007, shortly after Hamas’ 2006 victory in general elections held in the Gaza Strip.