fbpx

BICOM

Britain Israel Communications and Research Centre

Analysis

BICOM Briefing: The Israeli-Palestinian Peace Summit in Washington

Category:

[ssba]

The summit

  • A two-day summit in Washington re-launched direct Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations. For the first time in 20 months, Israeli and Palestinian leaders met face to face in an effort to broker an agreement to resolve the core issues of the conflict.
  • US President Barack Obama hosted the summit, which was also attended by King Abdullah II of Jordan and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.
  • The official launch of direct Middle East talks took place during a trilateral meeting at the State Department, which included key statements by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.
  • US Middle East Envoy George Mitchell concluded the summit at a press briefing in which he outlined the next steps in the negotiations process.

What did the summit achieve?

  • Moving forward: Although the summit was mostly ceremonial, it established a framework for continued talks. The next round of negotiations will take place in two weeks, on 14-15 September. It is likely to take place in the Middle East.
  • Framework: Both the Israelis and the Palestinian agreed to commence talks on all the core issues of the conflict and work to reach an agreement under the ambitious one-year timeframe set by the US Administration.
  • Building trust: The summit was intended to create a conducive environment from which a sustainable negotiations process can begin. Particularly noticeable was the effort to build trust and establish the commitment of all parties to work together to reach an agreement.
  • Ensuring international support: The summit was the result of intense US diplomatic effort in recent months to create broad international endorsement of the process. The International Quartet (UN, EU, US and Russia) and the Arab League played an important role in support of the US initiative.

Key positions

US

  • The US acknowledged outright the difficult road ahead. President Obama, Secretary Clinton and Senator Mitchell noted the immense challenges of reaching an agreement on the core issues, including the difficulty of overcoming those who will seek to derail the process through violence.
  • The US is committed to a one-year deadline. This pressures both sides not to pull out of the process prematurely. Washington is signalling its determination to overcome the forthcoming challenge relating to the end of the settlement moratorium on 26 September.
  • Bilateral basis for talks. Mitchell set out a process of bilateral meetings between the leaders with official discussions ongoing around that. The framework for the process looks in essence very similar to that of the Annapolis process over the course of 2008.
  • Working towards a framework agreement. Mitchell revealed that rather than trying to reach a temporary agreement (e.g. just on borders or security) the parties agreed to work towards a framework agreement. This will outline the broad principles on the core issues and work will then focus on the details. Comparable stages were passed in the Egypt-Israel peace process (the Camp David Accords in 1978 preceded final peace agreement in early 1979) and Israel-Jordan process (the Washington Declaration preceded final agreement).
  • Criticism of the Arab world. President Obama and Secretary Clinton expressed their disappointment that the administration’s efforts to get wider regional support with confident-building measures were rebuffed. The high profile role of President Mubarak and King Hussein during the summit shows the extent to which regional support is valued by the US.

Israel

  • Commitment to the process. Prime Minister Netanyahu sought to establish and repeat his dedication to reach an agreement and to end the conflict between Israel and the Palestinian. In both his speeches, Netanyahu addressed President Abbas with a clear message: “You are my partner in peace.”
  • The ‘two pillars’ of viable peace.
  • o Legitimacy: Netanyahu reiterated his longtime conviction that an agreement must include mutual recognition of each other’s right for national self determination – Palestine as a national home for the Palestinians and Israel as a national home for the Jews.
  • o Security: In particular the threat of rockets and missiles entering the West Bank and the rise of Iran and its proxies in the region.
  • o A fuller version of this position was given in Netanyahu’s address to the Council on Foreign Relations during his Washington visit in July.
  • Room for  manoeuvre. Though Netanyahu said little about his positions on other core issue like borders and Jerusalem, this has left him maximum room for manoeuvre. His key principles (legitimacy and security) do not preclude major concessions on other issues except for the right of return for Palestinian refugees to Israel, which is a clear red line.

The Palestinians

  • Looking for action, short on gestures. President Abbas focused his remarks on the Palestinian need to see an agreement take shape and implemented. In his usual style, he refrained from any gestures or ceremonial rhetoric. Abbas emphasised the need to base an agreement on international law and international bodies, but did not provide details on the core issues. The Palestinian president did nonetheless refer to the terms of reference outlined in previous Quartet statements on the 1967 borders and the division of Jerusalem.
  • Emphasis on security. Abbas again condemned the terror attacks in the West Bank in recent days and reiterated the Palestinian Authority’s commitment to act against terror. Abbas is under clear pressure to assert and demonstrate his control on the ground and convince both internal and external audiences that he will not repeat Yasser Arafat’s lax attitude toward terror.
  • Recognition already a fact. Abbas appeared to be reacting to Netanyahu’s call for recognition of Israel as a Jewish state by stressing that Palestinians have already recognised the State of Israel in the 1993 Declaration of Principles. Finding a satisfactory formula that meets Netanyahu’s demand for recognition of Israel as a Jewish state looks set to be one of the major challenges in reaching a framework agreement.

Further reading