I happened across Larry King's interview on CNN with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu last night and while it was interesting in the sense I was able to hear someone whom obviously is a professional when it comes to media relations what he didn't say spoke volumes.
And there were several times I wished Larry were more versed in the events in the area so he could probe more deeply and actually elicit some news that might help advance peace talks.
After discussing the chilled relations between the Obama Administration and his own, which he largely denied was the case, Larry asked Bibi about the establishment of direct peace talks. And just as I expected, he was able to make a coherent argument that it wasn't his administration holding up talks, that he has offered to sit down and discuss peace but that the PA has not agreed to do so. In presenting his case here, and even though I personally detest the man, I thought he was well-spoken, articulate and came across as very reasonable. He is certainly very savy about media, particularly American media and its use to further frame issues before the American public.
While many here know why the PA has refused, I believe, just as he intended it to, that statement will weigh heavily on Americans watching the program that don't regularly follow the Middle East peace process. Which is why I wish the PA would drop their demand for pre-conditions (much as I previously hoped Israel would do the same when it was the PA asking for direct talks and Israel doing the foot-dragging). And further still, why even if the PA did not drop its requirement why I would hope that Israel would halt all new settlement activity (including present construction). Impediments such as these to direct negotiations should not be sufficient to prevent negotiations from taking place, it is too important for the people and the region.
from the transcript
KING: All right, let's get into some things. Mr. Prime Minister, you say that you want to have direct talks with the Palestinians. So when are you and President Abbas, the Palestinian Authority, going to sit down? When's it going to happen? It's so frustrating to the world --
NETANYAHU: That's a very -- that's an excellent question that I've been asking for a year and a quarter, ever since I got into office. On day one that I got in, I said President Abbas, the Palestinian president, meet me and let's talk peace.
And I use this forum today, on the "Larry King" show, to say, President Abbas, meet me, and let's talk peace. We all have our grievances. We all have our, you know, our questions and things that we want answered. But the most important thing is to get together, sit down in a room and begin to negotiate peace. You cannot resolve a conflict, you cannot successfully complete a peace negotiation if you don't start it.
And I say let's start it right now, today, tomorrow, in Jerusalem, in Ramallah or anywhere else. I'm prepared to go to a warm city like New York or a cool city anywhere. Let's get on with the business of talking peace and concluding the peace agreement.
Larry also addressed whether or not Bibi would negotiate with Hamas. He said he would refuse because Hamas calls for the destruction of Israel and as such is not a 'partner for peace'.
Again, the pattern holds.
In part, because of the Hamas charter language regarding Israel, it gives Bibi a fig leaf to deny the advancement of peace talks. As he said to Larry, which Larry did not respond to, "would you sit down with somebody who said we want to destroy the United States? Now come and talk to us?" So if Hamas would only revise their charter, which has been argued is not their current policy anyway, then that rationale would be removed. On the other hand, Bibi's argument that Hamas is not a partner for peace and therefore disqualifies them from negotiations isn't truly credible since you don't typically negotiate peace treaties with your friends but rather with your enemies. Those enemies only become partners once a treaty is signed. Egypt and Jordan are prime examples, both waged war on Israel, both signed peace treaties, and both have been peaceful neighbors ever since.
So each side refuses to publicly move from their positions which would allow advancement of direct talks and therefore both are guilty to some degree of putting politics before peace.
I only hope this will change or has changed as part of the indirect discussions.