John Kerry, as always a statesman, on Israel/Palestine

[karynnj]

https://www.google.com/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=newssearch&cd=11&cad=rja&uact=8&ved=0CCQQqQIoADAAOAo&url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.csmonitor.com%2FMedia%2FContent%2F2014%2F4-2-14-How-Kerry-sees-Abbas-move-on-Palestinian-state&ei=mjA8U63cNKmqsQTiwIGgBw&usg=AFQjCNGSFY9VUViBIX9RkNOU66ydIXMXsQ&sig2=TR6DesqyuWQ1VoRnHI_JcQ&bvm=bv.63934634,d.cWc

This is a short video statement.

My opinion:
He has always said that it is up to to Israel and the Palestinians. Things look very bad for a solution, but they were never highly likely. The failure is both that of Abbas and Netanyahu. Although it seems Netayahu has gotten exactly what he really wanted - no solution with Abbas getting the blame. As a Jew, I hate to admit that if the talks end now, the only real difference from last July and now is that there are more apartments in settlements.

It was a really bad political move for Abbas to have gone to signing the international agreements - especially when he linked it to Israel not releasing the prisoners on the day they were suppose to when it (publicly at least) was still under negotiation. He would have had more sympathy had he linked it to the 700+ tenders to build in settlements near East Jerusalem.

[Scootaloo]

1. Here's the thing...

It was a really bad political move for Abbas to have gone to signing the international agreements - especially when he linked it to Israel not releasing the prisoners on the day they were suppose to when it (publicly at least) was still under negotiation.

The agreement was for Palestine to not join UN bodies for nine months; in exchange, Israel would release 104 prisoners. Israel did not hold up its end of the bargain, refusing to release the final 26 unless further concessions were granted to Israel.

Abbas did not "link it" to the prisoner release - this was exactly what the agreement was, "you release prisoners and we hold off on securing our place in the UN." Nor was it a bad move by Abbas - Israel is the party that failed to carry through, here. There's no reason for Abbas to do the Israelis a favor by pretending the deal is still in effect, after the Israelis scuttled the deal.

Kerry, of course, has to pretend the two are "equally at fault" - It's that faux neutrality thing that you see so often from the media as well, "pretending both sides are equal makes me unbiased." But Israel is the one that reneged on the deal it had agreed to, and asked for more just to continue what it was supposed to do anyway. It's on them.

[karynnj]

4. I understand what you are saying

You are misinterpreting my meaning. I am NOT disagreeing that Israel intentionally missed the date and is negotiating for more to do what they agreed to do. Netanyahu said they needed to "get something for it". My point was that given that there were still negotiations on the release, that arguing over a few days weakens him in terms of who is blamed.

If he had not done this - especially as he had said he would continue the talks until the end of April - what would have been seen was that Israel reneged. In fact, they also have acted against the spirit of the agreement at many points by continuing to build settlements.

In fact, the right wing of Netanyahu's party has publicly disparaged everyone involved in the effort - especially John Kerry. In addition, Netanyahu has - since he entered office - blatantly disrespected the idea of returning to 67 borders even with land swaps.

As to Kerry - he did not assess blame at all -- therefore he did not say they were equally at fault. What he did say was that he (and the US) were willing to facilitate their negotiations -- and he stated the obvious - the two governments need to agree.

As to history, I predict Netanyahu will be seen to have thrown away the last chance at a Jewish democracy. I wish I could see this as the first step to a peaceful process ending with a pluralistic democracy where everyone has the same rights which would be in fact a better result. Netanyahu and the right are even more against this.

[wisteria]

2. It isn't over yet, but I will admit to being discouraged.

It really does appear neither side wants peace if it costs them anything. And, I am very unhappy with the way the press is portraying this possible spy release as a desperate act on the part of the US, and Kerry as being delusional all along. Unfortunately, the pessimists and do nothings, are out in force today. But, if you at least try to do something, and fail, at least you have made an attempt to change a bad situation. As opposed to doing nothing, and accepting things as they are, then criticizing those who try and pursue positive change.

[ProSense]

3. Kerry offered some insights and

addressed rumors at a press conference yesterday.

QUESTION: Geez, wow. Thank you very much. (Laughter.) Mr. Secretary, two questions for you. NATO says there are no signs of a Russian pullback. What is it going to take for this body to have a greater show of force? Because there do seem some members wary of antagonizing Russia.

And on Mideast peace, where are we in this process, with President Abbas saying he’s canceled this meeting with you? Is this brinksmanship? And has the U.S. offered the release of Jonathan Pollard?

SECRETARY KERRY: Well, that’s about three questions or four, I think. But I’m happy to answer them. With respect to NATO and the presence of force and what is it going to take, I think everybody here today made it clear that the preference of NATO and the preference of all of us is to see a de-escalation, to find a diplomatic route in order to be able to work, hopefully, ultimately, together to strengthen the possibilities of Ukrainians making their own choices about Ukraine in the future. That’s the goal.

And at the same time, it is important for everybody in the world to understand that the NATO alliance takes seriously this attempt to change borders by use of force. So that is the wakeup call. And as a result, people here today made a commitment to be able to strengthen visibly, as a matter of deterrence and as a matter of reality, the cooperation, the deployment, and the efforts of those who are members of this alliance.

Now, with respect to the de-escalation, we were happy that yesterday Russia made an announcement, President Putin made the announcement initially, that they were going to move a battalion back. And that’s obviously small compared to the numbers that are deployed, but it is a welcome gesture in the right direction. The question now is: Is there a way to build on that in order to be able to find a way to move the masses of troops back and truly deescalate?

So I think there’s a delicate balance, and we’re engaged in efforts with lots of different people engaged in this effort to see if there is a way forward. That’s a lot of the discussion here today – it’ll be some of the discussion at the dinner tonight – is to help map that road forward.

With respect to the Middle East peace process, I’ve heard a rumor about, quote, not being invited or something. But I’m not sure I’m going, regardless of that, whether or not we have certain things that we’re trying to figure out in terms of the logistics on the ground and what is possible.

What is important to say about the Middle East right now is it is completely premature tonight to draw any kind of judgment, certainly any final judgment, about today’s events and where things are. This is a moment to be really clear-eyed and sober about this process. It is difficult, it is emotional, it requires huge decisions, some of them with great political difficulty, all of which need to come together simultaneously.

And all I can tell you is that we are continuing, even now as I am standing up here speaking, to be engaged with both parties to find the best way forward. We’ve been in touch with the White House and Washington during the day, as well as all of the parties. And I’ve talked to many people on the ground in the region, and I will continue to even tonight.

So my team is on the ground meeting with the parties even tonight. And we urge both sides to show restraint while we work with them. Obviously, it’s moments like this when we all need to remember exactly what brought us to this effort in the first place, what the goal is, and where everybody wants to end up. And tonight I haven’t heard yet what the public response of Israel has been, but I know that President Abbas in his comments made it clear that he intends to continue to work, even tonight, on this process that we are engaged in.

So we will see where we wind up at the end of the evening in the next days, but it is, as I said at the outset of my remarks, completely premature to draw any judgments about this at this point in time. And at this point in time, no agreement has been reached with respect to any prisoner, not even the ones that, at this moment, are at issue in terms of the transfer. The cabinet in Israel has to vote; I’m not sure exactly when that might take place or not. And so there is no agreement at this point in time regarding anyone or any specific steps. There are a lot of different possibilities in play.

MS. PSAKI: The next question will be from Lesley Wroughton of Reuters.

QUESTION: Mr. Secretary, I just wanted to be clear because there’s a lot of reports going around. We also understand from a U.S. official that you’re not traveling tomorrow to Ramallah. But also if it is true – I mean, I’ve looked at the transcript and President Abbas has signed those conventions to join these 15 agencies – is this in your mind a breach of the understanding of the process that you launched eight, nine months ago?

On the other hand, do you – how do you see the way going forward? If this is – the way that President Abbas explained it was that the Israelis did not release those prisoners; that was the agreement. He agreed he wouldn’t go to the UN until the end of April, and he’s going – he’s going to go now. So there seems to be a lot of disappointment.

SECRETARY KERRY: No, he’s not. He is not. Let me make it absolutely clear: None of the agencies that President Abbas signed tonight involve the UN. None of them. And President Abbas has given his word to me that he will keep his agreement and that he intends to negotiate through the end of the month of April.

Now obviously, the prisoners were due on the 29th, which was Saturday. I’m not going to get into the who, why, what, when, where, how of why we’re where we are today. We’re where we are today – and the important thing is to keep the process moving and find a way to see whether the parties are prepared to move forward. In the end, this is up to the parties.

I mean, I want to make this crystal clear: The United States is proud and ready and willing to be a facilitator in this process. But the leaders on both sides have to make the decisions, not us. It’s up to them to decide what they’re prepared to do with each other, for each other, for the future, for the region, for peace. And we will do everything in our power. President Obama has been as committed to this as anybody. He has committed his personal time. He has committed my time. The President is desirous of trying to see how we can make our best efforts in order to find a way to facilitate. But facilitation is only as good as the willingness of leaders to actually make decisions when they’re put in front of them.

And we’re going to continue to do our work. We’re going to continue because this matters – matters to the region, matters to the parties, matters to us, matters to the world. Everywhere I go, people ask me: Is there any progress? Can you get anywhere? Can you move? The one thing that I keep in the center of my mind is that, even tonight, both parties say they want to continue to try to find a way forward. And so we will continue to work with them in order to try to do that.

http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/04/224282.htm

[MBS]

5. his remarks in Algiers on algeria-US relations (and Middle East and Ukraine)

http://www.state.gov/secretary/remarks/2014/04/224343.htm
I've given kind of a long excerpt, but, since it's public, not commercial material -- government document-- I think it's OK.
I highlighted a part in bold, which made me think, not of Arab terrorists (ostensibly the subject), but of Republicans!! I wonder if JK was thinking that, too. : )

. . . Good morning, everybody. It’s nice to be here. I want to thank Foreign Minister Lamamra for his – Ramtane for his very thoughtful, very wise and encouraging opening comments, a really very comprehensive statement, Ramtane, with a great deal of thought about the things that we need to cooperate on and work on. So I’m particularly encouraged at the opening of this plenary session to have heard the broad prospects of increased cooperation between us. I want to thank you for your welcome here today, and particularly all the members of your team and the government for such a generous welcome. We’re really appreciative.

. . .

As Ramtane said to all of you, this is a relationship that goes way, way back, and it’s very special for us in the United States in that regard. The present-day American city of St. Augustine, Florida was actually founded 450 years ago in honor of a man from this corner of the world, the great scholar Augustine of Hippo. And as Ramtane mentioned a few moments ago, the treaty that was signed in 1795, the Amity and Peace Treaty that brought our countries together way back then, all the way through Algeria’s fight for independence – the United States and Algeria have worked together in support of peace and in support of self-determination.

. . .

So we come here today very sensitive to this history. We need to grow it. There’s much more that we can do. We need to trust each other. We need to build trust. And we need to think carefully about the challenges that we all face. This is a time when peace and self-determination are facing more complex threats than ever before, and it’s easy to say the words but it is not easy to achieve the goal. And I just want to say a word about that because it is what makes the cooperation between nations like ours so important.

. . . .

Those who offer the violence that comes with terrorism that Ramtane talked about don’t offer jobs. They don’t offer education. They don’t offer healthcare. They don’t have a program to pull the country together around its common identity. They destroy it. And they tell people, in a direct confrontation with modernity, that everybody has to do what they say and live the way they tell them. We’ve been through these struggles for too long as common humanity to be cowered by that, intimidated by it, or ruled by it. And so it is absolutely vital in this Strategic Dialogue that we work to find common ground.

. . . .
There are just an enormous amount – energy, as we think about the challenge of climate change in the world, as well as the challenges we see with the recent events of Ukraine – energy must not be used as a weapon, as a tool of conduct in international affairs. . . .
Third, on strengthening the people-to-people ties that are critical to the success of any international partnership, we have a number of important initiatives in place today. And we hope to see even more in the future. We look forward to building on programs like those that are funded by the Middle East Partnership Initiative, aimed at strengthening civil society throughout the region, and the Fulbright student exchanges. That program here in Algeria is a very, very important one, time-honored between us. . . . .

Finally, let me just mention quickly the external events that Ramtane referred to. It is critical for the world that we find a way to resolve the crisis of Syria, and we’re very appreciative for the cooperative effort with Algeria and other countries of the region to do so. We also believe there is no solution other than a political solution. There is no military solution. But we also believe that because of what has happened, the nature of the weapons used, gas, chemical bombs against children, indiscriminate killing of civilians, starvation as a tool of war, more then 140,000 people killed – we believe that it is impossible for Bashar al-Assad and his regime to ever regain the legitimacy to be able to govern the country. So the difficulty has been the absence of an ability to be able to change the dynamic where we can get that political solution, but we will remain committed, and we want to work with Algeria and others in order to help make that happen.

On the Middle East peace process, we remain committed. The parties met even last night and they are continuing to have their discussions. We will continue, no matter what, to try to facilitate the capacity of people to be able to make peace. But in the end, my friends, as all of you know, you can facilitate, you can push, you can nudge, but the parties themselves have to make fundamental decisions and compromises. The leaders have to lead, and they have to be able to see a moment when it’s there. There is an old saying, “You can lead a horse to water, but you can’t make it drink.” Now’s the time to drink, and the leaders need to know that.
. .

One last thing: We will cooperate in everything except the World Cup, where our teams may have to clash. (Laughter.) Thank you. (Applause.)

[karynnj]

6. Interesting Haaretz oped - suggesting Kerry et al leave - as shock treatment to get

Abbas and Netanyahu to face the decisions they have before them.

Kerry must go home. He must tell American envoy Martin Indyk and his team to pack their bags and take the first flight out of Ben-Gurion International Airport to the United States. He must ask the U.S. ambassador in Tel Aviv Dan Shapiro and consul general in Jerusalem Michael Retney to give the same answer to the calls from the prime minister’s office and the Muqata — “You didn’t want us, now get along by yourselves.”

Only American disengagement from the peace process could provide the shock treatment the Israelis and Palestinians need. Without Kerry and Indyk, Netanyahu and Abbas will suddenly discover that the alternative is to wallow together in the mud at best, or in blood at worst.

From the moment the Americans leave, it won’t take long before both sides scream "gevalt" and beg Kerry to return. If the Americans wanted to get involved in the peace process again after such a crisis, they could do so on their own terms. They could demand that the leaders make decisions, not just continue the process or negotiations. They could put a draft framework agreement on the table and tell Netanyahu and Abbas: Sign here, please.

http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.583507

I think this may reflect more the frustration of people wanting peace with both Abbas and Netanyahu.