the -should be- closest people to you are unlimited source for your insecurities.
After ignoring the part where The writer refers to Obama as (Hussein) to be more consistent with the ongoing debate by GOP whether he is Muslim or not!! The writer points out future scenarios for the settlements in light of the latest talks on Israeli point of view and how the complication of Netanyahu's stance after the 4 settlers killed by Hamas.
The article Questions the ability of Netanyahu to control the future of the settlements
Netanyahu is torn between the obligatory demands of any possible agreement, and the fear that the evacuation of the 100,000 settlers on the eastern side of the separation barrier is more than the country can tolerate
For me The most interesting part was his comment on the remark in which BiBi hoped that Abbas will be “a courageous partner, as Sadat was for Begin”
The late Egyptian president Anwar Sadat really was a great statesman; in exchange for his courageous acts, he received all of Sinai from prime minister Menachem Begin. Is that what Netanyahu was referring to? Or was he referring to an implicit understanding with the Americans and the Egyptians, which was part of the peace with Egypt, and enabled Begin to build dozens of settlements in the West Bank and to bomb the Iraqi nuclear reactor, at a time when the Egyptians were waiting patiently to receive their land back?
With “adjustments” to the present situation, maybe the idea is for there to be a withdrawal from the hilly areas of the West Bank in exchange for a green light from the U.S. to proceed with massive construction in the settlement blocs and to attack Iran, while the world is eagerly awaiting the establishment of Palestine.
The way Washington is hard selling these talks as (the 2010 Camp David) and the endless comparisons in which they remaking history is suspicious. Obama/Hilary are pushing for this talks for god knows why reasons but certainly not for “peace sake” Both Abbas and BiBi are pressured to continue this charade. Hamas latest militant operation against the settlers was a clear message that “security in exchange for sovereignty” is a bogus principle to begin with. In fact neither BiBi could offer sovereignty nor Abbas can present security.
So the Q remains upon all obvious indications of the FAIL talks why the pushy attitude to gather all of Netanyahu/Abbas/Mubarak/Abdallah under the same roof?!!!
the answer is one word –Iran- and the rest will follow.
We are dealing here only with USA security and its sovereignty in the region yet, the 4 musketeers are negotiating their roles in the one year plan- the time frame that Hilary suggested. like the writer put it down “ while the world is eagerly awaiting the establishment of Palestine.”Therefore, the talks is nothing but a booty division among the 4 relatively- of course- to their on-ground power. Netanyahu wants to be a partner with the US “plans”,Mubarak and Abdallah wants their shares too and Abbas has no choice except what will be offered.
To sum up, there is no peace but certainly there are talks and they are necessary for USA shaping its policy on the coming years in Middle East.
One last remark on Amr Moussa’s comment about the (peace talks):This round of Israeli-Palestinian talks will be the last !! wow Really did you have a vision about it?
it will be the last if the apocalypse is tomorrow for sure !!!