Israel knows & hopes that Abbas will not deliver ...

(Today, after Israel decided to 'settle' more of Jerusalem, most becmoes moot...)

OxFan: Excerpts:

"... After fits and starts, the United States has managed to get both Palestinians and Israelis to agree to discuss certain core issues, .... a variety of confidence-building measures agreed to by Israel have cleared the way for indirect 'proximity' talks:

• US officials announced on May 9 that Israel has agreed not to carry out construction in Ramat Shlomo for two years. In fact, Israeli ministers insisted domestically that the two-year time delay before construction begins is part of the normal planning process. While this insistence is damaging to US claims that it has secured concessions from Israel, and is likely to frustrate the Palestinians, the lack of construction during the period of indirect talks will allow the latter to participate without losing face.
• According to Israeli officials quoted anonymously in media reports, Israel may in the coming weeks release several hundred Palestinian prisoners, lift some checkpoints and allow Palestinian security forces to operate more widely in the West Bank. However, this is likely to be conditional on progress in the talks.
• Washington has said it is watching both sides for 'provocations' -- for Palestinians, this means Israel is not to announce more settlement housing, and from Israel's perspective, Palestinians must refrain from incitement. Washington says it is prepared to hold both sides accountable.

The United States failed to obtain an Israeli commitment to halt settlement construction entirely. Nevertheless, the Arab League has backed a four-month period of indirect talks.

Strategies.

Palestinians are insisting that the talks from the outset engage all final status issues: borders, the status of refugees and the fate of Jerusalem. Yet Israel has reportedly obtained US promises that the status of Jerusalem is to be left to the end of the talks. Israel says early negotiations will engage security and getting Palestinians to accept the Jewish character of the state -- a euphemism that Palestinians see as preventing a substantial return of Palestinian refugees. Given these deep differences, both sides are approaching the talks on a tactical, rather than strategic, basis.

Israeli objectives.

Israeli officials believe that as long as the Palestinian leadership is divided between the Fatah faction in the West Bank and Hamas in the Gaza Strip, Abbas is unable to deliver on any agreement. Therefore, (breathing a sigh of relief,) they seek to use the talks to break Israel's growing international isolation.

... Israeli officials will focus on what they call Palestinian incitement .........Netanyahu on May 9 insisted that the proximity talks must bring about direct talks soon, since peace cannot be achieved at a distance.

More broadly, Israel seeks to heal its rifts with the United States, particularly given their shared interest in containing Iran. It views negotiations with Palestinians as one way of 'quieting' this region, in order to attain the strategic goal of addressing the Iranian threat.

Palestinian objectives.

Palestinian officials say they do not believe substantial progress can be made in negotiations with the right-wing Netanyahu government. Tactically, they plan to use the talks to focus attention on Israel's settlement programme. ...

The tough Palestinian position on settlements is born of several factors:

• The administration of US President Barack Obama's stance opposing Israeli settlements has empowered Palestinian objections.
• The Palestinian Liberation Organisation (PLO) is today too weak to carry on direct talks with Israel as long as it is constructing settlements. These settlements have a direct impact on the Palestinian public through land confiscation, house demolition and settler violence. Further, not only has Hamas criticised the indirect negotiations, but the PLO faction the Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine has said that the talks should not take place, and that Palestinians should abandon the two-state solution. The PLO's main faction, Fatah, is under great internal and external strain.
• The sheer extent of Israeli settlement construction in East Jerusalem has pushed Palestinians to respond. Previously untouched Arab neighbourhoods such as Sheikh Jarrah and Silwan are now the focus of intensive Israeli settlement plans.
• In addition, recent assessments by US officials that the Mideast conflict is a strategic threat to US interests in the region have altered the equation for Palestinians. Moreover, they believe that as long as Washington is fighting wars in Iraq and Afghanistan, and thus has considerable troop presence in the region, Israel's role as crucial regional proxy fighting US battles on its behalf has diminished, and its relationship with Washington has changed.

Outlook. With hopes for any substantial breakthrough low, the best outcome of the proximity talks is a reduction in violence. March casualty figures among Palestinians were the highest they had been since the Gaza war.......

If the talks fail, the US administration has floated plans to release its own model for Middle East peace, based on the proposals of former President Bill Clinton. Israeli officials have expressed their opposition to this kind of US intervention, setting the stage for additional friction between Israel and the United States if the talks break down..."