Palestinians should consider halt to diplomacy

As the deadlock persists in the “negotiations” between the Palestine Liberation Authority and Israel without any evidence of a just and credible outcome in the offing, a group of distinguished Americans — Zbigniew Brzezinski, Frank Carlucci, Lee Hamilton, Carla A. Hills, Thomas Pickering and Henry Siegman — published an article on April 8 on the Politico news website titled “Stand Firm, John Kerry.” In it they suggest in regard to the settlements, “Halting the diplomatic process on a date certain until Israel complies with international law and previous agreements would help to stop this activity and clearly place the onus for the interruption where it belongs.”

International law? For more than 20 years, at least since the Oslo Accord and even before, Israel has persistently violated international law related to Palestinian national and human rights. The Israelis have treated international law as an intrusion on its plans, as demonstrated by the ongoing creeping annexations and proliferating settlements not only throughout the West Bank but also in East Jerusalem.

The authors open by stating, “We commend Secretary of State John Kerry’s extraordinary efforts to renew Israeli-Palestinian talks and negotiations for a framework for a peace accord, and the strong support his initiative has received from President Barack Obama.” They further state, “[W]e also believe that the necessary confidentiality that Secretary Kerry imposed on the resumed negotiations should not preclude a far more forceful and public expression of certain fundamental U.S. positions.”

What does this mean? While the United States disapproves of settlements and considers their enlargement as “illegitimate” and “unhelpful,” the authors consider that this “does not begin to define the destructiveness of this activity. Nor does it dispel the impression that we have come to accept it despite our rhetorical objections.”