fbpx

Analysis

BICOM Analysis: Talks deadline has passed, now what?

[ssba]

Key points

  • With the nine month period for peace talks expiring, the Palestinians have declared their intent to continue unilateral efforts to gain recognition by international bodies.
  • The decision by Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas to enter a unity government with Hamas led Israel to suspend for now efforts to renew talks, but all sides are waiting to see if a Palestinian unity government is actually formed.
  • Though both sides want to avoid blame for any further deterioration, the risk remains high of an escalation of unilateral measures and countermeasures.

What does the expiry of the nine months mean?

April 29 marked the  nine month deadline agreed by the parties in July 2013 to try and reach a final status agreement. The Palestinians agreed with US Secretary of State John Kerry to remain in the talks for nine months and to suspend their unilateral programme of joining international institutions and bodies. In return, Israel agreed to release, in stages, prisoners serving long sentences for terror offences carried out before the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993. Now that this period has expired, the Palestinians will feel that their commitment to Kerry has been fulfilled, and the PLO Central Council has approved a plan to continue efforts to gain membership of international bodies.

Efforts to find a basis to extend the  talks were suspended by Israel after PA President Mahmoud Abbas announced an agreement to form a unity agreement with Hamas on 23 April. Israel’s position is that it cannot negotiate with a Palestinian Authority (PA) backed by Hamas. However, the Israeli Security Cabinet held back from ceasing talks altogether and from taking immediate retaliatory measures, leaving open the possibility of a resumption of talks if – as on previous occasions – the Palestinian unity agreement  is not implemented.

What is likely to happen now?

All parties are watching to see how the Palestinian political unification process plays out, and to see how they choose to advance their applications to international institutions. Fatah and Hamas have given themselves five weeks from 23 April to form a technocratic government under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas, which will then prepare for parliamentary and presidential elections within six months. Such agreements have been announced in the past and not borne fruit. If this does indeed lead to a new unity government, international actors will judge it according to whether or not it expresses commitment to the Quartet conditions: renunciation of violence, recognition of Israel, and acceptance of previous agreements.

Meanwhile the PLO Central Committee approved a plan on Sunday to join an additional 48 international bodies, in addition to 15 conventions they applied to join on April 1. However, Abbas seems likely to move gradually, particularly with regard to more consequential institutions, such as the International Criminal Court. Applying to join some of these bodies could trigger US funding cuts to those institutions and potentially the PA itself, as well as retaliatory measures from Israel. Israel has already threatened to use tax remittances usually transferred monthly to the PA, to pay off debts owed by the Palestinians to Israel utility companies, as a result of their application to 15 international conventions.

What position are international actors taking?

US officials have sought to balance their criticism by referring to unhelpful steps taken by both Israel and the PA. Though President Obama described the announcement of the Palestinian unity government as ‘unhelpful’, the US is waiting to see how the government formation develops. In the meantime they are lowering their profile, with US mediator Martin Indyk having returned to the US. Secretary of State John Kerry is reportedly still considering the option of presenting the parties with a US framework deal at some point in the future. (For details on the US framework click here.)

EU High Representative Catherine Ashton has expressed conditional support for the Palestinian unity agreement. She reiterated that the new government must, “accep[t] previous agreements and … Israel’s legitimate right to exist,” she also welcomed the fact that, “President Abbas will remain fully in charge of the negotiation process … provides further assurance that the peace negotiations can and must proceed.”

What will Israel do now?

The decision of the Israeli Security Cabinet to suspend talks was unanimous, but Netanyahu is seeking to balance the views of Tzipi Livni and Yair Lapid to his political left, who are keen to keep open every possibility to resume talks, with those of his own Likud Party and Jewish Home, who will be pushing for more punitive measures against the PA. Netanyahu is also making clear internationally his position that Abbas needs to choose between peace with Hamas and peace with Israel. He recently delayed decisions for new settlement plans in order to avoid escalation or deflecting international criticism onto Israel.

Looking more long term, there are increasing voices on the Israeli centre-left arguing that if negotiations cannot be resumed, Israel needs a ‘Plan B’, to ensure its character as a Jewish and democratic state, by fixing a border between Israel and a future Palestinian state in the West Bank unilaterally. However, whilst Netanyahu has stated that one of his goals in seeking a peace agreement is to stop the creation of a binational state, he has yet to show any support for the idea of acting unilaterally to bring about a separation between Israel and the Palestinians in the West Bank.