Posted on 09/06/2006 7:18:34 AM PDT by ScaniaBoy
With realignment apparently dead and any diplomatic process with the Palestinians stagnant, some voices inside the EU are calling for the three preconditions to talks with Hamas to be "revisited," The Jerusalem Post has learned.
These voices, according to European officials, are not advocating dropping the three conditions - ending terrorism, accepting previous agreements and recognizing Israel - but rather staggering them so an opening is created for talks with the Palestinian Authority.
EU begins paying aid to Palestinians "No one is questioning the need for the three conditions," a senior European diplomatic source said. "But maybe if you cannot get wholesale adherence by Hamas to these three conditions, why not start with one, and see where that gets us."
He said that the one condition that should be insisted upon is an immediate stop to terrorism. "That is more important than the rest," he said. "After that, we could talk about getting them to accept the Oslo framework."
This, he said, could then lead to the implied recognition of Israel, because the Oslo framework is predicated on a two-state solution.
"But this [recognition of Israel] is not something that needs to be up front," he said.
The official said there was a growing feeling in Europe that it was a tactical mistake to agree to bundle all the conditions into one demand, "since not all three requirements are of the same value."
"There is some realization," he said, that "putting things so bluntly wasn't constructive and drove Hamas into the arms of the radical wing in Damascus."
He said this reevaluation of the three conditions is part of a general stocktaking in Europe of the situation in the Middle East.
"It is part of coming to grips with the reality that after seven months, things have gone nowhere and are worse than they were, especially after the war in Lebanon," he said.
Diplomatic officials in Israel acknowledged that there were voices calling for a reassessment of the three conditions inside Europe.
But, one said, "for the time being" it does not look like Europe would "soften" the three conditions or stagger them. But, he stressed, the operative words were "for the time being," and this might change as these voices gain traction.
The concern is that if Hamas continues to stubbornly toe "a hard line," the Europeans will say: "Oops, maybe we should cave in," he said, adding however that as of now Germany, Britain, France, the Czech Republic, Poland, Lithuania, Denmark and Holland are holding firm behind the three conditions.
The senior European diplomat said that current efforts by the Arab League to resuscitate the Saudi initiative of 2002 and present it to the UN Security Council later this month are "one of the levers left to bring about a national Palestinian consensus."
He said that while he did not envision a weak Olmert government accepting a plan that essentially called on Israel first to withdraw from all the territories, including the Golan Heights and east Jerusalem, and then get Arab recognition, the initiative was a "tactical move to get Hamas to realize that its position is untenable, and that if it wants anything to move it needs to declare in favor of a two state solution."
He dismissed as meaningless a proposed meeting at this time between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA President Mahmoud Abbas, since he said Abbas has no control, and Fatah has little standing, inside the PA.
"It's quite useless to talk to Abbas," he said. "He can convey messages to [PA Prime Minister Ismail] Haniyeh, but Haniyeh will say what [Damascus-based Hamas leader Khaled] Mashaal wants him to say. Mashaal is pulling the strings."
In a related development, Vice Premier Shimon Peres said on Army Radio, amid reports that a deal was in the works for the release of kidnapped soldier Gilad Shalit, that once the soldier was freed, Olmert would invite Abbas for a long-anticipated meeting.
"The moment that this matter is solved, the matter of our captive soldiers, and I hope it will be solved, that is what will happen," Peres said.
He dismissed as meaningless a proposed meeting at this time between Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and PA President Mahmoud Abbas, since he said Abbas has no control, and Fatah has little standing, inside the PA.
"It's quite useless to talk to Abbas,"he said. "He can convey messages to [PA Prime Minister Ismail] Haniyeh, but Haniyeh will say what [Damascus-based Hamas leader Khaled] Mashaal wants him to say. Mashaal is pulling the strings."
So, this senior European diplomat (could it be this man ?) is prepared not only to hand Hamas recognition as a serious negotiating partner, but also (and this is the real news) to discard Abbas like yesterday's soiled diapers.
Unfortunately, when the bureaucrasts in the various foreign offices or the EU starts to pull in one direction, their so called lords and masters (snigger, snigger), our elected representatives are soon following.
Abbas is fighting for his (political?) life but may soon be handed a fatal stab in the back by the EU, who will do everything to appease the most radical forces in the Arab world.
Ping!
Europeons waver in their resolve. Dog bites man.
"three conditions - ending terrorism, accepting previous agreements and recognizing Israel - but rather staggering them so an opening is created for talks with the Palestinian Authority"
Do polititians have to be SCHEISTERS?
High volume. Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel. also
2006israelwar or WOT
..................
Clearly it's important to the EU to see a terror state succeed in the mideast. Recognition and aid could do it.
Hamas' Waning Star?--The reality of a terrorist-run government is finally sinking in.
"Hamas to these three conditions, why not start with one, and see where that gets us."
There is no shortage of fools on the earth
I can see the Europeans' point.
So lets drop these unjustified conditions.
Let's see if meetings can be scheduled with Hamas when they are not busy, sometime between their terrorist attacks.
Honoring previous agreements? That's for pussies. Just because Israel gave them land and allowed them to form a Government doesn't mean Israelis should still not be murdered.
And I see absolutely no problem in speaking to Hamas about evil Israel, even though they do not acknowledge that Israel exists. We don't have to mention Israel in our discussion. Just call them that Kike entity.
"Palestinians"- Doing the job that Europeans used to do but now just gets them nostalgic.
They are not fools; they just don't care.
They are definitely fools. The definition of insanity is when you do the same thing over and over and expect different results....If the problem was that they just don't care, then they could eventually be motivated to see reality--but that is not the case--they just don't see it..
Although this is often said it simply is not true. That may be a symptom but it is not the definition.
insanity
noun
1 insanity runs in her family - mental illness, madness, dementia; lunacy, instability; mania, psychosis; informal craziness.
2 it would be insanity to take this loan - folly, foolishness, madness, idiocy, stupidity, lunacy, silliness; informal craziness.
By your definition, I guess I'm a little insane too--we both agree with that....
I was just using you to correct something that is often said by many, even Rush.
Another is "All that glitters is not gold." Wrong! Gold glitters and it IS gold. What is correct is, "Not all that glitters is gold."
Another peave is "Each and every ... ", an obvious redundancy, and it is said by many, many intelligent people. When someone says "Each ...." or Every ...", instead of "Each and every ...", I consider them of superior intelligence.
Unfortunately, when some well known person, usually and athlete or movie star, makes a mistake on radio or tv it is often picked up and then spreads like crazy. One that has seemed to have passed is the misuse of the pronoun "myself" instead of "I" or "Me" where appropriate.
I am no grammar nut but somethings are so off they stand out, especially when it becomes commonly used.
That is what the "The definition of insanity ... " thing is now.
What if I can get them to agree to 3 promises?
Then we should talk to them.
What if I can get them to agree to 2 promises? Surely if they agree with two, we should not judge them as harshly?
If they agree to two, then we should not judge them so harshly.
What if I can get them to agree to 1 promise. Surely if they agree to 1, they aren't as bad as agreeing with none...
And people who will elect them.
Well then, you should know, there is no word "normalcy." The word is normality....buy President Herbert Hoover coined the phrase. It's like President Bush's term Misunderestimate....people hear it and it becomes part of our language...
Umm, let's see if our resident self-appointed EU spokesperson has anything to say on this matter...
Hmmm....
All quiet on the EU front so far.
I hope you are reading the EUreferendum blog ( http://eureferendum.blogspot.com ) and the Brusselsjournal ( http://www.brusselsjournal.com ).
IMHO the best eurosceptic sites available.
Yep, I have noted the two sites for long. I think Brussels Journal is more generic philosophical/ideas-based while EUReferendum is more Anglocentric. The Journal is a gem in blogging EU developments.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.