Palestinian-Israeli Talks Is What Turkey Desires Too
In its news based on information from a high-ranking Fatah member, the AFP (Agence France Presse) reports that the Palestinian Authority’s response to a call by Catherine Ashton, the High Representative of the EU for Foreign Affairs, for direct peace talks with Israel will be positive. The news reported that the meetings Ashton has had with both parties have finally given fruit. Both Israel and the Palestinian Authority have declared their mutual willingness to commence direct talks in August; however, the formal announcement will be made this coming week. This is, no doubt, good news for Turkey and for all those who desire the long-absent permanent peace in the Middle East.
Yet, is the news correct? The very first question to ask would be: Is there really a Palestinian Authority that can, by itself, constitute a party to hold such direct talks? Will the body called the Palestinian Authority be able to claim a realm of authority that includes Gaza as well? If Mahmoud Abbas announces that he is ready to begin direct talks, and the talks result in the declaration of an independent Palestinian state within the pre-1967 borders within 24 months as envisaged, will decisions to be taken not concern the fate of Gazans also?
It is certainly admirable that Catherine Ashton has been at pains to eventually strike a permanent peace in the Middle East and to help the Middle East Quartet to achieve its declared goals. Yet, do such efforts not require bringing Hamas to the negotiating table in one way or another? How will Palestine, which is still divided mainly between Fatah and Hamas, make a peace with Israel? When Israel demands Palestinian civilians and militants to be disarmed, will Abbas be able to concede? Even if Abbas does, how will he disarm Hamas?
More to the point, Israel has not even stopped the Israeli settlements, which Abbas had presented as the minimum condition to be met for the commencement of direct talks. An Israeli regime, which has built its political dynamics on the promise of expanding the extant settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, cannot possibly bring its settlement activities to a halt. Israel is a country built on an ideology that proclaims Palestinian land as belonging to their race only. That land is even being purified by either removal of “non-Semite” graves to other locations or by construction of parks, buildings and Israeli houses. What will Fatah talk about to the advocates of that ideology?
The interesting thing is that the U.S. stance toward this ongoing process is still opaque. The U.S. is not a party to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to direct talks. It is more the party that will decide whether or not to put the indispensable pressure on Israel for the direct talks to succeed. However, do people really think that the American president, who is almost being stoned by the Israeli lobby because he threw his support behind the building of a mosque on private land in lower Manhattan, is not going to be in big trouble if he dares to intervene to stop the Israeli settlement activities in East Jerusalem and the West Bank?
In brief, seemingly insurmountable obstacles await the direct talks. Yet, Turkey will support even expressions of willingness from both sides to start talking to each other directly. And let this be Turkey’s response to the ‘mediation-mania’ columnists, who allegedly argue that Turkey does not like peace processes when Turkey is not the mediator.
Yet, is the news correct? The very first question to ask would be: Is there really a Palestinian Authority that can, by itself, constitute a party to hold such direct talks? Will the body called the Palestinian Authority be able to claim a realm of authority that includes Gaza as well? If Mahmoud Abbas announces that he is ready to begin direct talks, and the talks result in the declaration of an independent Palestinian state within the pre-1967 borders within 24 months as envisaged, will decisions to be taken not concern the fate of Gazans also?
It is certainly admirable that Catherine Ashton has been at pains to eventually strike a permanent peace in the Middle East and to help the Middle East Quartet to achieve its declared goals. Yet, do such efforts not require bringing Hamas to the negotiating table in one way or another? How will Palestine, which is still divided mainly between Fatah and Hamas, make a peace with Israel? When Israel demands Palestinian civilians and militants to be disarmed, will Abbas be able to concede? Even if Abbas does, how will he disarm Hamas?
More to the point, Israel has not even stopped the Israeli settlements, which Abbas had presented as the minimum condition to be met for the commencement of direct talks. An Israeli regime, which has built its political dynamics on the promise of expanding the extant settlements in East Jerusalem and the West Bank, cannot possibly bring its settlement activities to a halt. Israel is a country built on an ideology that proclaims Palestinian land as belonging to their race only. That land is even being purified by either removal of “non-Semite” graves to other locations or by construction of parks, buildings and Israeli houses. What will Fatah talk about to the advocates of that ideology?
The interesting thing is that the U.S. stance toward this ongoing process is still opaque. The U.S. is not a party to say ‘yes’ or ‘no’ to direct talks. It is more the party that will decide whether or not to put the indispensable pressure on Israel for the direct talks to succeed. However, do people really think that the American president, who is almost being stoned by the Israeli lobby because he threw his support behind the building of a mosque on private land in lower Manhattan, is not going to be in big trouble if he dares to intervene to stop the Israeli settlement activities in East Jerusalem and the West Bank?
In brief, seemingly insurmountable obstacles await the direct talks. Yet, Turkey will support even expressions of willingness from both sides to start talking to each other directly. And let this be Turkey’s response to the ‘mediation-mania’ columnists, who allegedly argue that Turkey does not like peace processes when Turkey is not the mediator.
Next article![]( "Disguise and Deceive")
