It was a theater of the absurd: Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Defense Minister Avigdor Liberman, minutes after Liberman took the oath of office May 30, talking to the press about their desire/agreement for a “two states for two peoples” solution and about recognizing positive elements in the 2002 Arab Peace Initiative, which the government would be ready to negotiate. Netanyahu actually believes that he can fool all the people all the time. Indeed, he succeeded this time, at least partly: The press was taken by surprise, Liberman’s entry into the Defense Ministry went over relatively smoothly in the world and not a single government publically called his bluff. The main purpose of these statements was to convince the US administration to take a more balanced position at the June 3 Paris conference in order to avoid a binding timeline.

Yet a bluff it was. There is no two-state solution process without a settlement freeze and a readiness to accept the 1967 lines with mutual land swaps as a basis for the negotiations. The Palestinians and the Arab countries will not engage anymore in negotiations for the sake of negotiations.

Furthermore, the phrase “two states for two peoples” was chosen carefully by the two right-wing leaders. It brings back to the scene the Israeli condition for the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish nation-state, knowing all too well that even the most moderate of Palestinian leaders will not accept what was not asked at the time (when peace treaties were negotiated) of neither Egypt nor Jordan.

As to the Arab Peace Initiative, the new odd couple of Israeli politics recognized the obvious — that there are positive elements in the initiative. They are referring to two clauses: the normalization of relations of Arab countries with Israel after conflict resolution and an “agreed and just” settlement to the Palestinian refugee problem. According to the initiative, Israel has to agree to the latter, thus giving Israel a veto power over the Palestinian right of return. Yet what was not mentioned at the May 30 press conference was that these positive elements of the Arab Peace Initiative are conditioned in the initiative on Palestinian statehood on the 1967 lines with mutual land swaps, with East Jerusalem as a Palestinian capital. Obviously, these are the components that Netanyahu wants to negotiate away. The wording matters and the devil is in the details. Israel can negotiate on the basis of the Arab Peace Initiative, but cannot negotiate the Arab Peace Initiative — this is a matter for the Arab League.