14 feb 2014
Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas is scheduled to meet on Sunday 270 Israeli youths representing Israeli parties and institutions as part of PA meetings with representatives of Israeli society in order to "discuss Palestinian view about the two-state solution and the achievement of peace."
Mohammad Madani, member of Fatah Central Committee and head of the Palestinian Committee for Interaction with the Israeli Society, said that this meeting aims to explain the Palestinian view on the proposals made to end the conflict.
More than 1,400 Israeli youths have asked to participate in this meeting, however the number has been reduced to reach 270 youths after conducting a draw, he explained.
During the meeting, Abbas is going to discuss the Palestinian perceptions to end the conflict and the two-state solution, and Palestinian demands regarding Jerusalem and refugees issues.
Mohammad Madani, member of Fatah Central Committee and head of the Palestinian Committee for Interaction with the Israeli Society, said that this meeting aims to explain the Palestinian view on the proposals made to end the conflict.
More than 1,400 Israeli youths have asked to participate in this meeting, however the number has been reduced to reach 270 youths after conducting a draw, he explained.
During the meeting, Abbas is going to discuss the Palestinian perceptions to end the conflict and the two-state solution, and Palestinian demands regarding Jerusalem and refugees issues.
President Barack Obama will launch a new round of Middle East diplomacy Friday in a plush oasis in the arid California desert, hosting a Valentine's Day summit with Jordan's King Abdullah II.
Obama and the king will swap the piles of snow in Washington for the Sunnylands retreat at the Annenberg estate in Palm Springs, to discuss issues including the pitiful torrent of refugees pouring into Jordan from Syria.
The meeting will be the first of a trio of meetings between Obama and key Middle East leaders in the coming weeks.
On March 3, the US president will sit down at the White House for his latest encounter with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has made no secret of his skepticism over an interim deal that Washington and other world powers reached with Iran on its nuclear program.
Then at the end of March, he will travel to Saudi Arabia, for what is likely to be a sharp personal reminder that Saudi King Abdullah shares Netanyahu's doubts about Obama's strategy of testing the sincerity of an Iranian diplomatic opening.
Obama and his royal guest will sit down in California just two days after the US president admitted that Syria was "crumbling," while his Director of National Intelligence James Clapper described the civil war-splintered country as an "apocalyptic disaster."
Jordan has borne the brunt of much of the humanitarian overflow -- nearly 600,000 Syrian refugees have now crossed its borders, straining its infrastructure and finances.
Obama has all but admitted that his policy is failing in the expressed US aim of sparking a political transition in Syria leading to the exit of President Bashar Assad.
But he frequently notes that the United States is the largest aid donor to Syrian refugees. Washington has so far donated $1.7 billion to the cause, according to the US Agency for International Development.
But there are no signs that the Obama administration believes that a new US policy -- or a change in its reluctance to either to do more to arm opposition rebels or to commit direct US military resources -- would bring an end to the crisis any closer.
Obama will also discuss US efforts to broker a settlement between Israelis and Palestinians with the Jordanian monarch, who strongly backs US efforts.
The president's decision to travel to California to meet King Abdullah has meant some uncomfortable moments on the hot-seat for his aides.
Reporters have darkly suggested that the president is using the meeting as an excuse to hunker down at the balmy resort -- which boasts a highly regarded golf course -- for the long President's Day weekend.
Abdullah has been in Washington for several days -- so could easily have met Obama already -- following his talks with Vice President Joe Biden and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and other officials.
The White House points out that before heading to the summit, Obama will tour efforts to mitigate a historic drought in Californian farmlands.
"The king is also going to go out to California. The president and the king can meet there and will meet there as part of this trip," White House spokesman Jay Carney said in evasive comments that hardly tamped down speculation about Obama's motives.
US presidents have often met foreign leaders outside Washington -- George W. Bush, for instance, often entertained dignitaries at his ranch in Texas.
Obama, who does not own a vacation property, often comes under political fire from Republican foes over his choice of vacation spot -- especially when it facilitates his love of golf.
Obama may welcome some informal time with Abdullah in a relaxed setting.
The two men have been friendly ever since the king drove then senator Obama to the airport in a silver Mercedes after dinner at one of his palaces in Amman a few months before the 2008 election.
But since then, they have mainly met in formal settings.
While Obama enjoys his stag weekend, his wife Michelle and daughters Malia and Sasha reportedly have their own mini-break planned elsewhere.
Presidents, including Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush have loved the links at Sunnylands since the 1960s.
The course is a nine-hole layout, but two sets of tees allow for a varied 18-hole round to a par of 72.
Obama will be making his second visit to the resort as president. Last year, he held an informal shirt-sleeves summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping, and stayed on for a few rounds of golf.
Obama and the king will swap the piles of snow in Washington for the Sunnylands retreat at the Annenberg estate in Palm Springs, to discuss issues including the pitiful torrent of refugees pouring into Jordan from Syria.
The meeting will be the first of a trio of meetings between Obama and key Middle East leaders in the coming weeks.
On March 3, the US president will sit down at the White House for his latest encounter with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who has made no secret of his skepticism over an interim deal that Washington and other world powers reached with Iran on its nuclear program.
Then at the end of March, he will travel to Saudi Arabia, for what is likely to be a sharp personal reminder that Saudi King Abdullah shares Netanyahu's doubts about Obama's strategy of testing the sincerity of an Iranian diplomatic opening.
Obama and his royal guest will sit down in California just two days after the US president admitted that Syria was "crumbling," while his Director of National Intelligence James Clapper described the civil war-splintered country as an "apocalyptic disaster."
Jordan has borne the brunt of much of the humanitarian overflow -- nearly 600,000 Syrian refugees have now crossed its borders, straining its infrastructure and finances.
Obama has all but admitted that his policy is failing in the expressed US aim of sparking a political transition in Syria leading to the exit of President Bashar Assad.
But he frequently notes that the United States is the largest aid donor to Syrian refugees. Washington has so far donated $1.7 billion to the cause, according to the US Agency for International Development.
But there are no signs that the Obama administration believes that a new US policy -- or a change in its reluctance to either to do more to arm opposition rebels or to commit direct US military resources -- would bring an end to the crisis any closer.
Obama will also discuss US efforts to broker a settlement between Israelis and Palestinians with the Jordanian monarch, who strongly backs US efforts.
The president's decision to travel to California to meet King Abdullah has meant some uncomfortable moments on the hot-seat for his aides.
Reporters have darkly suggested that the president is using the meeting as an excuse to hunker down at the balmy resort -- which boasts a highly regarded golf course -- for the long President's Day weekend.
Abdullah has been in Washington for several days -- so could easily have met Obama already -- following his talks with Vice President Joe Biden and Defense Secretary Chuck Hagel and other officials.
The White House points out that before heading to the summit, Obama will tour efforts to mitigate a historic drought in Californian farmlands.
"The king is also going to go out to California. The president and the king can meet there and will meet there as part of this trip," White House spokesman Jay Carney said in evasive comments that hardly tamped down speculation about Obama's motives.
US presidents have often met foreign leaders outside Washington -- George W. Bush, for instance, often entertained dignitaries at his ranch in Texas.
Obama, who does not own a vacation property, often comes under political fire from Republican foes over his choice of vacation spot -- especially when it facilitates his love of golf.
Obama may welcome some informal time with Abdullah in a relaxed setting.
The two men have been friendly ever since the king drove then senator Obama to the airport in a silver Mercedes after dinner at one of his palaces in Amman a few months before the 2008 election.
But since then, they have mainly met in formal settings.
While Obama enjoys his stag weekend, his wife Michelle and daughters Malia and Sasha reportedly have their own mini-break planned elsewhere.
Presidents, including Gerald Ford, Ronald Reagan and George H.W. Bush have loved the links at Sunnylands since the 1960s.
The course is a nine-hole layout, but two sets of tees allow for a varied 18-hole round to a par of 72.
Obama will be making his second visit to the resort as president. Last year, he held an informal shirt-sleeves summit with Chinese President Xi Jinping, and stayed on for a few rounds of golf.
by Daoud Kuttab
The seriousness of the U.S.-initiated framework for a possible solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem appears to have shaken dormant relations in the region, including in Jordan.
The Palestinian-Jordanian relationship, which is experiencing its highest degree of cooperation and mutual trust, is being put to the test.
The challenges facing this important relationship stem from identity issues that have plagued Jordan for decades but which have been pushed under the rug.
Jordanian politicians, pundits, journalists and even government officials are expressing different degrees of concern and worry regarding the aftermath of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry plan, even though information about the plan is very sketchy.
The potential of solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has resurrected badly needed discussion about political reform, which was delayed until the resolution of the Palestinian cause.
The refugee issue is perhaps the most important part of this discussion. Two million registered refugees in Jordan are the biggest single group of Palestinian refugees in the world. Their case is even more complicated by the fact that they are also full Jordanian citizens, though not equitably represented in Parliament as a result of large-scale gerrymandering.
Murmurings began on websites and social media, and from former Jordanian officials, including former prime minister Marouf Bakhit, who requested that a Jordanian representative attend the ongoing U.S.-led talks to ensure that Jordanian rights are preserved.
The issue of Palestinians in Jordan was also included in the discussions about the rights of Jordanian women to pass on citizenship to their children.
A promise by the government to a parliamentary coalition led by Madaba MP Mustafa Hamarneh to give civil rights to children of Jordanians provoked angry responses from East Bank Jordanians who fear that this will cause a shift in the sensitive demographics of Jordan.
Respected columnist Fahed Fanek picked up on the issue saying, without substantiation, that the idea of giving temporary or permanent passports to Palestinians caused the emptying of the West Bank.
The discussion, however, was further escalated when members of Parliament demanded a briefing from the government on the progress of the peace talks.
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriate Affairs Nasser Judeh gave a general briefing about Jordan's key interests in the peace talks, but this did not please the MPs who wanted more details.
Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour came to the podium and surprised parliamentarians by questioning the transparency of the Palestinian side vis-à-vis the Jordanian counterparts.
Ensour said that Jordanians are afraid of a Palestinian surprise, a hint to the fact that Jordan, like many others, was caught totally by surprise when the Oslo back channel produced the 1993 Israeli-Palestinian memorandum of understanding.
Although he praised Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, the media picked on Ensour's questioning of the Palestinian openness to Jordan.
Ensour's claim, however, was quickly responded to by Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Al Malki.
In an interview, portions of which were broadcast on Radio Al Balad in Amman, Malki insisted on the fact that Palestinians are totally open and transparent with Jordan.
He said that Palestinian president briefs His Majesty King Abdullah regularly and completely. However, Malki hinted to the possibility that the problem might be within Jordan.
"What the King chooses to relate to his government is not our business," he concluded.
Malki's statement on the radio produced some angry remarks from some Jordanians.
Former head of the Royal Court, Riyad Abu Karaki, wrote on his Facebook page that Malki's statements were inappropriate.
He used the Arabic word "eib" (shame) to describe the hints at the disconnect between the palace and the government.
There is no doubt that the national identity issues confronting Jordanians if and when the Palestinian issue is resolved are daunting.
Real political reform and an equitable share to all citizens, which has been postponed for years, will not be justified any further.
While the late King Hussein's memorable quote that Jordan is for its citizens, irrespective of origin, remains the guiding principle for the way forward, many fear that the interests of some Jordanians who have benefited from the central government for decades will be washed away once the need for equity among all citizens become the rule.
The seriousness of the U.S.-initiated framework for a possible solution to the Israeli-Palestinian problem appears to have shaken dormant relations in the region, including in Jordan.
The Palestinian-Jordanian relationship, which is experiencing its highest degree of cooperation and mutual trust, is being put to the test.
The challenges facing this important relationship stem from identity issues that have plagued Jordan for decades but which have been pushed under the rug.
Jordanian politicians, pundits, journalists and even government officials are expressing different degrees of concern and worry regarding the aftermath of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry plan, even though information about the plan is very sketchy.
The potential of solving the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has resurrected badly needed discussion about political reform, which was delayed until the resolution of the Palestinian cause.
The refugee issue is perhaps the most important part of this discussion. Two million registered refugees in Jordan are the biggest single group of Palestinian refugees in the world. Their case is even more complicated by the fact that they are also full Jordanian citizens, though not equitably represented in Parliament as a result of large-scale gerrymandering.
Murmurings began on websites and social media, and from former Jordanian officials, including former prime minister Marouf Bakhit, who requested that a Jordanian representative attend the ongoing U.S.-led talks to ensure that Jordanian rights are preserved.
The issue of Palestinians in Jordan was also included in the discussions about the rights of Jordanian women to pass on citizenship to their children.
A promise by the government to a parliamentary coalition led by Madaba MP Mustafa Hamarneh to give civil rights to children of Jordanians provoked angry responses from East Bank Jordanians who fear that this will cause a shift in the sensitive demographics of Jordan.
Respected columnist Fahed Fanek picked up on the issue saying, without substantiation, that the idea of giving temporary or permanent passports to Palestinians caused the emptying of the West Bank.
The discussion, however, was further escalated when members of Parliament demanded a briefing from the government on the progress of the peace talks.
Minister of Foreign Affairs and Expatriate Affairs Nasser Judeh gave a general briefing about Jordan's key interests in the peace talks, but this did not please the MPs who wanted more details.
Prime Minister Abdullah Ensour came to the podium and surprised parliamentarians by questioning the transparency of the Palestinian side vis-à-vis the Jordanian counterparts.
Ensour said that Jordanians are afraid of a Palestinian surprise, a hint to the fact that Jordan, like many others, was caught totally by surprise when the Oslo back channel produced the 1993 Israeli-Palestinian memorandum of understanding.
Although he praised Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, the media picked on Ensour's questioning of the Palestinian openness to Jordan.
Ensour's claim, however, was quickly responded to by Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad Al Malki.
In an interview, portions of which were broadcast on Radio Al Balad in Amman, Malki insisted on the fact that Palestinians are totally open and transparent with Jordan.
He said that Palestinian president briefs His Majesty King Abdullah regularly and completely. However, Malki hinted to the possibility that the problem might be within Jordan.
"What the King chooses to relate to his government is not our business," he concluded.
Malki's statement on the radio produced some angry remarks from some Jordanians.
Former head of the Royal Court, Riyad Abu Karaki, wrote on his Facebook page that Malki's statements were inappropriate.
He used the Arabic word "eib" (shame) to describe the hints at the disconnect between the palace and the government.
There is no doubt that the national identity issues confronting Jordanians if and when the Palestinian issue is resolved are daunting.
Real political reform and an equitable share to all citizens, which has been postponed for years, will not be justified any further.
While the late King Hussein's memorable quote that Jordan is for its citizens, irrespective of origin, remains the guiding principle for the way forward, many fear that the interests of some Jordanians who have benefited from the central government for decades will be washed away once the need for equity among all citizens become the rule.
Right wing Israelis march from the Jewish settlement of Maale Adumim to the controversial West Bank area known as E1, on Feb. 13, 2014
Thousands of young Israeli hardliners marched on Thursday to demand the government build new settler homes in E1, a highly sensitive strip of West Bank land near Jerusalem.
Police said more than 6,000 people, including major Israeli political figures but composed mostly of teenagers, joined the march which began in Maale Adumim settlement in the occupied West Bank and ended at E1 -- an undeveloped stretch of land just to the west, which borders annexed East Jerusalem.
"Kerry = persona non grata," read one of the signs, referring to US Secretary of State John Kerry, who is currently trying to coax Israel and the Palestinians towards a peace agreement.
Israel has been planning construction in E1 since the early 1990s but nothing has ever been built there due to heavy international pressure. Plans for building 1,200 units unveiled in December 2012 were quickly put on the back burner after the announcement triggered a major diplomatic backlash.
The Palestinians say construction in E1 would effectively cut the West Bank in two and prevent the creation of a contiguous Palestinian state.
"We will keep (the) promise to build in E1," Housing Minister Uri Ariel told a crowd composed almost entirely of high-schoolers.
Last April, Ariel, who belongs to the far-right national religious Jewish Home party, pledged to build new apartments in E1 within 18 months.
The demonstration came hours after a Palestinian protest on the site in opposition to Israeli settlement construction in E1. That protest was held in anticipation of the Israeli right wing protest, and Israeli forces detained one activist during the demonstration.
In January 2013, a group of more than 200 Palestinian activists had set up a protest encampment called Bab al-Shams in E1 as a way of drawing attention to Israel's plans to settle there.
Israel and Palestinians began a nine-month track of direct peace talks at Kerry's urging in July 2013, but there has been little visible sign of progress.
Kerry, who has repeatedly come under fire from Israeli hardliners in recent weeks, is currently focusing his efforts on hammering out a framework agreement which would allow for the talks to be extended, likely until the end of the year.
In late 2012, the Israeli government announced plans to build hundreds of settler homes in the E1 corridor after Palestine was granted non-member observer state status at the United Nations. Those plans were later frozen, but never completely shelved.
Israeli settlement construction in E1 would divide the West Bank in two and make the creation of a contiguous Palestinian state -- as envisaged by the internationally backed two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict -- virtually impossible.
Thousands of young Israeli hardliners marched on Thursday to demand the government build new settler homes in E1, a highly sensitive strip of West Bank land near Jerusalem.
Police said more than 6,000 people, including major Israeli political figures but composed mostly of teenagers, joined the march which began in Maale Adumim settlement in the occupied West Bank and ended at E1 -- an undeveloped stretch of land just to the west, which borders annexed East Jerusalem.
"Kerry = persona non grata," read one of the signs, referring to US Secretary of State John Kerry, who is currently trying to coax Israel and the Palestinians towards a peace agreement.
Israel has been planning construction in E1 since the early 1990s but nothing has ever been built there due to heavy international pressure. Plans for building 1,200 units unveiled in December 2012 were quickly put on the back burner after the announcement triggered a major diplomatic backlash.
The Palestinians say construction in E1 would effectively cut the West Bank in two and prevent the creation of a contiguous Palestinian state.
"We will keep (the) promise to build in E1," Housing Minister Uri Ariel told a crowd composed almost entirely of high-schoolers.
Last April, Ariel, who belongs to the far-right national religious Jewish Home party, pledged to build new apartments in E1 within 18 months.
The demonstration came hours after a Palestinian protest on the site in opposition to Israeli settlement construction in E1. That protest was held in anticipation of the Israeli right wing protest, and Israeli forces detained one activist during the demonstration.
In January 2013, a group of more than 200 Palestinian activists had set up a protest encampment called Bab al-Shams in E1 as a way of drawing attention to Israel's plans to settle there.
Israel and Palestinians began a nine-month track of direct peace talks at Kerry's urging in July 2013, but there has been little visible sign of progress.
Kerry, who has repeatedly come under fire from Israeli hardliners in recent weeks, is currently focusing his efforts on hammering out a framework agreement which would allow for the talks to be extended, likely until the end of the year.
In late 2012, the Israeli government announced plans to build hundreds of settler homes in the E1 corridor after Palestine was granted non-member observer state status at the United Nations. Those plans were later frozen, but never completely shelved.
Israeli settlement construction in E1 would divide the West Bank in two and make the creation of a contiguous Palestinian state -- as envisaged by the internationally backed two-state solution to the Palestinian-Israeli conflict -- virtually impossible.
Representatives of various Palestinian political parties held a meeting on Thursday evening in Gaza to discuss negotiations and national reconciliation.
Palestinian People's Party lawmaker Bassam al-Salhi briefed the representatives on the possible results of the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations during the meeting, and revealed the details of a letter he sent to President Mahmoud Abbas in this regard.
Al-Salhi said the letter included six main principles that should be upheld including preserving a state within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, the refusal of any Israeli presence on Palestinian lands, the release all Palestinian prisoner from Israeli jails, and ensuring a fair resolution issue of the refugees' right of return.
Fatah spokesman Fayiz Abu Aita said that there is an unanimity over the importance of achieving national reconciliation between the national factions, and on called Hamas to accept Fatah's recent initiative in order to push reconciliation forward.
The meeting comes amid ongoing unity talks between the two main Palestinian factions, Hamas and Fatah.
The division between the two Palestinian factions began in 2006, when Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections.
In the following year, clashes erupted between Fatah and Hamas, leaving Hamas in control of the Strip and Fatah in control of parts of the occupied West Bank.
The groups have made failed attempts at national reconciliation for years, most recently in 2012, when they signed two agreements -- one in Cairo and a subsequent one in Doha -- which have as of yet been entirely unimplemented.
Palestinian People's Party lawmaker Bassam al-Salhi briefed the representatives on the possible results of the Palestinian-Israeli negotiations during the meeting, and revealed the details of a letter he sent to President Mahmoud Abbas in this regard.
Al-Salhi said the letter included six main principles that should be upheld including preserving a state within the 1967 borders with East Jerusalem as its capital, the refusal of any Israeli presence on Palestinian lands, the release all Palestinian prisoner from Israeli jails, and ensuring a fair resolution issue of the refugees' right of return.
Fatah spokesman Fayiz Abu Aita said that there is an unanimity over the importance of achieving national reconciliation between the national factions, and on called Hamas to accept Fatah's recent initiative in order to push reconciliation forward.
The meeting comes amid ongoing unity talks between the two main Palestinian factions, Hamas and Fatah.
The division between the two Palestinian factions began in 2006, when Hamas won the Palestinian legislative elections.
In the following year, clashes erupted between Fatah and Hamas, leaving Hamas in control of the Strip and Fatah in control of parts of the occupied West Bank.
The groups have made failed attempts at national reconciliation for years, most recently in 2012, when they signed two agreements -- one in Cairo and a subsequent one in Doha -- which have as of yet been entirely unimplemented.
13 feb 2014
They [Israeli's] don't want to withdraw from the land they acquired by force in 1967 and have occupied and colonised ever since. The settlements give the game away; Israel wants all of the West Bank. If Mahmoud Abbas hasn't smelt the coffee by now, he never will
Soon after the signing of the Wye River Agreement in 1998 Israel's minister of infrastructure in the first Netanyahu government, the late, unlamented Ariel Sharon, urged settlers to "seize the hilltops". What followed was an explosion of Israeli settlements across the occupied West Bank. Sixteen years on, as US Secretary of State John Kerry makes another push for an agreement on his peace plan, Israel has again ratcheted up its land-grabbing campaign.
The political and humanitarian consequences are countless and far-reaching. Politically, Secretary Kerry's ambition to have a final agreement within nine months was, from the very beginning, unrealistic. Now in the wake of Israel's continued pillage of Palestinian land he is said to be considering a deferral until the end of 2014. Fixing ad hoc dates that are divorced from reality can, however, be dangerously deceptive and misleading.
It is one thing to "mediate" from the comfort zone of a hotel in Jerusalem or an office in Ramallah; it is quite a different matter to experience first-hand what it means to be a Palestinian in a village wrecked by Israeli demolitions. Thus, it seems quite reasonable that Mr Kerry should, on his next visit to the occupied territories, trek to the outskirts of Ramallah, Hebron and Bethlehem and witness for himself the damage done to Palestinian agricultural land by the settlers in their hideous race against the agreement clock.
Such a direct encounter with the "facts on the ground" would, within minutes, confirm that peace cannot be imposed from above, especially in this poisoned climate. Indeed, in the same way that the secretary state had the vision to send his assistant, Victoria Nuland, to Kiev's Independence Square to show solidarity with protesters, he could also ask her to visit the occupied territories and accompany the US-made bulldozers as they wreak havoc and destruction in Palestinian villages.
The obvious difference between the two scenarios is that whereas the protesters who brave the cold in Kiev chose to do so, the Palestinians who sleep out in parts of Jerusalem do not do so voluntarily. They were evicted forcibly from their homes.
For the hundreds of victims who spent years working and saving to provide homes for their loved ones, the impact of their demolition in unimaginable. Spare a thought for their wellbeing and the future of their children. In many cases they have suffered multiple evictions and displacements. Inevitably, the convenient official explanation is always that the Palestinians had no licence to build or that the demolition was done to protect Israel's security and the security of its citizens.
Of course, this systematic destruction of homes could not take place without the approval of the Israeli government and by association the indifference of the US. In 2013 there was a 127 per cent increase in the number of demolitions in the Jordan Valley compared to 2012 (from 172 demolished structures to 390); the Bedouin and herding communities in the Negev and Jordan Valley were the worst affected. Already, the pattern has continued into 2014 with demolitions taking place at an alarming rate in Al-Jiftlik Al-Mustafa (Jericho), Ein El-Hilweh in the northern Jordan Valley and Jabal Al-Mukabbir in Jerusalem.
Like ostriches with their heads buried in the sand, none of the parties involved in the current "negotiations" are willing to admit that Israel does not recognise the Palestinian people or their rights. In fact, most members of the present Israeli government believe that all of the land, from the river to the sea, is the Land of Israel. Furthermore, they view the West Bank as a crucial source of water. That is why, throughout all negotiations, including Camp David with the Egyptians, they have always insisted that no agreement should enable the Palestinians to dig wells in the western, northern and eastern slopes of the West Bank because it will impact negatively on the Israeli wells along the Green Line inside Israel. At present, Israel accesses 90 per cent of the water from the West Bank.
Since the French Socialist Jean Glavany MP published his report on the theft of Palestinian water two years ago nothing has changed. If anything, they have got worse. Back then Glaveny pointed out that water had become "a weapon serving the new apartheid". To illustrate his view he noted that, "Some 450,000 Israeli settlers on the West Bank use more water than the 2.3 million Palestinians that live there." While in Israel the consumption is 266 litres per person per day, in the occupied territories the average is no more than 15 litres per person per day.
Despite the reports in the Israeli media that Mr Kerry has accepted most of Netanyahu's demands, the latter is still stuck in the past, pursuing the same policy that he endorsed through Sharon in 1998. The proliferation of settlements and attendant destruction of Palestinian homes is simply his way for sabotaging Kerry's efforts. The latter must surely be asking himself: what do the Israelis really want? The truth is that many of them don't know themselves. What is well known, though, is that they don't want to withdraw from the land they acquired by force in 1967 and have occupied and colonised ever since. The settlements give the game away; Israel wants all of the West Bank. If Mahmoud Abbas hasn't smelt the coffee by now, he never will.
Soon after the signing of the Wye River Agreement in 1998 Israel's minister of infrastructure in the first Netanyahu government, the late, unlamented Ariel Sharon, urged settlers to "seize the hilltops". What followed was an explosion of Israeli settlements across the occupied West Bank. Sixteen years on, as US Secretary of State John Kerry makes another push for an agreement on his peace plan, Israel has again ratcheted up its land-grabbing campaign.
The political and humanitarian consequences are countless and far-reaching. Politically, Secretary Kerry's ambition to have a final agreement within nine months was, from the very beginning, unrealistic. Now in the wake of Israel's continued pillage of Palestinian land he is said to be considering a deferral until the end of 2014. Fixing ad hoc dates that are divorced from reality can, however, be dangerously deceptive and misleading.
It is one thing to "mediate" from the comfort zone of a hotel in Jerusalem or an office in Ramallah; it is quite a different matter to experience first-hand what it means to be a Palestinian in a village wrecked by Israeli demolitions. Thus, it seems quite reasonable that Mr Kerry should, on his next visit to the occupied territories, trek to the outskirts of Ramallah, Hebron and Bethlehem and witness for himself the damage done to Palestinian agricultural land by the settlers in their hideous race against the agreement clock.
Such a direct encounter with the "facts on the ground" would, within minutes, confirm that peace cannot be imposed from above, especially in this poisoned climate. Indeed, in the same way that the secretary state had the vision to send his assistant, Victoria Nuland, to Kiev's Independence Square to show solidarity with protesters, he could also ask her to visit the occupied territories and accompany the US-made bulldozers as they wreak havoc and destruction in Palestinian villages.
The obvious difference between the two scenarios is that whereas the protesters who brave the cold in Kiev chose to do so, the Palestinians who sleep out in parts of Jerusalem do not do so voluntarily. They were evicted forcibly from their homes.
For the hundreds of victims who spent years working and saving to provide homes for their loved ones, the impact of their demolition in unimaginable. Spare a thought for their wellbeing and the future of their children. In many cases they have suffered multiple evictions and displacements. Inevitably, the convenient official explanation is always that the Palestinians had no licence to build or that the demolition was done to protect Israel's security and the security of its citizens.
Of course, this systematic destruction of homes could not take place without the approval of the Israeli government and by association the indifference of the US. In 2013 there was a 127 per cent increase in the number of demolitions in the Jordan Valley compared to 2012 (from 172 demolished structures to 390); the Bedouin and herding communities in the Negev and Jordan Valley were the worst affected. Already, the pattern has continued into 2014 with demolitions taking place at an alarming rate in Al-Jiftlik Al-Mustafa (Jericho), Ein El-Hilweh in the northern Jordan Valley and Jabal Al-Mukabbir in Jerusalem.
Like ostriches with their heads buried in the sand, none of the parties involved in the current "negotiations" are willing to admit that Israel does not recognise the Palestinian people or their rights. In fact, most members of the present Israeli government believe that all of the land, from the river to the sea, is the Land of Israel. Furthermore, they view the West Bank as a crucial source of water. That is why, throughout all negotiations, including Camp David with the Egyptians, they have always insisted that no agreement should enable the Palestinians to dig wells in the western, northern and eastern slopes of the West Bank because it will impact negatively on the Israeli wells along the Green Line inside Israel. At present, Israel accesses 90 per cent of the water from the West Bank.
Since the French Socialist Jean Glavany MP published his report on the theft of Palestinian water two years ago nothing has changed. If anything, they have got worse. Back then Glaveny pointed out that water had become "a weapon serving the new apartheid". To illustrate his view he noted that, "Some 450,000 Israeli settlers on the West Bank use more water than the 2.3 million Palestinians that live there." While in Israel the consumption is 266 litres per person per day, in the occupied territories the average is no more than 15 litres per person per day.
Despite the reports in the Israeli media that Mr Kerry has accepted most of Netanyahu's demands, the latter is still stuck in the past, pursuing the same policy that he endorsed through Sharon in 1998. The proliferation of settlements and attendant destruction of Palestinian homes is simply his way for sabotaging Kerry's efforts. The latter must surely be asking himself: what do the Israelis really want? The truth is that many of them don't know themselves. What is well known, though, is that they don't want to withdraw from the land they acquired by force in 1967 and have occupied and colonised ever since. The settlements give the game away; Israel wants all of the West Bank. If Mahmoud Abbas hasn't smelt the coffee by now, he never will.
The Palestinians cannot reach a peace agreement with the current Israeli government or even with a future government because there is currently an imbalance between the two sides of the conflict, a Fatah official said on Thursday.
Member of Fatah Central Committee Tawfiq Tirawi told a Ma'an reporter in Ramallah Thursday that "negotiations can reveal to the world that the Palestinians are seeking peace, but that the occupation (regime) doesn't want it."
"Our just cause has the power of right, but we have never used this right," he added.
He explained that the Palestinians need to take advantage of the rights they are entitled to either take their case to the United Nations or to organize popular resistance activities. He stressed that these activities would support Palestinian negotiators and help them achieve better results.
The Israelis can reach a peace agreement, Tirawi said, "but they do not want to because according to their religious beliefs, this land belongs to them, which is neither real nor true."
Tirawi pointed out that negotiations are a means of resistance and it could be the weakest of all means. However, it is still a means to defy the occupier and prove to the world that "this occupation along with its American supporters are arrogant."
He added that Israel is occupying the land and people of Palestine and is practicing oppressive and aggressive acts against them.
"Negotiations can reveal to the world that the Palestinians are seeking peace, but that the occupation (regime) doesn't want it."
Commenting on the security pretexts Israel repeatedly cites, Tirawi said it is the Palestinians not the Israelis who should be worried about their security, because Israel possesses all types of weapons, while the Palestinians are seeking to establish a demilitarized state.
Direct negotiations began in July between Israel and the Palestinians in a US-led attempt to restart the deadlocked peace process. Israel has announced plans to build thousands of homes in illegal settlements across the West Bank over the course of the talks, inhibiting US efforts.
The Palestinian negotiating team resigned in protest against continued Israeli settlement construction in mid-November, dealing a major blow to negotiations between Israel and the PLO that had already been stalled.
The internationally recognized Palestinian territories of which the West Bank and East Jerusalem form a part have been occupied by the Israeli military since 1967.
Member of Fatah Central Committee Tawfiq Tirawi told a Ma'an reporter in Ramallah Thursday that "negotiations can reveal to the world that the Palestinians are seeking peace, but that the occupation (regime) doesn't want it."
"Our just cause has the power of right, but we have never used this right," he added.
He explained that the Palestinians need to take advantage of the rights they are entitled to either take their case to the United Nations or to organize popular resistance activities. He stressed that these activities would support Palestinian negotiators and help them achieve better results.
The Israelis can reach a peace agreement, Tirawi said, "but they do not want to because according to their religious beliefs, this land belongs to them, which is neither real nor true."
Tirawi pointed out that negotiations are a means of resistance and it could be the weakest of all means. However, it is still a means to defy the occupier and prove to the world that "this occupation along with its American supporters are arrogant."
He added that Israel is occupying the land and people of Palestine and is practicing oppressive and aggressive acts against them.
"Negotiations can reveal to the world that the Palestinians are seeking peace, but that the occupation (regime) doesn't want it."
Commenting on the security pretexts Israel repeatedly cites, Tirawi said it is the Palestinians not the Israelis who should be worried about their security, because Israel possesses all types of weapons, while the Palestinians are seeking to establish a demilitarized state.
Direct negotiations began in July between Israel and the Palestinians in a US-led attempt to restart the deadlocked peace process. Israel has announced plans to build thousands of homes in illegal settlements across the West Bank over the course of the talks, inhibiting US efforts.
The Palestinian negotiating team resigned in protest against continued Israeli settlement construction in mid-November, dealing a major blow to negotiations between Israel and the PLO that had already been stalled.
The internationally recognized Palestinian territories of which the West Bank and East Jerusalem form a part have been occupied by the Israeli military since 1967.
Member of Hamas' political bureau Ezzat Al-Resheq reiterated his Movement's rejection of any plan detracting from the Palestinian people's right to have an independent state on the whole Palestinian soil with Jerusalem as its capital. In press remarks to Al-Risala newspaper, Resheq described Kerry's framework plan as nonviable and grossly biased in favor of Israel.
The Hamas official warned of the PA's persistence in getting along with the US biased positions, although there is a clear Palestinian consensus dismissive of Kerry's plan and proposals.
He expressed his belief that nothing new would come from the US mediator because of Israel's intransigence and its ongoing crime against the Palestinian people.
Resheq underlined that any Palestinian intent to recognize Israel as a Jewish state poses a strategic threat to the Palestinians in the 1948 occupied lands and the entire Palestinian rights.
The Hamas official urged the Palestinian people to necessarily move against Kerry's framework plan and prevent any possible liquidation of their national rights and cause.
The Hamas official warned of the PA's persistence in getting along with the US biased positions, although there is a clear Palestinian consensus dismissive of Kerry's plan and proposals.
He expressed his belief that nothing new would come from the US mediator because of Israel's intransigence and its ongoing crime against the Palestinian people.
Resheq underlined that any Palestinian intent to recognize Israel as a Jewish state poses a strategic threat to the Palestinians in the 1948 occupied lands and the entire Palestinian rights.
The Hamas official urged the Palestinian people to necessarily move against Kerry's framework plan and prevent any possible liquidation of their national rights and cause.
Palestinian and Israeli civil liaison departments reached a deal on Thursday to allow patients from Gaza to enter Israel for medical treatment after earlier being denied access because their referral letters contained the "State of Palestine" logo.
Palestinian officials told Ma'an that the official met Wednesday afternoon at the Erez crossing to try to find a temporary solution for patients seeking medical care.
A deal was reached to cross out the the words "State of Palestine" on all official referral letters in order to allow patients entry to Israel, the officials said.
Over 190 patients were eventually allowed to cross into Israel and travel to the West Bank for medical treatment after the logo was blurred out.
On Wednesday, Seventy patients who were scheduled to travel to the West Bank via the Erez crossing for treatment were denied entry because they presented documents including the "State of Palestine" on the letterheads.
"This is a political decision from the Israelis to exert pressure in the negotiations," a senior Palestinian official at the Gaza district coordination office said.
A spokesman for COGAT, the Israeli defense ministry unit responsible for coordinating civilian affairs in the Palestinian territories, confirmed that the permits had been refused because they were submitted on stationary bearing the problematic logo.
The PLO declared independence unilaterally in 1988 and was recognized as a "non-member observer state" by the United Nations in 2012.
More than 130 countries today recognize Palestine's existence as a state, but Israel refuses to do so.
Palestinian officials told Ma'an that the official met Wednesday afternoon at the Erez crossing to try to find a temporary solution for patients seeking medical care.
A deal was reached to cross out the the words "State of Palestine" on all official referral letters in order to allow patients entry to Israel, the officials said.
Over 190 patients were eventually allowed to cross into Israel and travel to the West Bank for medical treatment after the logo was blurred out.
On Wednesday, Seventy patients who were scheduled to travel to the West Bank via the Erez crossing for treatment were denied entry because they presented documents including the "State of Palestine" on the letterheads.
"This is a political decision from the Israelis to exert pressure in the negotiations," a senior Palestinian official at the Gaza district coordination office said.
A spokesman for COGAT, the Israeli defense ministry unit responsible for coordinating civilian affairs in the Palestinian territories, confirmed that the permits had been refused because they were submitted on stationary bearing the problematic logo.
The PLO declared independence unilaterally in 1988 and was recognized as a "non-member observer state" by the United Nations in 2012.
More than 130 countries today recognize Palestine's existence as a state, but Israel refuses to do so.
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas sent out a list of “red line” requirements for a peace deal with Israel, preempting an American-forged agreement that was supposed to take shape in the next few weeks. Among the red lines: Israel must withdraw “from all Palestinian territories occupied in 1967” within the next three or four years, Abbas spokesman Nabil Abu Rudeineh told the Times of Israel.
Another requirement is that East Jerusalem must be recognized as the official capital of the Palestinian state. Without these concessions, Mr. Abbas vowed no peace deal could be forged, the Times of Israel reported. His list, which came amid a U.S. effort to broker a peace deal with terms satisfactory to both the PA and Israel, was sent to the key leaders in the Middle East and to President Obama.
“These are the red lines of the Palestinian position, since without these principles there can be no just and comprehensive peace in the region,” Mr. Rudeineh told the Times of Israel. The four-year withdrawal deadline is a year earlier than what Mr. Abbas agreed to in early February, when he was quoted in a New York Times article as saying the Israelis would have five years to withdraw.
Mr. Abbas also called for a three-year withdrawal deadline for Israel in a televised interview in Tel Aviv shortly before the New York Times published his statement, the Times reported.
Source: The Washington Times.
Another requirement is that East Jerusalem must be recognized as the official capital of the Palestinian state. Without these concessions, Mr. Abbas vowed no peace deal could be forged, the Times of Israel reported. His list, which came amid a U.S. effort to broker a peace deal with terms satisfactory to both the PA and Israel, was sent to the key leaders in the Middle East and to President Obama.
“These are the red lines of the Palestinian position, since without these principles there can be no just and comprehensive peace in the region,” Mr. Rudeineh told the Times of Israel. The four-year withdrawal deadline is a year earlier than what Mr. Abbas agreed to in early February, when he was quoted in a New York Times article as saying the Israelis would have five years to withdraw.
Mr. Abbas also called for a three-year withdrawal deadline for Israel in a televised interview in Tel Aviv shortly before the New York Times published his statement, the Times reported.
Source: The Washington Times.
12 feb 2014
Ultra-Orthodox Jewish youths wait for the body of Rabbi Ovadia Yosef, spiritual leader of the ultra-religious Shas political party, to be brought to a seminary before his funeral in Jerusalem on Oct. 7, 2013
Jerusalem's Israeli planning committee moved forwards on Wednesday with plans to build a nine-story Jewish seminary in the heart of a densely-populated Palestinian neighborhood near the Old City in occupied East Jerusalem.
Plans for the new tower block, to be built in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem, were deposited for consultation, giving the public 60 days to submit any objections, settlement watchdog Peace Now said.
"It's a plan for a nine-story, ultra-Orthodox yeshiva in Sheikh Jarrah which was deposited today for objections," spokesman Lior Amihai told AFP.
"The plan was supposed to be discussed and approved a few weeks ago, however it was postponed -- most probably due to political reasons," he said.
"It's not a game changer but it's on a piece of land in Sheikh Jarrah which has already suffered a lot. It's a very sensitive area and I think the prime minister knows it."
Sheikh Jarrah is a Palestinian residential neighborhood located to the north of the Old City that has seen repeated attempts by Jewish settlers to evict local residents.
The area, which is home to around 2,700 Palestinians, includes well-known landmarks, such as Orient House, the American Colony Hotel and the Palestinian National Theater, as well as many consular missions.
Located on the road which links the Old City to Mount Scopus, the area is considered a strategic location and settlement groups have made persistent efforts to take control of its land.
Israel occupied East Jerusalem during the Six-Day War of 1967 and later annexed it in a move never recognized by the international community.
It considers all of Jerusalem its "eternal, indivisible" capital and does not see construction in the eastern sector as settlement building.
The Palestinians want East Jerusalem as capital of their promised state, which is currently being discussed in US-led negotiations with Israel that are struggling to make headway ahead of an April deadline.
Both the Palestinians and the international community consider all Israel construction on land seized in 1967 to be a violation of international law.
Jewish school approved to be built in east Jerusalem
Planning and Construction Committee of Jerusalem District on Wednesday approved a plan to build a religious school in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in occupied east Jerusalem. The decision came in spite of the recommendations made by Civil Administration that the building would not serve the local population.
Hebrew daily Haaretz reported that the building consists of nine above and three under-ground storeys, including a religious school, accommodation and other facilities.
"The land earmarked for the building is a state property allocated by the Israel-controlled Jerusalem municipality for the school construction, although the place is structurally designed for the establishment a playground for educational institutions in the neighborhood." the daily said.
Jerusalem's Israeli planning committee moved forwards on Wednesday with plans to build a nine-story Jewish seminary in the heart of a densely-populated Palestinian neighborhood near the Old City in occupied East Jerusalem.
Plans for the new tower block, to be built in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood of East Jerusalem, were deposited for consultation, giving the public 60 days to submit any objections, settlement watchdog Peace Now said.
"It's a plan for a nine-story, ultra-Orthodox yeshiva in Sheikh Jarrah which was deposited today for objections," spokesman Lior Amihai told AFP.
"The plan was supposed to be discussed and approved a few weeks ago, however it was postponed -- most probably due to political reasons," he said.
"It's not a game changer but it's on a piece of land in Sheikh Jarrah which has already suffered a lot. It's a very sensitive area and I think the prime minister knows it."
Sheikh Jarrah is a Palestinian residential neighborhood located to the north of the Old City that has seen repeated attempts by Jewish settlers to evict local residents.
The area, which is home to around 2,700 Palestinians, includes well-known landmarks, such as Orient House, the American Colony Hotel and the Palestinian National Theater, as well as many consular missions.
Located on the road which links the Old City to Mount Scopus, the area is considered a strategic location and settlement groups have made persistent efforts to take control of its land.
Israel occupied East Jerusalem during the Six-Day War of 1967 and later annexed it in a move never recognized by the international community.
It considers all of Jerusalem its "eternal, indivisible" capital and does not see construction in the eastern sector as settlement building.
The Palestinians want East Jerusalem as capital of their promised state, which is currently being discussed in US-led negotiations with Israel that are struggling to make headway ahead of an April deadline.
Both the Palestinians and the international community consider all Israel construction on land seized in 1967 to be a violation of international law.
Jewish school approved to be built in east Jerusalem
Planning and Construction Committee of Jerusalem District on Wednesday approved a plan to build a religious school in the Sheikh Jarrah neighborhood in occupied east Jerusalem. The decision came in spite of the recommendations made by Civil Administration that the building would not serve the local population.
Hebrew daily Haaretz reported that the building consists of nine above and three under-ground storeys, including a religious school, accommodation and other facilities.
"The land earmarked for the building is a state property allocated by the Israel-controlled Jerusalem municipality for the school construction, although the place is structurally designed for the establishment a playground for educational institutions in the neighborhood." the daily said.
11 feb 2014
Palestinian chief negotiator Saeb Erekat expected that Israel would launch an offensive against Gaza to frustrate Kerry’s peace plan with the Palestinian Authority. Erekat said in a statement to Chinese news agency “Xinhua” that Israeli prime minister ordered to intensify raids into al-Aqsa Mosque compound to frustrate Kerry’s peace plan.
“If Netanyahu believes that Kerry’s plan is an internationally accepted plan on the basis of international law, he will stage a war against Gaza to fail it” Erekat added.
Erekat described the recent Israeli threats against Gaza as dangerous, calling the international community to draw attention to the besieged territory and what may happen to it.
Regarding Kerry’s framework expected to be announced, Erekat said it has yet to come out and that the Palestinian side is committed to his positions on the peace process based on the international law.
Since the late December 2013, Israeli military has escalated its operations against Gaza, carrying out several airstrikes and assassinations which killed six Palestinians and injured dozens of citizens.
Israeli senior officials repeatedly threatened to attack Gaza in recent days.
“If Netanyahu believes that Kerry’s plan is an internationally accepted plan on the basis of international law, he will stage a war against Gaza to fail it” Erekat added.
Erekat described the recent Israeli threats against Gaza as dangerous, calling the international community to draw attention to the besieged territory and what may happen to it.
Regarding Kerry’s framework expected to be announced, Erekat said it has yet to come out and that the Palestinian side is committed to his positions on the peace process based on the international law.
Since the late December 2013, Israeli military has escalated its operations against Gaza, carrying out several airstrikes and assassinations which killed six Palestinians and injured dozens of citizens.
Israeli senior officials repeatedly threatened to attack Gaza in recent days.
The Hebrew radio said on Tuesday that the US-drafted framework agreement to be signed between the Palestinian Authority (PA) and Israel includes a Palestinian recognition of the Jewish state. According to the radio, Kerry's plan is based on reciprocity between a state for the Jewish people and a state for the Palestinian people.
The agreement also includes land swaps based on the 1967 lines and the demographic changes that have taken place on the ground over the past decades.
The security arrangements in the Jordan Valley, and no right of return to the Jewish state for Palestinian refugees and their descendants are stipulated as well by the agreement.
Israeli chief negotiator Tzipi Livni had also alluded recently to possible Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.
The agreement also includes land swaps based on the 1967 lines and the demographic changes that have taken place on the ground over the past decades.
The security arrangements in the Jordan Valley, and no right of return to the Jewish state for Palestinian refugees and their descendants are stipulated as well by the agreement.
Israeli chief negotiator Tzipi Livni had also alluded recently to possible Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Jewish state.
10 feb 2014
International peace activists hold posters in Jerusalem calling for a boycott of Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with three of his top ministers to discuss ways to deal with the threat of economic boycotts against Israel, media reported Monday.
The meeting on Sunday night was attended by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, Economy Minister Naftali Bennett and Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz, the reports said.
The meeting comes less than a fortnight after US Secretary of State John Kerry warned that Israel was facing a growing campaign of delegitimisation which could worsen if peace talks with the PLO collapsed.
Maariv newspaper noted that Justice Minister Tzipi Livni and Finance Minister Yair Lapid, who echoed Kerry's sentiment in recent remarks, were not invited to Sunday's meeting.
Israeli officials have refused to comment on the reports.
A growing number of governments and international businesses have said they will not trade with Israeli firms with ties to illegal settlements, highlighting the creeping success of a Palestinian-led boycott campaign.
The BDS movement -- boycott, divestment and sanctions -- works to convince governments, businesses and celebrities to cut ties with Israeli companies active in the occupied Palestinian territories, in a bid to repeat the success of the boycott which ended apartheid in South Africa.
In late January, US actress Scarlett Johansson was forced to choose between being an ambassador for Oxfam and taking on a new role as the public face of Israel's SodaStream, which has a factory in the occupied West Bank, after the international aid group said the two roles were "incompatible."
She resigned her position at Oxfam.
On the same day, Norway's sovereign wealth fund blacklisted two Israeli companies involved in construction in annexed East Jerusalem.
Since Jan. 1, the European Union has blocked all grants and funding to Israeli entities operating beyond the pre-1967 war lines, sparking growing alarm in Israel.
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu met with three of his top ministers to discuss ways to deal with the threat of economic boycotts against Israel, media reported Monday.
The meeting on Sunday night was attended by Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman, Economy Minister Naftali Bennett and Strategic Affairs Minister Yuval Steinitz, the reports said.
The meeting comes less than a fortnight after US Secretary of State John Kerry warned that Israel was facing a growing campaign of delegitimisation which could worsen if peace talks with the PLO collapsed.
Maariv newspaper noted that Justice Minister Tzipi Livni and Finance Minister Yair Lapid, who echoed Kerry's sentiment in recent remarks, were not invited to Sunday's meeting.
Israeli officials have refused to comment on the reports.
A growing number of governments and international businesses have said they will not trade with Israeli firms with ties to illegal settlements, highlighting the creeping success of a Palestinian-led boycott campaign.
The BDS movement -- boycott, divestment and sanctions -- works to convince governments, businesses and celebrities to cut ties with Israeli companies active in the occupied Palestinian territories, in a bid to repeat the success of the boycott which ended apartheid in South Africa.
In late January, US actress Scarlett Johansson was forced to choose between being an ambassador for Oxfam and taking on a new role as the public face of Israel's SodaStream, which has a factory in the occupied West Bank, after the international aid group said the two roles were "incompatible."
She resigned her position at Oxfam.
On the same day, Norway's sovereign wealth fund blacklisted two Israeli companies involved in construction in annexed East Jerusalem.
Since Jan. 1, the European Union has blocked all grants and funding to Israeli entities operating beyond the pre-1967 war lines, sparking growing alarm in Israel.
Hasan Khreisheh, the second deputy speaker of the Palestinian legislative council (PLC), said the Palestinian people would not accept the idea of bringing international forces as a replacement for the Israeli occupation forces in the occupied Palestinian territories.
"This proposal seems to have been addressed to the Zionists and the international community, on the grounds that Abbas realizes that the Zionists will not put their security in the hands of anyone. It is also a message to the Americans who are primarily concerned about the Zionists' security and submit to their demands," Khreisheh stated on Monday, commenting on Mahmoud Abbas's latest proposal for deploying NATO forces in the future Palestinian state.
"[Abbas' recent remarks] confirm that going to the negotiation was a big disaster for the Palestinian people in light of the three Zionist noes that are included in Kerry's plan, which declares that no Palestinian state on the 1967 borders, no Jerusalem as a capital of the Palestinian state and no return for the refugees," the PLC deputy speaker said.
As for Abbas' claims that he is the Palestinian leadership and thus can sign a peace treaty with the Israeli occupation, Khreisheh emphasized that any Palestinian whatever his post or status has no right to sign an agreement detracting from the national rights of the Palestinian people.
"If we are unable to extract our right under the current circumstances, then at least we are able not to make concessions. We should not deprive our next generations of restoring our rights."
"This proposal seems to have been addressed to the Zionists and the international community, on the grounds that Abbas realizes that the Zionists will not put their security in the hands of anyone. It is also a message to the Americans who are primarily concerned about the Zionists' security and submit to their demands," Khreisheh stated on Monday, commenting on Mahmoud Abbas's latest proposal for deploying NATO forces in the future Palestinian state.
"[Abbas' recent remarks] confirm that going to the negotiation was a big disaster for the Palestinian people in light of the three Zionist noes that are included in Kerry's plan, which declares that no Palestinian state on the 1967 borders, no Jerusalem as a capital of the Palestinian state and no return for the refugees," the PLC deputy speaker said.
As for Abbas' claims that he is the Palestinian leadership and thus can sign a peace treaty with the Israeli occupation, Khreisheh emphasized that any Palestinian whatever his post or status has no right to sign an agreement detracting from the national rights of the Palestinian people.
"If we are unable to extract our right under the current circumstances, then at least we are able not to make concessions. We should not deprive our next generations of restoring our rights."
