One of the curious aspects of these old stories is that they are always concerned to promote the belief that Israel has been willing to 'negotiate' with 'the Palestinians' but that, to quote Abba Eban of yesteryear The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity -except Eban forgot to add the crucial end to his quip -The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity to give Israel what it wants.Quote:
Originally Posted by yosi
Condoleeza Rice mentioned this chestnut in her memoirs, noting at the same time that Tzipi Livni who successfully ousted Olmert from the leadership of Kadima (Olmert has been bogged down in corruption trials having been found gulty in one with another yet to complete) was placed in charge of negotiations even though Olmert “admitted that she didn’t know the issues as well but she came up to speed very quickly.” Rice herself demonstrated her firm grasp of foreign policy by suggesting Palestinian refugees could be re-located to Argentina and Chile (presumably with the full support of those states)....
In the event, the meetings, I believe there were three, were mostly informal dinners, at one of which Olmert offered Abbas
-shared sovereignty of Jerusalem with leadership based on a numerical majority -which, given the extensive boundaries of Jerusalem is pre-designed to give Israel a permanent majority, although the Palestinians would have the post of Deputy Mayor (Shukran). It isn't clear to me if Jerusalem as a result would be an 'open city', whatever the intention might have been.
-no absolute right of return for Palestinian refugess, but 1,000 would be allowed for five years, ie 5,000 (Shukran).
-a territorial solution to the Occupation of the West Bank, with Israel claiming 6.4% of the territory occupied since 1967, with 'safe passage' from the West Bank to Gaza possibly via a tunnel but not a road; the key point is that Olmert showed Abbas a map of what the Israel and Palestinian state would look like, but this was not for negotiation at all, it was a final take it or leave it offer, and Olmert would only allow Abbas to take the map away if he signed it first.
There are other versions with more or less detail, but it seems that Olmert's concept of negotiation is that you present your opponent with a plan over an infirmal dinner, not in a formal setting, and moreover, one that on a key feature of any future settlement, is non-negotiable!
Abbas was being asked to sign something that would have tied him in to something more formal, without having the opportunity to discuss it with his own people, without the opportunity -some might even say, the Right- to make a counter-offer, for example, on settlements and settlers. No, not a bit of it.
Shortly after these talks Olmert was out of office, and once Netanyahu entered it, the talks and the proposals were instantly scrapped, no surprise there.
When someone can offer a serious process of negotiations which are not fixed in advance to privilege the Israeli position, who knows, real talks might even take place.
Article on Rice's memoirs here:
http://www.israelnationalnews.com/Ne...4#.UL4WNoaa8YI
Another version of what really happened is here:
http://daledamos.blogspot.co.uk/2011...-claim-he.html
A detailed version from al-Jazeera's Transparency Unit here
http://transparency.aljazeera.net/en...046718794.html
