Peace in 6 Months? Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas predicted that if Israel completely halted construction in settlements for six months - even without announcing a comprehensive freeze - negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians might be completed.

 

"I spoke with [Israeli] Defense Minister Ehud Barak twice over recent weeks," Abbas told Haaretz on Tuesday. "I suggested to him three weeks ago that Israel freeze all settlement construction for six months, including in East Jerusalem, without declaring it, just carrying it out in practice. I want to emphasize: without even declaring [the freeze]. But I demanded a complete freeze of settlement construction."

 

The moratorium on new settlement construction announced last month by Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is not as comprehensive as Israel's commitments under the Road Map peace plan, which calls on Israel to freeze "all settlement activity" and explicitly disallows construction for the "natural growth of settlements."

 

Abbas boasted of the steps the Palestinians have made to fulfill their Road Map obligations, including security achievements, recognition of Israel, and battling incitement to violence. He then asked his Israeli interviewer, "What steps have you taken so far? You have not met a single clause in the road map. You removed a few roadblocks and there are still 640. Every day there are arrests, house demolitions. I don't understand why. We have security coordination, so why do this?"

 

Haaretz's editorial on Wednesday noted that Abbas' offer could provide both Israeli leaders and Palestinian leaders a face-saving way to launch negotiations.

 

The editorial called on Israel's leaders to respond favorably: "If Netanyahu and Barak truly wish to preserve the two-state option and avoid the collapse of the Palestinian leadership that supports it, they must respond positively to Abbas' proposal. The damage from prolonging the diplomatic stalemate and the departure of a pragmatic leader like Abbas would affect Israel's interests in the region and around the world infinitely more than the price of a total sixth-month construction freeze beyond the Green Line. The bitter lesson of Netanyahu and Barak's previous terms in office should have taught them that a leader who tries to advance the peace process and maintain Israel's standing in the world while reconciling with the extreme right loses in the end. This time their acrobatics could end in the loss of an important partner for peace and a deterioration in Israel's foreign relations." (Haaretz, 12/16 & 12/17/09)

 

Israelis Trust Obama: A recent poll by the New America Foundation finds that President Barack Obama's standing among Israelis is higher than widely perceived.

 

55% of Israelis see the American president as honest and trustworthy. 52% think that he will strengthen America's global standing.

 

41% of Israelis have a favorable view of Obama, while 37% view him unfavorably. This level of support is far better than that of Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak (30% favorable, 46% unfavorable) or Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman (38% favorable, 42%unfavorable).

 

Israelis value their special relationship with the United States, the poll found. By a margin of 65% to 31%, Israelis believe that the U.S. is the only powerful country that Israel can count on, and they do not agree that Israel can build alliances with other powers if relations with the U.S. ever deteriorate.

 

The poll indicates that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu would have strong support for any peace deal he makes. By a 25-point margin (59% to 34%), the Israeli public will support any agreement he reaches with Israel's enemies.

 

Israelis also know that peace is necessary. 58% of Israelis understand that Israel will not be able to achieve a normal life with security and prosperity absent a peace agreement with the Palestinians. More Israelis are concerned with the dangers of not making peace, than about the risks that would follow a peace agreement. A majority of Israelis is concerned that their continued control over the occupied territories will lead to a bi-national state, in which Jews are a minority.

 

As to the benefits of peace, 77% of Israelis foresee unprecedented economic growth following a peace agreement with the Palestinians. 73% predict that a peace deal will allow their children to lead a normal life.

 

From these findings, pollster Jim Gerstein concludes that "as the Obama Administration continues its efforts to assert American leadership to resolve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, it is very clear that it does so from a position of strength when seen through the prism of Israeli public opinion, and that there are real opportunities for the President and his team to speak directly and convincingly to the Israeli people." (New America Foundation, 12/10/09)

 

Lacking in Numbers: An attempt by settler groups earlier this month to display broad Israeli opposition to the limited settlement freeze failed to draw large numbers.

 

Israel Radio estimated the crowd at more than 10,000.

 

"This was not a demonstration of rage like in the days of Oslo and disengagement, in which hundreds of thousands flooded [Jerusalem's] Zion Square and the Prime Minister's Office," wrote Ma'ariv's Shalom Yerushalmi.

 

In addition to the meager turnout, Yerushalmi noted that the settlers were only able to appeal to small sectors of the Israeli public.   "In yesterday's demonstration, there were mainly knitted kippa wearers and a handful of Kahane-supporting Haredim. There were no secular people there. This is another good reason for the settlers' anxiety about the future. It will be a lot harder for them on their own." (Israel Radio, 12/10/09; Ma'ariv, 12/10/09)

 

Good Fences? Egypt has started construction of an underground steel barricade along the border between the Gaza Strip and the Sinai. The barricade is part of an effort to stop smuggling by way of tunnels.

 

In recent days, Egyptian construction workers and security personnel in the area have been shot at from within Gaza. Egyptian security forces are now on a heightened state of alert following a call by Hamas leaders to demonstrate against the barricade.

 

Tensions between Egypt and Hamas officials in Gaza have been high because of Hamas's refusal to sign an Egyptian-engineered agreement to provide for Fatah-Hamas reconciliation several weeks ago.

 

"Hamas's decision not to sign the accord with Fatah was seen by Palestinians and Egyptians as a severe blow to Mubarak's personal prestige and Egypt's standing in the Arab world," observes the Jerusalem Post's Khaled Abu Toameh.

 

Now, writes Abu Toameh, an "all-out confrontation between Hamas and Egypt will undoubtedly undermine Mubarak, because it will make him appear as if he's helping Israel and the U.S. in their war against the movement. A confrontation will also send the message that Mubarak is also involved in the 'siege' on the Gaza Strip. Hamas, on the other hand, stands to win from a standoff with a regime that is regarded by many Arabs and Muslims as a puppet in the hands of the Israelis and Americans." (Jerusalem Post, 12/21/09; Israel Radio, 12/21/09)

 

No Confidence in Sanctions: The House of Representatives approved new American-imposed sanctions focused on the Iranian refined petroleum sector last week, but few in Washington seem to think that such sanctions will have a meaningful impact on the Iranian government.

 

"Sanctions on Iran's gas would only hurt the Iranian population without crippling the Iranian government. Worse, they would most likely enrich and could even strengthen the Revolutionary Guards and their business partners," warns RAND analyst Alireze Nader for Foreign Policy.

 

An article co-authored by Dr. Jim Walsh and retired Ambassadors Thomas Pickering and William Luers expresses concern that American policy makers are too focused on sanctions. "The real danger is that a myopic focus on new sanctions will backfire," they write. "Sanctions can be a complement to negotiation when they give a country an incentive to bargain. Unfortunately, they can also be a roadblock to negotiations. It would be tragic indeed if, in the rush to pile on more sanctions, an opportunity to achieve the strategic objective, an Iran without nuclear weapons, was lost."

 

The doubt over the efficacy of sanctions penetrates to the major Jewish and pro-Israel groups who have pushed for these sanctions, according to James Besser of the New York Jewish Week: "Privately, many of their leaders acknowledge that making sanctions work is a tall order even if countries like China and Russia get on board. Tehran's leaders have become adept at sidestepping sanctions; after all, they've had years of experience. And they [have] something others desperately want - oil. But these same Jewish leaders say, basically, that there aren't many other choices, so sanctions are worth a try."

 

Newsweek's Katie Paul believes that a more sensible plan than the sanctions passed by the House "would be the program suggested by the Obama administration - targeted and multilateral sanctions in 2010, after the administration's deadline for diplomatic overtures has passed (and after persuading reluctant partners like Turkey, they hope)."

 

Paul recalls the comments made by Deputy Secretary of State James Steinberg to the Senate back in October: "Not only is a sanction more effective when [it's] broad-based, but it also takes away the political argument that the Iranian government may try to make, which is that this is American hostility," (Jewish Week, 12/8/09; Newsweek, 12/10/09; Foreign Policy, 12/14/09; ArmsControl.org, 12/9/09)