Setting the Record Straight on Middle East Peace Process

• Determined to Reach a Common Objective
• Setting the Record Straight | Oct 13, 2010
• “We knew at the outset that the task would be difficult. We acknowledged that publicly and privately. We knew this would be a road with many bumps— and there have been many bumps—and that continues to this day. But we are not deterred. We are, to the contrary, determined more than ever to proceed to realize the common objective, which we all share, of a Middle East that is at peace with security and prosperity for the people of Israel, for Palestinians, and for all the people in the region. We will continue our efforts in that regard, undeterred and undaunted by the difficulties, the complexities or the bumps in the road.”—George Mitchell, special envoy for Middle East peace, remarks with Prime Minister Netanyahu, September 29, 2010
• Despite Challenges, Peace is Possible
• Setting the Record Straight | Sep 28, 2010
• “The real danger between these two star-crossed inhabitants of the same Holy Land is not failure to negotiate; it’s the failure of the negotiations. Flashpoints in the Holy Land tend to burst after they sit down at the negotiating table, give their speeches, fail to agree, and watch the process collapse.”
  —Leslie H. Gelb, president emeritus, Council on Foreign Relations, “Hillary’s Dangerous Mideast Leap,” The Daily Beast, September 15, 2010
• 
• “Let us direct our courage, our thinking, and our decisions at those historic decisions that lie ahead. Now, there are many skeptics. One thing there’s no shortage of, Mr. President, are skeptics. This is something that you’re so familiar with, that all of us in a position of leadership are familiar with. There are many skeptics. I suppose there are many reasons for skepticism. But I have no doubt that peace is possible.”
  —Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, remarks at the White House, September 1, 2010
• Government Reforms Instill Confidence
• Setting the Record Straight | Sep 14, 2010
• “So if you look at fiscal operations, you look at security cooperation, yes, institutions are being built. The economy is in a sense reviving or I would say recovering. It is recovering based on two things, number one the security cooperation makes possible a degree of movement in the West Bank that allows for the reemergence of economic activity, and second ... the tremendous influx of international assistance. The economy is reviving, not because of brilliant economic management or because of institution building but simply recovery from some of the fiscal and economic problems caused by the intifada years.”
  —Nathan Brown, nonresident senior associate, Middle East Program, Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, event, "Divided Palestine-A Barrier to Peace," Carnegie Endowment for International Peace, July 21, 2010
• 
• “In 2009 the macroeconomic situation continued to improve in the West Bank, but in Gaza conditions remain difficult due to the blockade. In the West Bank, three key factors contributed to continued strong growth performance. First, private sector confidence has been bolstered by the Palestinian Authority (PA)’s track record in institution-building and reforms in particular in the security, public finance, and governance areas. Second,
  these reforms have been supported by generous donor budgetary aid, equivalent to about 22 percent of GDP in 2009. Third, some restrictions on movement and access have been relaxed, especially on movement of goods and people between major urban centers in the West Bank.”
  —International Monetary Fund, “Macroeconomic and Fiscal Framework for the West Bank and Gaza: Fifth Review of Progress,” April 13, 2010
• Special Relationship Unchanged
• Setting the Record Straight | Jul 20, 2010
• “Even if we still need the billions in military aid, the markets, and the ammunition provided by the U.S., and even if our international isolation is growing—we can no longer rely on U.S. support. …"Obama presses the State of Israel to freeze all construction in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem, and to accept dictates that will lead to the establishment of a Palestinian state in the heart of the country. In exchange he will be willing to provide us with guarantees on safeguarding our security and our technological advantage, and on demilitarizing the Palestinian state. Yet why should anyone in Israel be willing to assume existential risks while relying on the pledge of U.S. president who betrayed and denied all the pledges made by his predecessors, while also forgetting his own explicit commitments?”
  —Aryeh Eldad, member of Israeli Knesset (National Union), “Time for Reassessment,” YNet, July 6, 2010
• 
• “I can tell you there is a consistent line. And all U.S. presidents, from everyone that I met including President Obama, share what the president called the basic bedrock of this unbreakable bond between Israel and the United States.
  
  “Israeli prime ministers are also different. Each one of us is different. But we all value the relationship with the United States enormously. Enormously. I think America has no better friend and ally than Israel in the world, and I'm sure that Israel has no better friend and ally than the United States.”
  —Benjamin Netanyahu, prime minister of Israel, interview, Fox News Sunday, July 11, 2010
   
• Isolating Hamas Should Not Mean Isolating the People of Gaza
• Setting the Record Straight | Jun 15, 2010
• “The history of blockades by free nations is an honorable one. Israel’s blockade of Hamas-run Gaza—a blockade that … permits the delivery of humanitarian and civilian aid—stands in that tradition. It preserves a tenuous peace in the short run. And it may result in the liberation of Palestinians from Hamas’s dictatorship, and prevent their exploitation by a terror-supporting Iranian regime, in the longer run.”
  —William Kristol, editor, The Weekly Standard, op-ed, “In Praise of Blockades,”
• 
• “Well, it's precisely the limitations of that [Gaza] policy that are now apparent. And what people like myself have been arguing for, now for the best part of two years, is that it is, of course, right that we make huge progress on the West Bank … but it's always been a mistaken belief that you push ahead in the West Bank and leave Gaza completely isolated. In the end, what you have to do is, even with the problems there with Hamas, you have to bring people in Gaza to understand that there is an alternative, it is a better way forward. But if they become completely isolated, the danger is not that they turn then towards a more sensible, more moderate path. The danger is then that extremism grows.”
  —Tony Blair, representative of the Middle East Quartet and former British prime minister, interview with Fareed Zakaria, CNN, June 6, 2010 
• Status Quo is Unsustainable
• Setting the Record Straight | Jun 8, 2010
• “[W]e use all our chips for the negotiating sessions, instead of applying them to the hard work of nation building. ... We use American influence with Israel not to promote economic growth in the West Bank, but to try and impede Jewish (never Arab) construction in Israel's capital city. This set of priorities is perverse and will not lead to peace. Instead, a pragmatic approach that seeks to create in the West Bank a decent society and a state that will maintain law and order should be our goals.”
  —Elliott Abrams, former deputy national security adviser to President George W. Bush; senior fellow, Council on Foreign Relations, "The Future of an Illusion," The Weekly Standard, April 5-12, 2010
• 
• “[T]he status quo is not sustainable. It is not sustainable for Israel's identity as a secure, Jewish, and democratic state, because the demographic clock keeps ticking and will not be reversed. The status quo is not sustainable for Palestinians who have legitimate aspirations for sovereignty and statehood. And the status quo is not sustainable for the region because there is a struggle between those who reject Israel's existence and those who are prepared to coexist with Israel—and the status quo strengthens the rejectionists and weakens those who would live in peace. … The United States stands ready to do whatever is necessary to help the parties bridge their differences and develop the confidence needed to make painful compromises on behalf of peace. As we do so, we will also strongly support the Palestinian Authority's efforts to develop its institutions from the ground up and call on other states, particularly in the region, to do their part to support the Palestinian Authority as well.”
  —National Security Adviser James L. Jones, remarks, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy, April 21, 2010
• ‘United Jerusalem’ Already Divided?
• Setting the Record Straight | May 11, 2010
• “The Israelis have no intention of ever again being prevented from living throughout the city as they were between 1948 and 1967 when, under Jordanian control, Jewish communities were ruthlessly and violently driven out of areas where they had lived for centuries. Israel has a very different perspective. To Israelis, there is no Jewish Western Jerusalem and Eastern Arab Jerusalem.”
  —Mortimer Zuckerman, editor-in-chief, U.S. News and World Report, “On Israel, Obama Playing the Mideast Game Wrong,” April 23, 2010
• 
• “The State of Israel has given up. The [Palestinian] neighborhoods are outside the jurisdiction of the state, and certainly the municipality. For all practical purposes, they are Ramallah. … Outside the half delusional right wing camp, I don't know anyone who wants to enforce Israeli sovereignty over this area.”
  —Yakir Segev, holder of the East Jerusalem portfolio in the Jerusalem municipality, address, Hebrew University, January 8, 2010
• Economic Development is No Substitute for Two-State Solution
• Setting the Record Straight | May 4, 2010
• “The West Bank governs itself. It’s not a country exactly, but then neither is Kosovo or Nagorno-Karabakh. The international community does not invest much energy worrying about the precise status of either of these autonomous self-governing regions. Why not allow the Palestinian Authority to stumble along in the same way? … Then, for the time being—a time that may stretch for decades—everybody tacitly agrees to live with the status quo: The Israelis keep what they have, the West Bank Palestinians commit to keep order on their side of the fence, Hamas remains an international pariah, foreign aid continues to flow to the West Bank so long as good behavior continues. No process, no treaty, just quiet and development.”
  —David Frum, “Peace Without the Process,” National Post, May 1, 2010
• 
• “Even though the economic situation in the West Bank has improved over the last two years and Abu Mazen and Fayyad repeatedly declare that they oppose a resumption of the violent confrontation with Israel, such pronouncements do not guarantee security stability over time. Although the population's sense of economic welfare is gradually evolving, given the occupation and settlement construction, there will always be motivation to resume the confrontational approach. … The absence of a political process will deny the PA legitimacy to continue working intensively against Hamas on the West Bank.”
  —Col. (Ret.) Ephraim Lavie, director, Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace, Tel Aviv University, “Between Settlement and Crisis: The Next Round of the Palestinian Issue,” Strategic Assessment, INSS, February 2010
• Progress Toward Peace is an Israeli Interest
• Setting the Record Straight | Apr 27, 2010
• “The true barrier to ending the Mideast conflict is the widespread Palestinian refusal to accept and to live alongside Israel as a Jewish state. Despite this reality, since day one the White House has applied a severe double standard that refuses to hold the Palestinians accountable for their many provocations. It makes one wonder where the responsible adults are in the administration? The administration’s troubling policy of manufacturing fights with Israel to ingratiate itself with some in the Arab world is no way to advance the cause of Mideast peace. What kind of message is sent to the world when our country appears to turn its back on key strategic allies who share our values?”
  —Rep. Eric Cantor (R-VA), minority whip, U.S. House of Representatives, statement, April 15, 2010
• 
• “The world isn’t willing to accept—and we won’t change that in 2010—the expectation that Israel will rule another people for decades more … It’s something that doesn’t exist anywhere else in the world. The alienation that is developing with the United States is not good for Israel. We have strong ties with the United States, a bond, long-term friendship and strategic partnership. We receive three billion dollars from them each year; we get the best planes in the world from them. For all these reasons we must act to change things. … With a broad readiness to go for a [peace] agreement, Israeli governments have overcome many obstacles in the daily discourse with the Americans about building in this or that settlement or a Jerusalem neighborhood.”
  —Ehud Barak, Israeli defense minister, April 19, 2010
• Connecting the Dots
• Setting the Record Straight | Mar 23, 2010
• “Let's assume there is a comprehensive settlement to which the Palestinian Authority (PA) agrees. It isn't going to happen but this is for demonstration purposes. … What would happen? First, none of this would apply to the Hamas-ruled Gaza Strip. Hamas, Hezbollah, Syria, Iran, Muslim Brotherhoods, and many others would renounce this as treason. … Would the kind of people who are now prone to support revolutionary Islamism then say: 'What a fair settlement. This settles all our grievances. Thank you, America for being so wonderful!'”
  —Barry Rubin, director, Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center, blog, “Why What General Petraeus Said is Wrong About the Middle East (Or is It Just Being Misinterpreted?)” March 17, 2010
• 
• “The Arab-Israeli conflict, and especially the Palestinian issue, remains one of the most contentious and sensitive issues in the entire Muslim world. The Palestinian issue can get Muslims demonstrating in the streets from Jakarta to Nigeria to Lebanon. … When the United States is expending its blood and treasure fighting insurgencies in overwhelmingly Muslim Iraq and Afghanistan, the dots are even easier to connect. It’s all part of a very important whole. We would be naive to think that resolving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will eliminate the problems of terrorism and radicalization in the Islamic world, but it will go a long way toward draining the swamp of issues that extremists exploit for their own ends. So I think any American president would be well-advised to tackle this issue.”
  —Edward Djerejian, former assistant secretary of state for Near Eastern and South Asian affairs and U.S. ambassador to Israel; currently director, James Baker III Institute for Public Policy, Rice University, interview with the National Journal, February 20, 2010