Obama: 'Pause' in peace talks might be in order

[Jefferson23]

In first public comments since Fatah-Hamas unity deal, Obama says both Israelis and Palestinians have shown lack of will to in talks, suggests pause in talks may be needed so get sides back on track.

Yitzhak Benhorin, AP

President Barack Obama said a pause in peace negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians might be in needed so both sides can consider the alternative to negotiating and claimed the recent halt in talks underscores how neither side has shown the political will to make tough decisions that would sustain the talks.

"So far we have seen some movement on both sides to acknowledge that this is a crisis long-running that needs to be solved," Obama said. "What we haven't seen is frankly the kind of political will to actually make tough decisions. And that's been true on both sides."

Obama described the reconciliation agreement between the Palestinian Authority and the militant group Hamas as "unhelpful" and said it was "just one of a series of choices that both the Israelis and Palestinians have made that are not conductive to trying to resolve this crisis."

"Folks can posture, folks can cling to maximalist positions, but realistically there is one door and that is the two parties getting together and making some very difficult political compromises in order to secure the future of both Israelis and Palestinians for future generations," Obama said.

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-4513244,00.html

[Israeli]

1. talk about flogging a dead horse ....

...its over Jefferson23.

A " pause in peace negotiations " !!!!~!~!

Question now is :

Where do we go from here?

What are the chances that there would again be in Israel a peace-seeking government, which would make its own independent peace initiative and make to the Palestinians an offer which the Palestinians could accept? As things look now, the chances are very low. The supporters of a daring peace initiative constitute a Left minority among the citizens of Israel. Most Israeli citizens are convinced that achieving peace is simply not possible. In the past, the citizens of Israel brought Yitzhak Rabin to power - and he was assassinated. They brought Ehud Barak to power, who claimed to be the successor of Rabin - and proved unequivocally that he was not. And they put their trust in Ariel Sharon’s proposal to withdraw - and the result was not especially successful. Another opportunity probably there would not be. Israeli citizens are unlikely to again bring to power a Prime Minister committed to making peace and/or giving up territory.

http://adam-keller2.blogspot.co.il/2014/04/where-do-we-go-from-here.html

Time to hunker down and try to avoid the backlash ....cause its coming ....an eye for an eye is the law that rules the middle east ....

see : http://972mag.com/a-rolling-stone-of-holiness-rage-and-revenge/89859/

[Jefferson23]

2. As you know, the US is not and has not been an honest broker. There was not going to be a viable

Palestinian state if Abbas signed on the dotted line. If he is vigilant, if all Palestinian political factions can
cooperate with each other, if the Arab League will assist them with massive amounts of funds
to tolerate a loss of money from the US..they stand a chance.

I agree with much in the first OP, with the exception that the Kerry plan ever had a viable
state for them in mind in the first place. If Abbas had agreed it would have been ratified by the UNSC
and it would be over for the Palestinians for good. Bantustanville would be their home land.

I like that Kerry/Obama are not assigning blame for the peace talks ending due to Abbas, alone.
For prosperity, Kerry was not going to let Bibi off that hook...he is pissed off. He may also be
determined to see this through..he has had a tough time at success with Syria and now with
Russia. It has always been easier for the US to intimidate/control the Palestinians, and Abbas
does not by any stretch of the imagination have a stellar reputation for protecting his own people.

The Palestinians do have themselves to rely on and I think most people following this brutal occupation
recognize the toll it has taken on them and no one can force people to rise up en masse in civil disobedience.

If they did, would that be met with violence? I think we know the answer to that question, but this time it could
produce a shift for them on the international stage coupled with the politics of Abbas signing more
significant treaties to bring an end to the occupation once and for all..either Israel agrees, or sanctions
would follow.

It's troubling on all fronts, your government and mine are in the way of a two state solution, have been
for a long time.

Your last link..history can be depressing to read..wish those in power would recognize we don't need to
leave ourselves open to further tragedies.

[Scootaloo]

3. And the Israelis would have continued violating even that

And the US would keep turning a blind eye to it.

[Jefferson23]

4. As long Israel's interests do not severely interfere with ours...yes.

Years ago, I was convinced the Centcom report was going to be the catalyst to
a peace deal...I could not have been more wrong.
I thought, ok, finally, the US Congress will have what they need to push back on the lobby...no dice.


The issue was brought up again last year: snip*So we’ve got to work on this with a sense of urgency, and I paid a military security price every day as a commander of CENTCOM because the Americans were seen as biased in support of Israel, and that moderates all the moderate Arabs who want to be with us because they can’t come out publicly in support of people who don’t show respect for the Arab Palestinians.

http://thinkprogress.org/security/2013/07/22/2336271/former-centcom-head-us-pays-security-price-for-israeli-palestinian-conflict/

I no longer know what the threshold would be, sometimes I think I don't want to know.