Doaa El-Bey reviews the TV and print coverage of the Hisham Talaat Mustafa verdict and whether the Israeli prime minister really wants peace A few days after his meeting with Barack Obama, Binyamin Netanyahu declared that his government would not stop building new settlements, pushing writers to ask whether the US can force Netanyahu to change his policy and accept the two-state solution. The Omani daily Al-Watan said the Israeli government had put the US administration to a real test when Netanyahu stated that his government would not stop building more settlements, or accept the establishment of a Palestinian state or the return to pre-1967 borders. Meanwhile, Mahmoud Abbas's meeting with Obama is a chance for the US to reassert its commitment to establish a Palestinian state regardless of the Israeli attempt to hamper it. However, the editorial suggested that the Arab states should consider the possibility of reaching another solution at the Moscow conference due in July unless the US clearly reveals its new policy towards the Middle East. This solution could be the declaration of a Palestinian state during the conference and asking the US to recognise it. Tawfiq Al-Medeini wrote that the first meeting between Obama and Netanyahu did not bridge the gaps between the US and Israeli policies. On the contrary, it showed a clear US failure in changing Netanyahu's stand that stated that his government is committed to peace talks on the basis of Palestinian recognition of Israel as a Zionist state. In the meantime, Obama is adamant about making progress in the Palestinian-Israeli conflict by offering a new peace initiative. The initiative which the writer expects Obama to declare during his address to the Islamic world next month is based on the two-state solution partially based on the Arab peace initiative and the roadmap. It will also put Israeli security as a top priority. The establishment of this state is expected to take no less than four years -- Obama's term in office. However, Al-Medeini ruled out that the solution could see light because the Netanyahu-Obama meeting revealed the deep differences between the US and Israel in resolving the Palestinian-Israeli conflict. Any present effort would lose its credibility as a result of the continuing Israeli policy of building more settlements and of espousing the policy of ethnically cleansing Israel from all Arabs, in addition to declining to link progress in Palestinian-Israeli negotiations to progress in the Iranian nuclear programme, he wrote in the United Arab Emirates daily Al-Bayan. The London-based political daily Al-Quds Al-Arabi wrote that the US government is focussing on persuading Natanyahu to halt building settlements in the West Bank as a step towards the resumption of peace negotiations. But he is adamant on carrying on his settlement policies as he pledged during his election campaign. A few days ago, the newspaper editorial added, Netanyahu reiterated his stand in the government's weekly meeting by saying he would not build more settlements but would extend present settlements according to the needs of the growing population. Extending the present settlements in East Jerusalem, the paper said, would simply eat up all the areas that are left in the city. The editorial added it was clear that Netanyahu's priorities differed completely from that of the US. The newspaper wondered how the US would respond to the present Israeli stand especially when Obama comes to address the Islamic world from Cairo next month. "Obama's failure to deal with the present Israeli government in a decisive manner will not make his address to the Islamic world of any use," the edit read. The newspaper expressed fear that Obama would bow to Israeli blackmail and throw the ball in the Arab court by asking them to take more steps towards normalisation in return for Netanyahu's acceptance to stop building more settlements in occupied lands. That would mean dwarfing the demands of the Arab initiative in return for halting settlement building. The initiative calls for complete normalisation in return for complete withdrawal from Arab occupied territories. The edit did not rule out that some Arab regimes would accept such a condition. Omar Gifteli asked how the international community could talk about peace after the statements made by Netanyahu and his Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman who clearly say they will not stop building more settlements, will not return to 1967 borders, say 'no' to a Palestinian state and 'no' to withdrawal from Jerusalem. Netanyahu also called on Israelis living in Tel Aviv to move to Jerusalem so as to complete judaising the city. These statements reassert the racist, extremist nature of the Israelis. Meanwhile, the international community is still dealing with the Palestinian issue in a less than serious manner and without showing any real keenness to carry out international law or UN resolutions. However, the more important question that the writer pointed to in the Syrian political daily Tishreen is what do the Arabs expect from the international community after it closed its eyes to the Israeli practices of the past 60 years. Nagah Matarna wrote that Netanyahu tried to focus on the danger of the Iranian nuclear programme in an attempt to avoid discussing the establishment of a Palestinian state in the framework of a two-state solution. He ignored Obama wanting to put pressure on him to accept the two-state solution and stop building new settlements. As for the Iranian nuclear programme, the writer said that Obama concluded an interview with Newsweek magazine by saying he would present Iran with all options that conform to international laws and which guarantee that Iran would not threaten its neighbours. Thus, he shut the door before any Israeli attempts to focus on the issue at the expense of the Palestinian problem. "The Israelis should stop talking about the Iranian nuclear programme and remember that they are more dangerous than Iran because they are the only power that possesses nuclear weapons in the region," Matarna wrote in the Jordanian independent political daily Al-Rai. The writer optimistically concluded that the US declared its seriousness in supporting the Palestinians and resolving the Middle East conflict. Thus, if the Israeli government does not want to fail completely, it should recognise Palestinians rights. Hafez Barghouti was not as optimistic as Matarna, writing that during his visit to the US, Netanyahu managed to an extent to help impose a deadline to US-Iranian talks until the end of the year and reignite Obama's threatening language vis-à-vis Tehran. Obama said after their meeting that all options are open in dealing with Iran. Meanwhile, the US is trying to use the Iranian nuclear programme as a tool to intimidate both Israel and the Arab states in order to adopt more flexible stands towards peace. However, Matarna did not expect this policy to reap fruit because Israel is taking a few steps backwards by reneging on all its commitments to peace and is now talking about settlements rather than peace, he wrote in the Palestinian political daily Al-Hayat Al-Jadida.
