Netanyahu evading negotiations to keep coalition?

[Doctor Evil]

Usually I would hesitate to start a thread on Israel, as it would just reinforce the embarrassing level of obsession on display in this forum. (Just look at the first few pages of this subfoum.) But this story is just too good to pass up.

One of Maariv main correspondent's, Ben Kaspit, a respected journalists, claims that in contrast to public declarations, Netanyahu has avoided opportunities to discuss core issues with Palestinian negotiators, stating that if he would do that his coalition would break down. I could not find an English version for this story, but here is the google translation:

The second case occurred at a meeting held between Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Mahmoud Abbas, the official residence of Prime Minister in Jerusalem

.​

Now it turns out that during this meeting brought Mahmoud Abbas to Netanyahu official Palestinian document, two pages are printed with a Palestinian proposal to resolve both matters which the parties were to discuss the first phase: the security arrangements and borders

.​

Netanyahu refused to read the document or discuss.

Note, this google translation is horrible. For instance, Olmert appear in the title, where as in the Hebrew version its "prime minister". I guess that google is behind the times. There are many more serious errors.

My take is that whether the story is true or not (- only covered by one newspaper so far - ) we are seeing the last few months on this coalition in Israel. Barak is facing the heat from his Labor party, which may be quitting soon. On the other hand, Lieberman is pulling his own way. In the middle, Netanyahu is looking more and more like someone who would do anything, or more precisely nothing, to keep his seat. This situation would not last long.

 

[Thunder]

One of Maariv main correspondent's, Ben Kaspit, a respected journalists, claims that in contrast to public declarations, Netanyahu has avoided opportunities to discuss core issues with Palestinian negotiators, stating that if he would do that his coalition would break down. .

Just yesterday, Bibi said he is willing to have one-on-one, non-stop negotiations with Abbas, and will make whatever concensions are necessary to make peace, as long as the Palestinians recognize a Jewish state, abandon the Right of Return, and agree to a demilitarized Palestine. And he would make such a deal regardless of coalition threats.

but honestly, I'd like to hear how Netanyahu plans on bringing home 100,000 or more settlers from the West Bank.

 

[ddt]

My take is that whether the story is true or not (- only covered by one newspaper so far - ) we are seeing the last few months on this coalition in Israel. Barak is facing the heat from his Labor party, which may be quitting soon. On the other hand, Lieberman is pulling his own way. In the middle, Netanyahu is looking more and more like someone who would do anything, or more precisely nothing, to keep his seat. This situation would not last long.

Do you have a link to the Maariv article so we can read the whole article or try Google translate on it? (sorry, my Hebrew is non-existent ).

How does this mesh with the mounting criticism on Barak? I just read in the Haaretz (hoping they'd have an article covering this too), that the US is outraged at Barak for not living up to his promises of reining in Netanyahu; and that other Labour politicians now call for his head.

Bradley Burston's take on this coalition is also a nice read, keeping in mind it is meant to be provocative. To me, the claims of the Maariv journalist you posted sound credible, this is an impossible coalition when it comes to the peace process, and that Netanyahu would have obstructed negotiations in order not to offend either of his main coalition partners and thus blow up his coalition government sounds in-character for him.

 

[Doctor Evil]

Do you have a link to the Maariv article so we can read the whole article or try Google translate on it? (sorry, my Hebrew is non-existent ).

I was sure that I gave a link to the google translation. Don't know how I missed that. Anyway, here it is.

I will give my take on the other points tomorrow.

 

[Doctor Evil]

How does this mesh with the mounting criticism on Barak? I just read in the Haaretz (hoping they'd have an article covering this too), that the US is outraged at Barak for not living up to his promises of reining in Netanyahu; and that other Labour politicians now call for his head.

It would play as follows. Barak is very unpopular in its own party. In recent weeks at least two other Labor politicians announced that they are interested in becoming party leaders. In order to do that they will use whatever news story which can help them, whether true or not. It is likely that Barak will be replaced as Labor head at some point in the next year. It is also likely that Labor will leave the coalition soon.

As for the story about the US anger, it may be true or not, but IMO there is also an element of the US administration blaming others for their own mistakes. I would point out that it was the US administration which pulled out from the proposed three months settlement freeze deal. Netanyahu can be blamed for haggling over the details of the deal, and taking his time. But there are reasons for that, and they are also due to actions of this US administration. I can expand if you like. (Note this comes from someone who would be happy to see this govenment fall and thinks that Netanyahu seeks to avoid peace talks.)

Bradley Burston's take on this coalition is also a nice read, keeping in mind it is meant to be provocative. To me, the claims of the Maariv journalist you posted sound credible, this is an impossible coalition when it comes to the peace process, and that Netanyahu would have obstructed negotiations in order not to offend either of his main coalition partners and thus blow up his coalition government sounds in-character for him.

I would dispute several claims in the article. (Possibly due to the fact that it was meant to be provocative.) Saying that, I would certainly agree with its main point, namely, that Tanya seeks to stay in power, and avoiding any action is his modus operandi.


PS I have also started to smell elections in the air.