DA EFE

Israel aprovou a construção de 500 novas casas em colônias judaicas no território ocupado da Cisjordânia, em resposta ao assassinato neste sábado no assentamento de Itamar de cinco israelenses da mesma família.

As casas serão erguidas em Gush Etzion, perto de Belém; Maaleh Adumim, ao leste de Jerusalém; Ariel, no norte da Cisjordânia e Kiryat Sefer, ao noroeste de Jerusalém, disse o governo israelense em um comunicado.

A decisão, anunciada hoje, foi tomada ontem à noite por uma equipe interministerial em resposta ao atentado na madrugada da sexta-feira para sábado, que gerou comoção por sua crueldade e espalhou o medo que se retorne aos níveis de violência dos anos mais duros da segunda Intifada.

Na madrugada da sexta-feira para sábado, uma ou várias pessoas cruzaram a cerca tecnológica de segurança em torno da colônia, entraram na casa e esfaquearam os pais e três de seus filhos: um de 11 anos, outro de quatro e um bebê de três meses.

O funeral acontece hoje no cemitério Har Haenujot de Jerusalém.

O primeiro-ministro, Benjamin Netanyahu, e o titular da Defesa, Ehud Barak, participaram ontem à noite na discussão das respostas ao ataque, entre as quais se avaliou também começar uma nova colônia judia ou ampliar Itamar, mas no final prevaleceu a proposta de Barak, segundo o jornal “Haaretz”.

Netanyahu notificou na noite deste sábado a decisão à Casa Branca.

Enquanto isso, as forças de segurança israelenses continuam a busca dos autores do atentado com um extenso dispositivo e um cerco em torno da cidade palestina de Nablus, no norte da Cisjordânia.

Cerca de 20 palestinos já foram detidos em diferentes localidades em torno de Itamar.

“Não descansaremos até pegar os assassinos”, deixou claro o chefe do Estado-Maior, Benny Gantz, em comunicado.

DA EFE, EM JERUSALÉM

Um grupo de palestinos atacou nesta segunda-feira o escritório da rede de TV do Catar Al Jazeera localizado na cidade de Ramallah, na Cisjordânia, em resposta ao vazamento de supostas propostas feitas pela Autoridade Nacional Palestina (ANP) a Israel durante o processo de paz.

A própria emissora mostrou imagens de uma multidão enfurecida, que se aglomeravam na porta do escritório, e de confrontos entre os manifestantes e funcionários da Al Jazeera.

O correspondente estrangeiro da TV, Alan Fischer, escreveu em sua página no Twitter que ninguém ficou ferido antes que a polícia palestina chegasse ao local.

A Al Jazeera estimou em 50 o número de manifestantes que pouco antes haviam se concentrado no centro de Ramallah, e alguns deles se dirigiram a sua sede na capital administrativa da Cisjordânia.

O episódio ocorreu após a rede de TV revelar documentos nos quais a ANP fez ofertas generosas a Israel em questões fundamentais do conflito do Oriente Médio, como refugiados, Jerusalém e o status dos lugares considerados sagrados.

O negociador-chefe palestino, Saeb Erekat, declarou à emissora de rádio Voz da Palestina que os documentos, que revelam concessões “sem precedentes” aos israelenses, “não são fiéis à realidade” e rechaçou confirmar qualquer das afirmações que figuram nos mesmos.

TEMAS SENSÍVEIS

Segundo os documentos, negociadores palestinos teriam manifestado a disposição, em 2008, de permitir inclusive que Israel anexasse praticamente todos os assentamentos judaicos construídos em Jerusalém Oriental em troca de terras em outras regiões.

A proposta –que acabou recusada como insuficiente pela então chanceler israelense, Tzipi Livni foi feita em maio de 2008, meses antes do início da ofensiva de Israel a Gaza.

As concessões fazem parte de cerca de 1.700 documentos que a cadeia de TV do Qatar Al Jazeera começou a difundir na noite deste domingo –e que foram compartilhados com o jornal britânico “Guardian”, mantidos em segredo desde 1999 e que revelam detalhes sobre as negociações de paz entre palestinos e israelenses.

Na prática, Israel tem controlado Jerusalém e a Cisjordânia desde 1967. Nos últimos 44 anos, foram estabelecidos mais de cem assentamentos na região, que são habitados por cerca de 500 mil colonos judeus.

O atual governo, do premiê Binyamin Netanyahu, rejeita compartilhar Jerusalém com um futuro Estado palestino. Os palestinos querem que Jerusalém Oriental seja sua capital.

Os assentamentos são considerados ilegais, e a comunidade internacional nunca reconheceu a anexação da parte leste de Jerusalém por Israel. A ação, no entanto, tem o apoio da maioria dos judeus israelenses.

RESPOSTA

O presidente da ANP, Mahmoud Abbas, negou nesta segunda-feira ter oferecido concessões secretas a Israel e afirmou que documentos secretos sobre as negociações de paz entre os dois lados apresentam posições israelenses, e não de seus próprios negociadores.

“O que se pretendeu foi um confusão”, disse durante uma entrevista coletiva no Cairo, após reunião com o presidente do Egito, Hosni Mubarak.

“A publicação desses documentos foi intencional e tem o objetivo de mesclar os assuntos entre as propostas palestinas e as israelenses”, reiterou. “Queremos confirmar de novo que não temos nenhuma segredo para esconder e tudo o que negociamos ou nos é proposto ou propomos, apresentados em detalhes aos países árabes confirmado com documentos, e todos os árabes sabem disso.”

Já o movimento islâmico Hamas, que controla a faixa de Gaza e é rival do Fatah, o partido que domina a ANP, disse que os documentos demonstram que Abbas está aliado a Israel.

Segundo o porta-voz do grupo, Sami abu Zuhri, esses documentos “são uma clara evidência de que a Autoridade [Nacional] Palestina coopera secretamente com a ocupação [israelense] e reflete seu papel para eliminar a justa causa palestina”.

Para ele, o chamado “WikiLeaks palestino” prova que a ANP “coopera para manter o bloqueio à Gaza” e “esteve envolvida” na ofensiva militar israelense à região no final de 2008, na qual morreram mais de 1.400 palestinos, a maioria civis.

From Guardian.co.uk

. Massive new leak lifts lid on negotiations

. PLO offered up key settlements in East Jerusalem

. Concessions made on refugees and Holy sites

The biggest leak of confidential documents in the history of the Middle East conflict has revealed that Palestinian negotiators secretly agreed to accept Israel‘s annexation of all but one of the settlements built illegally in occupied East Jerusalem. This unprecedented proposal was one of a string of concessions that will cause shockwaves among Palestinians and in the wider Arab world.

A cache of thousands of pages of confidential Palestinian records covering more than a decade of negotiations with Israel and the US has been obtained by al-Jazeera TV and shared exclusively with the Guardian. The papers provide an extraordinary and vivid insight into the disintegration of the 20-year peace process, which is now regarded as all but dead.

The documents – many of which will be published by the Guardian over the coming days – also reveal:

• The scale of confidential concessions offered by Palestinian negotiators, including on the highly sensitive issue of the right of return of Palestinian refugees.

• How Israeli leaders privately asked for some Arab citizens to be transferred to a new Palestinian state.

• The intimate level of covert co-operation between Israeli security forces and the Palestinian Authority.

• The central role of British intelligence in drawing up a secret plan to crush Hamas in the Palestinian territories.

• How Palestinian Authority (PA) leaders were privately tipped off about Israel’s 2008-9 war in Gaza.

As well as the annexation of all East Jerusalem settlements except Har Homa, the Palestine papers show PLO leaders privately suggested swapping part of the flashpoint East Jerusalem Arab neighbourhood of Sheikh Jarrah for land elsewhere.

Most controversially, they also proposed a joint committee to take over the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount holy sites in Jerusalem’s Old City – the neuralgic issue that helped sink the Camp David talks in 2000 after Yasser Arafat refused to concede sovereignty around the Dome of the Rock and al-Aqsa mosques.

The offers were made in 2008-9, in the wake of President George Bush’s Annapolis conference, and were privately hailed by the chief Palestinian negotiator, Saeb Erekat, as giving Israel “the biggest Yerushalayim [the Hebrew name for Jerusalem] in history” in order to resolve the world’s most intractable conflict. Israeli leaders, backed by the US government, said the offers were inadequate.

Intensive efforts to revive talks by the Obama administration foundered last year over Israel’s refusal to extend a 10-month partial freeze on settlement construction. Prospects are now uncertain amid increasing speculation that a negotiated two-state solution to the conflict is no longer attainable – and fears of a new war.

Many of the 1,600 leaked documents – drawn up by PA officials and lawyers working for the British-funded PLO negotiations support unit and include extensive verbatim transcripts of private meetings – have been independently authenticated by the Guardian and corroborated by former participants in the talks and intelligence and diplomatic sources.

The Guardian’s coverage is supplemented by WikiLeaks cables, emanating from the US consulate in Jerusalem and embassy in Tel Aviv. Israeli officials also kept their own records of the talks, which may differ from the confidential Palestinian accounts.

The concession in May 2008 by Palestinian leaders to allow Israel to annex the settlements in East Jerusalem – including Gilo, which is a current focus of controversy after Israeli authorities gave the go-ahead for 1,400 new homes – has never been made public before.

All settlements built on territory occupied by Israel in the 1967 war are illegal under international law, but the Jerusalem homes are routinely described, and perceived, by Israel as municipal “neighbourhoods”. Israeli governments have consistently sought to annex the largest settlements as part of a peace deal – and came close to doing so at Camp David.

Erekat told Israeli leaders in 2008: “This is the first time in Palestinian-Israeli history in which such a suggestion is officially made.” No such concession had been made at Camp David. But the offer was rejected out of hand by Israel because it did not include a big settlement near the city Ma’ale Adumim as well as Har Homa and several others deeper in the West Bank, including Ariel. “We do not like this suggestion because it does not meet our demands,” Israel’s then foreign minister, Tzipi Livni, told the Palestinians, “and probably it was not easy for you to think about it, but I really appreciate it”.

The overall impression that emerges from the documents, which stretch from 1999 to 2010, is of the weakness and growing desperation of PA leaders as failure to reach agreement or even halt all settlement temporarily undermines their credibility in relation to their Hamas rivals; the papers also reveal the unyielding confidence of Israeli negotiators and the often dismissive attitude of US politicians towards Palestinian representatives.

Palestinian and Israeli officials both point out that any position in negotiations is subject to the principle that “nothing is agreed until everything is agreed” and therefore is invalid without a overarching deal. But PA leaders are likely to be embarrassed by the revelation of private concessions that go far beyond what much of their population would regard as acceptable – particularly since Mahmoud Abbas’s mandate as Palestinian president expired in 2009.

The PA, set up as a transitional administration after the 1993 Oslo agreement between Israel and the PLO, is under pressure from a disaffected Palestinian public and from Hamas, the Islamic Resistance Movement. Hamas won the Palestinian elections in 2006 and has controlled the Gaza Strip since its violent takeover in 2007.

Unlike the PLO, Hamas rejects negotiations with Israel, except for a long-term ceasefire, and refuses to recognise it. Its founding charter also contains antisemitic elements. Supported by Iran and Syria, it is sanctioned as a terrorist organisation by Israel, the US and the EU, despite pressure for it to be included in a wider political process.

Em homenagem a minha tia Jake, apresento uma versão simplificada da notícia anterior, em português, e aproveito e mando um recado para ela: Obrigado por todas as palavras de incentivo e pelos olhares críticos!

Acordo de paz no Oriente Médio é possível em um ano, diz Abbas

WASHINGTON (Reuters) – O presidente palestino, Mahmoud Abbas, disse na quarta-feira que um acordo de paz no Oriente Médio é possível “dentro de um ano” e condenou os últimos ataques contra judeus na Cisjordânia.

Falando a líderes israelenses e árabes e para o presidente norte-americano, Barack Obama, na Casa Branca, Abbas pediu a Israel que congele todas as atividades de assentamento e disse que é tempo de fazer a paz, terminar a ocupação de Israel e estabelecer um Estado palestino.

No mesmo encontro, o primeiro-ministro de Israel, Benjamin Netanyahu, afirmou que seu país não deixará terroristas bloquearem o caminho para a paz no Oriente Médio. Qualquer acordo de paz deve garantir a segurança, disse.

Obama pediu aos líderes que não deixem escapar a chance para a paz ao abrir uma cúpula patrocinada pelos Estados Unidos para retomar as conversações diretas assombradas pela violência na região.

Na terça-feira, quatro colonos israelenses foram mortos a tiros na Cisjordânia ocupada, num ataque que o grupo islâmico palestino Hamas disse ter sido seu primeiro gesto contra as negociações de paz que começaram na quarta-feira em Washington.

New York Times

WASHINGTON — President Obama began his foray into Middle East peace-making on Wednesday, as the Israeli and Palestinian leaders committed to work on a comprehensive Middle East peace treaty in the next year intended to end a conflict that has endured for six decades.

In a remarkable tableau at the White House, Mr. Obama, flanked by the leaders of Israel, the Palestinians, and the only two Arab states with whom Israel has made peace, vowed to do everything within his power to achieve the comprehensive agreement that has eluded negotiators since Israel was established.

“We are but five men,” Mr. Obama said Wednesday night. “But when we come together, we will not be alone. We will be joined by the generations of those who have gone before.” He spoke of Anwar el-Sadat and Yitzhak Rabin, the Egyptian and Israeli leaders who lost their lives because they pursued peace; of Jordan’s King Hussein and Israel’s Menachem Begin — “statesmen,” Mr. Obama said, “who imagined the world as it should be.”

Mr. Obama said that he and the other leaders owed it to those men to “work diligently to fulfill their aspirations.”

In somber, emotional tones, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority expressed their own determination to make peace.

Mr. Netanyahyu, turning toward to Mr. Abbas, called him his “partner in peace.” He said he came to find a “historic compromise” but warned that any deal must be anchored in ensuring Israel’s security.

Mr. Abbas, for his part, said he would push hard despite “the difficulties we’re going to face tomorrow.” But he quickly foreshadowed the biggest early sticking point in the talks, calling for Mr. Netanyahu to freeze settlement activity in the West Bank.

The East Room gathering was a rare moment of diplomatic theater, endorsed by the attendance of President Hosni Mubarak of Egypt and King Abdullah II of Jordan, and orchestrated by Mr. Obama as part of an effort to invest the process with his own personal stature. It came after Mr. Obama held a series of one-on-one meetings with the men throughout the day, and just before they were to begin a working dinner. On Thursday, Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Abbas are to begin direct talks.

For Mr. Netanyahu and Mr.Abbas, the talks, with their very real chance of failure, represent a huge risk: President Bill Clinton’s failed attempt in 2000 led to the Palestinian intifada while President George W. Bush’s Annapolis peace attempt dissolved amid chronic violence in Gaza.

“Too much blood has already been shed, too many hearts have already been broken,” Mr. Obama said. “This moment of opportunity may not return soon again.”

The inclusion of Mr. Mubarak and King Abdullah underlines the administration’s hopes to forge a regional solution to the conflict. Egypt and Jordan are critical to providing Israel with security guarantees that would enable it to accept the creation of a Palestinian state.

Mr. Mubarak has offered to host subsequent rounds of talks in Egypt, though officials said he was pushing for Mr. Obama to take a direct personal role in the process. The standing of Mr. Mubarak, 82, in the region is such that officials said the administration was eager to get direct talks going quickly, because his health is said to be fragile and the United States is worried about the uncertainty that will come after he passes from the scene.

Jordan is a crucial player because of the difficult question of how to secure its border with a new Palestinian state. Israel currently has troops on that frontier and would balk at withdrawing them without a guarantee that the border would not become a conduit for missiles that militant groups opposed to the peace process, chiefly Hamas, could fire at Tel Aviv and other Israeli cities.

Previous attempts to involve Israel’s Arab neighbors in constructing a peace deal between Israelis and Palestinians have fared poorly. Mr. Obama’s most recent attempt, when he sought to win confidence-building measures from Israel’s neighbors like allowing Israeli carriers to fly over their countries, failed when Saudi Arabia and other Arab states refused. But more recently, the Saudis pressed Mr. Abbas to agree to the direct talks, using their financial aid to the Palestinian Authority as a lever.

The Arab League also has put its stamp of approval on the negotiations.

The success of the talks, all sides said, will depend in part on whether Mr. Obama can succeed where his predecessors have failed in pushing Palestinians and Israelis toward resolving the core final status issues that have bedeviled peace negotiators since 1979. They include the dismantling of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, the borders of a Palestinian state, the security of Israel, the status of Jerusalem and the fate of Palestinian refugees who left, or were forced to leave, their homes in Israel.

Mr. Obama will know quickly whether he has any more chance of success than the eight failed attempts that have gone before this one. At the end of September, Israel’s 10-month moratorium on settlement construction will expire. Mr. Netanyahu so far has not indicated any willingness to extend it, and Mr. Abbas has said that he will withdraw from negotiations if settlement activity resumes.

American officials have been working with their Israeli and Palestinian counterparts to try to come up with a way around the issue to no avail so far.

During the meeting on Wednesday afternoon between Mr. Obama and Mr. Abbas, American officials said they would press the Israelis to find a way around the moratorium expiration, but they also asked the Palestinian president to try to be flexible, according to advisers to all three sides.

Mr. Netanyahu made no specific mention of settlements during his remarks before the dinner. The closest he came was in an acknowledgment of Palestinian claims to land.

“The Jewish people are not strangers in our homeland, the land of our forefathers,” he said. “But we recognize that another people share this land with us. And I came here today to find an historic compromise that will enable both peoples to live in peace, security and dignity.”

For Mr. Obama, the settlements issue is doubly important because if it blows up the talks, Middle East experts said, he will once again have left the perception in the Arab world of escorting Mr. Abbas out on a limb and then leaving him there.

Many Palestinian officials complain that Mr. Obama’s decision last year to drop his demand for Israel to halt settlement construction as a prelude to peace talks may have delayed the start of these negotiations, since it was difficult for the Palestinian leader to back down.

While the issues are daunting, some analysts also saw a reed of hope in the resolute response of Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Abbas to the killing by Hamas gunmen of four Israeli settlers in the West Bank on the eve of the talks. Both men immediately said the attack should not be allowed to derail the negotiations, and the Palestinian Authority condemned the killings.

“Normally, it’s been reliably easy to torpedo, or veto, any progress between Israelis and Palestinians,” said Ziad J. Asali, the president of the American Task Force on Palestine. “This means an incredible loss of a weapon.”

By MARTIN INDYK

The New York Times Journal

NOW that President Obama has finally succeeded in bringing the Israelis and the Palestinians back to the negotiating table, the commentariat is already dismissing his chances of reaching a peace agreement. But there are four factors that distinguish the direct talks that will get under way on Sept. 2 in Washington from previous attempts — factors that offer some reason for optimism.

First, violence is down considerably in the region. Throughout the 1990s, Israel was plagued by terrorist attacks, which undermined its leaders’ ability to justify tangible concessions. Israelis came to believe that the Palestinian leader Yasir Arafat was playing a double game, professing peace in the negotiations while allowing terrorists to operate in territory he was supposed to control.

Today, the Palestinian Authority is policing its West Bank territory to prevent violent attacks on Israelis and to prove its reliability as a negotiating partner. Hamas — mainly out of fear of an Israeli intervention that might remove it from power — is doing the same in Gaza.

These efforts, combined with more effective Israeli security measures, have meant that the number of Israeli civilians killed in terrorist attacks has dropped from an intifada high of 452 in 2002 to 6 last year and only 2 so far this year.

Second, settlement activity has slowed significantly. As a result of Israel’s 10-month settlement moratorium, no new housing starts in the West Bank were reported by the Israeli Central Bureau of Statistics in the first quarter of this year. What’s more, there have been hardly any new housing projects in East Jerusalem since the brouhaha in March, when Vice President Joe Biden, during a visit to Israel, condemned the announcement of 1,600 additional residential units. The demolition of Palestinian houses there is also down compared with recent years.

The settlement moratorium, however, is due to expire on Sept. 26. The Israeli prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, seems unlikely to extend it, and Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian Authority president, has declared that he will withdraw from negotiations if settlement activity resumes.

However, there could be a workable compromise if Mr. Netanyahu restricts building to modest growth in the settlement blocs that will most likely be absorbed into Israel in the final agreement, while offering changes that would make a real difference to West Bank Palestinians. Israel could promise that there would be no more Israeli Army incursions into areas under Palestinian control; it could also allow the Palestinian police to patrol in most West Bank villages.

Third, the public on both sides supports a two-state solution. So do a majority of Arabs. The simple truth is that most people in the Middle East are exhausted by this conflict, and if Mr. Netanyahu and Mr. Abbas can reach a viable agreement, the public on all sides will likely support it by a large majority.

Yes, Mr. Netanyahu would face strident opposition from within his Likud party, but he could lean on the support of the Israeli center and left to ensure a Knesset majority. And because a referendum on Palestinian statehood would likely receive overwhelming support in Gaza as well as the West Bank, Hamas — always attuned to Palestinian public opinion — would have a hard time standing in the way.

Fourth, there isn’t a lot to negotiate. In the 17 years since the Oslo accords were signed, detailed final status negotiations have dealt exhaustively with all the critical issues. If an independent Palestinian state is to be established, the zone of agreement is clear and the necessary trade-offs are already known.

Security arrangements were all but settled in 2000 at Camp David before the talks collapsed. The increased threat of rocket attacks since then, among other developments, require the two sides to agree on stricter border controls and a robust third-party force in the Jordan Valley. But one year is ample time to resolve this. In fact, if the leaders are sincere in their intent to make a deal, dragging out the negotiations would only weaken them politically and give time for the opponents of peace to rally.

In short, the negotiating environment is better suited to peacemaking today than it has been at any point in the last decade. The prospects for peace depend now on the willpower of the leaders.

Does President Abbas, already a weakened figure, have the courage to defend the necessary concessions to his people, particularly when it comes to conceding the “right of return” to Israel? Does Prime Minister Netanyahu have the determination to withdraw from at least 95 percent of the West Bank and to accept a Palestinian capital in Arab East Jerusalem? And does President Obama have the statesmanship to persuade both parties to make the deal and to reassure them that the United States will be there with a safety net if it fails?

At the end of the Clinton administration, Shimon Peres observed that “history is like a horse that gallops past your window and the true test of statesmanship is to jump from that window onto the horse.” Arafat failed that test, leaving Palestinians and Israelis mired in conflict. We cannot know whether Mr. Abbas and Mr. Netanyahu will take the politically perilous leap. But for the time being, we should suspend disbelief and welcome the fact that American diplomacy has ensured they will soon be put to the test.

Martin Indyk, the director of the foreign policy program at the Brookings Institution and the author of “Innocent Abroad: An Intimate Account of American Peace Diplomacy in the Middle East,” was the United States ambassador to Israel during the Clinton administration.

Hillary Clinton hopes a peace agreement can be reached within a year, in first direct negotiations since 2008

The Guardian Journal

Israel and the Palestinians are to resume direct peace talks next month under pressure from Washington to break years of political stalemate.

The US secretary of state, Hillary Clinton, announced that the Israeli prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, would meet in Washington on 2 September to “relaunch direct negotiations to resolve all final status issues which we believe can be completed within one year”.

Netanyahu welcomed the talks.

“We are coming to these talks with a serious desire to reach a peace agreement between nations, while still preserving Israel’s national interests, security being the foremost of them,” he said.

But some Israeli and Palestinian former negotiators and politicians greeted the news with scepticism, saying Abbas was only participating under US pressure and Netanyahu had no immediate political interest in reaching a peace agreement.

Clinton said the Egyptian and Jordanian leadership had also been invited to the opening of the negotiations, with Tony Blair, the envoy for the quartet of the US, UN, EU and Russia, “in view of his important work to help Palestinians build the institutions of their future state”.

“As we move forward it is important that actions by all sides help to advance our effort not hinder it. There have been difficulties in the past. There will be difficulties ahead. Without a doubt we will hit more obstacles. The enemies of peace will keep trying to defeat us and to derail these talks. But I ask the parties to persevere, to keep moving forward even through difficult times and to continue working to achieve a just and lasting peace in the region,” Clinton said.

The US said all main issues would be on the table, including the difficult final status questions of the borders of a Palestinian state, the division of Jerusalem and the right of return for Palestinian refugees.

The US Middle East envoy, George Mitchell, said he believed it was realistic to include a one-year deadline to resolve core issues on which neither side has been able to reach agreement since the 1993 Oslo peace accords.

“We believe it can be done within a year and that is our objective,” he said. Netanyahu and Abbas were “sincere and serious” about peace, he added, and Washington would take a hands-on role in guiding the talks because it was “in the national security interests of the United States”.

The date for negotiations was set only after the Obama administration pressured Abbas into agreeing to talks. Abbas has sought guarantees from the US that the Palestinians would not be drawn in to perpetual negotiations that go nowhere while Israel continues to expand in the occupied territories. The White House offered the one-year deadline for talks as a reassurance.

A senior Israeli official said that the government recognises that the Palestinians have come to the negotiating table reluctantly and that Abbas is politically weak. But he said that with all issues on the table, there is the potential to make progress.

Asked whether there are red lines for Israel, including Netanyahu’s previous claim to all of Jerusalem, the official said the only unshakeable demands are guarantees of Israel’s security and Palestinian recognition of Israel’s legitimacy.

Mitchell said he accepted there was continued hostility between the two sides but compared the Middle East talks to his experience of “700 days of failure and one day of success” as the Northern Ireland peace broker.

William Hague, the British foreign secretary, said: “A two-state solution is the only hope for lasting peace and security. Today’s announcement is a courageous step towards that goal.”

Moty Cristal, a negotiations expert and adviser to previous Israeli prime ministers, said: “Netanyahu is buying time, looking for ways to stay away from any action on the ground and have more time in leadership. Netanyahu doesn’t think that the Palestinian situation is any threat or has any urgency. The urgency for him is the Iranian affair.”

Abdul Rahman Zidan, a former minister in the Hamas government, said: “Nothing positive will come out of these fruitless talks – we have tried this way several times. The Americans and the Israelis need talks – any talks – just for the feeling that there is a peace process. But for us, this is a negative, empty feeling because there is nothing on the table. It’s a merry-go-round,” he said.

EUOBSERVER / BRUSSELS – The Palestinian Authority is ready for direct talks with Israel, with Ramallah likely to give a definitive go-ahead perhaps as early as Sunday (15 August), according to EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton.

The EU high representative made the comments in a letter to European foreign ministers ahead of their informal meeting after the summer break.

“President Abbas is very close to accepting direct talks, but has requested a few more days for final consultations,” she wrote to the bloc’s 27 foreign policy chiefs, who are to meet from 10 to 11 September in Brussels, in a letter seen by EUobserver.

“In principle, President Abbas should be in a position to give a definitive answer by Sunday or early next week.”

The two sides have engaged in indirect talks since the spring.

Once Mr Abbas has signed off on talks, direct negotiations would then begin “later in August,” according to the Ashton text. He will only agree to talks so long as Israel for its part endorses a 19 March statement by the Quartet, the international body promoting the Middle East Peace Process, she writes.

The statement lays out that Israel stop settlement construction in the West Bank, leading to a comprehensive peace agreement with the Palestinians within 24 months. Such a peace deal would see the creation of a Palestinian state based on the borders that existed prior to the 1967 Six-Day War.

It has long been understood that while the 1967 borders would form the basis of a deal, some adjustments and land swaps will be necessary.

The signal from Ms Ashton comes as Israel’s partial 10-month “freeze” on settlement construction in the West Bank is coming to a close on 26 September.

Mr Abbas has throughout the process insisted on a clear framework of discussion topics based on Quartet demands, so that if terms offered by Israel do not match up with those required by the EU, US, UN and Russia, the Palestinian Authority will not appear to be rejecting a peace deal.

Any new talks are to exclude the militant group Hamas, which is listed as a terrorist entity by the EU and which has in the past fought bloody battles with the Abbas camp, but which controls the Gaza Strip.

“Estamos indignados. Consideramos un error que Israel trate de ocultar la situación en la región. No somos ninguna flotilla, sino parlamentarios españoles”

EFE – Jesusalén – 25/07/2010

Las autoridades de Israel no han autorizado la entrada hoy en Gaza de un grupo de cuatro diputados socialistas españoles, entre ellos los catalanes Jordi Pedret y Meritxell Cabezón, que pretendía visitar la franja palestina. Según Fátima Aburto, que forma parte de la delegación, las autoridades israelíes comunicaron su decisión a través del Consulado General español en Jerusalén, sin ofrecer explicación alguna.

“Estamos indignados. Consideramos un error que Israel trate de ocultar la situación en la región. Nosotros no somos ninguna flotilla, sino parlamntarios españoles que hemos venido en coordinación con la UNRWA”, (agencia de Naciones Unidas para los refugiados palestinos), ha subrayado Aburto. La diputada socialista entiende que “si tienen que ocultar la verdad es porque algo muy malo hay detrás” y considera que el que no les dejen entrar en el territorio palestino “es bastante sospechoso”.

En su muro de Facebook de Aburto se puede leer: “Ya esta! No nos permiten entrar en Gaza porque ‘han tomado una decisión definitiva’ [sic] El interrumpo del Congreso de los Diputados trabajamos para la solución de dos estados, por una paz justa y por la seguridad de la zona. Es un inmenso error crear sospechas y enemigos donde no los hay, una ofensa a los representantes… de un país amigo”.

La delegación -que pertenece al llamado Intergrupo Parlamentario por Palestina y está integrada también por los diputados José Antonio Peres Tápies, Jordi Pedret y Meritxell Cabezón-, aprovechará su viaje para visitar proyectos de cooperación en el territorio palestino de Cisjorania. Pedret, coordinador del Intergrupo y diputado del PSC, explicó que la delegación “seguirá con el programa visitando los proyectos de la UNRWA fuera de Gaza y tendrá también encuentros con movimientos sociales y con palestinos e israelíes que trabajan por la paz”.

Los diputados, que llegaron ayer a Israel y permanecerán hasta el jueves en la región, se desplazará con ese objetivo a ciudades cisjordanas como Ramala, Belén y Hebrón. En esa última ciudad, única de Cisjordania con colonos judíos, los parlamentarios españoles irán acompañados por miembros de la organización “Breaking the Silence” (Rompiendo el Silencio), formada por ex militares y militares en la reserva israelíes y que denuncia los abusos del Ejército de Israel en los territorios ocupados palestinos. Israel autoriza con cuentagotas la visita a Gaza de políticos occidentales que pretenden conocer sobre el terreno la situación en la franja palestina.

La última personalidad occidental que ha visitado ese territorio, sometido desde hace tres años a un bloqueo por parte de Israel, fue a mediados del presente mes la Alta Representante de Política Exterior y de Seguridad de la UE, la británica Catherine Ashton.

JERUSALÉM (Reuters) – O primeiro-ministro palestino, Salam Fayyad, se reuniu com o ministro da Defesa de Israel, Ehud Barak, na segunda-feira para o primeiro diálogo entre altas autoridades dos dois países desde o início das negociações indiretas de paz há dois meses.

A reunião estava sendo realizada no hotel Rei Davi em Jerusalém, antes das conversas em Washington na terça-feira entre o primeiro-ministro israelense Benjamin Netanyahu e o presidente norte-americano Barack Obama, que quer o início das negociações diretas de paz entre os dois países.

Os ministros não se pronunciaram antes de suas negociações, a autoridades disseram que não haveria um comunicado conjunto após a reunião.

O gabinete de Ehud Barak disse no domingo que ele iria discutir “os vários assuntos relacionados à relação entre Israel e os palestinos”.

O enviado especial de Obama para o Oriente Médio, George Mitchell, vem mediando os diálogos desde maio, com o objetivo de trazer os dois países à mesa de discussão e resolver as diferenças sobre a criação de um Estado palestino na Cisjordânia e na Faixa de Gaza.

Na sexta-feira, um assessor de Obama negou que pouco progresso havia sido feito, dizendo que “distâncias foram diminuídas.”

Netanyahu quer realizar negociações diretas assim que possível. Os líderes palestinos dizem que diálogos indiretos ainda não tiveram progresso suficiente para justificar as conversas diretas.

Eles querem respostas claras de Israel sobre as questões de fronteira e segurança — ou seja, as fronteiras do futuro Estado palestino e o fim da ocupação militar.