Palestinian Authority (PA) President Mahmoud Abbas is succumbing to American pressure to drop all demands and preconditions for the resumption of the stalled peace negotiations with Israel, Palestinian sources have revealed. Abbas has been touring the capitals of the world to explain his authority's position vis-à-vis the peace process. In this context, he has visited several European and Arab capitals as well as Tokyo. However, in secret contacts with the Americans, Abbas seems to have accepted the notion that talks with Israel can be resumed virtually without conditions, even without getting the Netanyahu government to freeze or halt settlement construction on occupied Palestinian territories. On Monday, 8 February, the Israeli newspaper Haaretz quoted "reliable sources" at the PA government headquarters in Ramallah as saying that Abbas had agreed to start "indirect talks" with Israel by the end of February. According to the paper, Abbas agreed to hold "proximity" talks with Israel whereby the talks would be held, probably in Washington, in two different rooms with the US Middle East Envoy George Mitchell communicating messages between the two sides. This style of negotiations is considered a setback given the fact that Israel and the PA had held extensive face-to-face talks. It means that the "psychological barrier" between the two sides had been broken irreversibly. However, observers notice that Abbas wants to use the "indirect talks" in order to be able to claim that he is still clinging to his earlier stance, which precludes any resumption of talks in the absence of a definitive freeze in Jewish settlement expansion. The Palestinian leader also doesn't want to get "too involved" in another spate of negotiations that may very well prove as futile as previous talks especially in light of the fact that the two sides had repeatedly exhausted discussion of all pertinent issues and that what was really needed was taking decisions, not conducting more talks. It is not clear yet as to what subjects the two sides would discuss in the upcoming talks. The Israeli government under Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has consistently refused to restart the talks from the point where they left off under the Olmert-Livni government, whereas the PA has been demanding that the Israeli government show commitment to understandings and agreements reached earlier. Far from espousing these understandings, Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman has been saying that the entire concept of land-for-peace was dead. Observers have noted that Abbas's willingness to resume the talks with Israel as Israel expands the pace of settlement construction in East Jerusalem and the rest of the West Bank constitutes a clear retreat and a de facto admission of weakness and defeat. "This man has been saying for many months that he won't return to the negotiating table with the Zionist regime until Israel freezes the settlements. And now, he is saying he will hold indirect talks with Israel. Well, what is the difference," remarked Ahmed Hamdan, an independent commentator from the Hebron region. He added: "This serious retreat sends a dangerous message to the Americans and the Zionists which states that the Palestinian side can be bullied into making more and more concessions on the fundamental issues, and that when the Palestinians say 'no' it doesn't mean that this is their final position." Moreover, Hamadan said the retreat of Abbas on the settlement issue would boost Netanyahu's popularity. "Now Netanyahu could boast that his intransigence and stubbornness have paid off. He will be able to argue that if only Israel shows some more patience, it will achieve its goals." While Abbas has accused the Obama administration of failing to honour earlier commitments made to the Palestinians and the larger Arab world, he said he was not seeking new assurances from Washington as to the duration of the proposed proximity or indirect talks. "The Palestinian side has not set any conditions in particular," Abbas told reporters in Japan when asked under what conditions he would accept the US offer on proximity talks. He added that he expected Mitchell to get back to him with further clarifications about the proposed talks by mid- February. Afterward, Abbas added, he would consult with Arab leaders and make a decision. Another Palestinian commentator, Hani Al-Masri, opined that Abbas was trying to return to the talks gradually in order to desensitise the Palestinian public as much as possible. "He is facing a dilemma. If he doesn't return to the talks, he will be accused by Washington and Israel of obstructing the peace process, and if he returns, he will receive next to nothing from Israel. "He will try to circumvent this predicament by seeking assurances and guarantees from the Americans. But the problem lies not in obtaining guarantees and assurances from Washington. The problem is Israel which refuses to end the occupation and put an end to its theft of Palestinian land." Netanyahu has been suggesting that his repetitive calls for an immediate resumption of peace talks with the Palestinians in no way imply that he is willing to give concessions to the Palestinians. In fact, the Israeli premier has been adding fresh conditions to his infamous speech at Tel Aviv's Bar Illan University in June 2009 when he said that any prospective Palestinian entity would have to be completely controlled by Israel, including borders, border crossings, foreign relations, communications networks, airspace and territorial waters. Two weeks ago, Netanyahu said that Israel would have to maintain a military presence in the West Bank in the context of any future arrangement with the Palestinians. He also pointed out that Israel would have to retain military control of the Jordan valley, which constitutes the boundaries between Jordan and any future Palestinian political entity. According to some sources in Ramallah, Abbas feels that Washington may be trying to coerce the Palestinian leadership into abandoning, though not necessarily publicly, the traditional Palestinian constants with regard to the inviolability of the 1967 borders, the status of Jerusalem and refugees. One source intimated that Washington might resort to strengthening Prime Minister Fayyad at Abbas's expense. Fayyad is definitely more acceptable to Israel than Abbas. While attending the annual strategic evaluation conference in Herzlia near Tel Aviv, Fayyad declared that he was more concerned about "building" a Palestinian state than declaring one. Needless to say, this is music to the ears of Netanyahu and the extreme right-wing Israeli establishment. They understand it as implying that Israel would be granted more time to build more settlements while the Palestinians will be busy building their state on whatever is left of occupied Palestine.
