Palestine Papers: 8th Meeting on Territory

Summary

The Palestinians affirmed their position that negotiations are based on UNSCR 242 and 338, while the Israelis continued to assert their claims to land within the 1967 line and stressed they are not "giving" anything back. The Israelis backtracked on swaps and would not discuss swaps unless Ma'ale Adumim, Givat ze'ev and Ariel are discussed.

Samih Al-Abed: …[T]hese negotiations didn’t come out from a vacuum. They’ve been discussed in Camp David, Taba and Geneva. There is a history of talks. You can’t come up with a proposal as if there was nothing before. If we do not consider these talks, we cannot move forward… You exaggerated your demands on us that it is not even close to previous agreements.

Udi Dekel, Israeli Official: Since 2000, something happened in those 8 years so we are not at the same starting point. You started a terror war on us and we created facts on the ground. This is the reality that we live in today, so we can’t go back to Camp David. Circumstances changed considerably since then.

I don’t think it is part of our group to discuss resolution 242 interpretation. You believe 242 says rights and that settlements are illegal, we don’t. We believe we have rights in these territories…We are not of the position that we took something from you that we have to give back.

(later)

Dekel: This short discussion between us shows that we cannot bridge our narratives. I do not want to convince you, but the background for our discussions is not the same either. We couldn’t agree on the principles…. I cannot speak of swaps unless I know from you Ma’ale Adumim is on the table, Givat Ze’ev is on the table, Ariel is on the table.

Samih Al-Abed: Swaps is a principle. You cannot make this a precondition. It’s not a starting point at all.

(later)

Al-Abed: We can’t go forward without Jerusalem on the table…So let’s start somewhere with your map as a whole.

Dekel: We presented it many times.

Al-Abed: It is not acceptable to us.

Dekel: Yours is not acceptable to us. Ok, so you close the discussion. We should eat the food and enjoy ourselves.

Hala Rashid, Negotiations Support Unit (PA): With all due respect, if it were up to us, our proposal would be the 1967 line. But in the interest of peace and in good faith and with all sincerity, we presented something we thought addressed our interests and needs and rights, and also addressed your interests.

Dekel: We do not accept 67 as a baseline.

(later)

Dekel: I do not have permission to discuss Jerusalem without knowing what arrangements will be in Jerusalem.

Al-Abed: And Abu Ala said we cannot discuss Ma’ale Adumim.

Dekel: So let’s each lunch together, and let them [leaders] decide what to do.

ENDS

© Scoop Media