Is It the Right Time for Direct Negotiations?

After the recent meeting between Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Obama at the White House, both sides insisted on the unique ties between the countries and expressed their serious concerns on the Iranian nuclear program. In addition, they emphasized their desire to resume the direct Israeli-Palestinian negotiation. Meanwhile the Palestinian and Israeli officials are preparing for the upcoming discussion; there are no evidences suggesting a major shift in either of the side’s policies.
One of the significant concerns of the Palestinian officials has been the issue of the boarders, including East-Jerusalem as their capital. Despite the Palestinian requests, speaking at the White House and the Council on Foreign Relations, Prime Minister Netanyahu stressed that he is not willing to extend the freeze on the settlement’s construction any further than his previous date in September. As the Palestinians want to build up their state in the West-Bank, the Israeli settlements in that region is problematic. In the short term, it is seen as an invasion of their land by the Palestinians, increasing the popularity of radical solutions. In the long term, it can decrease the support for a two-state solution, rendering peace more challenging as the sides then have to think of a solution for moving hundreds of Israeli settlers. Furthermore, the argument regarding Jerusalem maintains. Although the Palestinians claim East-Jerusalem as their capital, Israelis continue to declare Jerusalem as their capital.
Moreover, despite the emphasis of President Obama on the necessity for a change in the Palestinian official's language, President Abbas maintains to include incitement against Israel. Speaking after the death of Mohammed Oudeh, mastermind of the 1972 Munich Olympics attacks, he said: “The deceased was one of the prominent leaders of the Fatah movement and lived a life filled with the struggle, devoted effort, and the enormous sacrifice of the deceased for the sake of the legitimate problem of his people.” Considering that Oudeh was remembered by the Israelis as a terrorist killing Israeli civilian, one can regard this speech as a fundamental provocation. This can lead to similar reactions by the Israeli society and politicians.
Hence as both sides appear to sustain their previous positions, what is the necessity for a direct peace negotiation? From an intrastate perspective, President Obama has been criticized for his Middle-East policies. As the Senate elections are coming up, it is crucial for President Obama and Democrats to show a progress in their Middle-East agenda to counter the criticism. In addition, the matters surrounding the Palestinian-Israeli conflict will not get solved unless both sides negotiate over their desirable outcomes. Thus this direct conversation can be an opportunity for them to share their views on the conflict and attempt to achieve a solution. However, the failure of these negotiations can fundamentally disturb President Abbas’ credibility. While President Abbas fails to progress in solving the conflict, more Palestinians can start supporting Hamas to achieve a solution. This will increase the power of Hamas and can seriously damage the authority of President Abbas. Therefore, it appears that time is playing on the side of Hamas. The failure of negotiations between Fatah and Israel increases the necessity to start negotiations with Hamas. Talking about the position of Hamas in the peace negotiations, Khaled Meshal, the head of Hamas, recently stated: “We are patient.”
Image: The Economist