Secretary Kerry presses Israel & Palestine

[sear]

Kerry presses Israel and Palestinians for concessions to pave way for peace talks

RAMALLAH, West Bank — Beginning a tentative round of Middle East shuttle diplomacy, Secretary of State John F. Kerry is asking for small concessions from both Israel and the Palestinians to pave the way for new talks, U.S. and other officials said Sunday.

Kerry first visited Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, who has resisted new talks for most of the past four years. His government had sought to file a complaint with the International Criminal Court against Israel over homebuilding in Jerusalem, but put the plan on hold shortly before Kerry arrived.

Kerry presses Israel and Palestinians for concessions

During Middle East trip, Kerry also says Israel, Turkey must stick to agreement to end their estrangement.http://www.washingtonpost.com/world/middle_east/kerry-presses-israel-turkey-to-mend-ties/2013/04/07/493be3a4-9f7e-11e2-9c03-6952ff305f35_story.html

Is this the biggest blunder of Secretary Kerry's brief tenure?

When Israeli citizens were being massacred by the dozens, on buses and at cafe's, by homicide bombers; there was an emergency to respond to.

But in April 2013, things are fairly calm.

Is it not painfully obvious that peace talks are a higher priority to Kerry than to either Israel, or Palestine?

Is this more about middle east peace; or Kerry's portfolio?

[+and-then]

Imo Kerry is just carrying Obama's water (of course) and the end game is forcing a deal on Israel while doing the minimum to discomfit the Palestinians. Perhaps I'm wrong. But I do not think Obama's record on Israel is as pristine as he says. I admit I have a bias toward Israel and due to my faith I cannot see a real peace occurring in the M.E. that has been negotiated by man. But from a purely secular POV there is abundant evidence that these two sides are as far apart as any two groups of human beings EVER have been. The Bible states that a peace treaty of 7 years will be enforced at some point and broken at the 3.5 year mark. I don't think this is the treaty but it could be the immediate predecessor.

[Sir Wearer of Hats]

sometimes when you can't fight the bushfire, you put out spot fires.

Perhaps he's trying to establish himself as, if not someone who can "bring peace" but at least get them to a table talking, that'd be kudos in and of itself.

[acidhead]

Imo Kerry is just carrying Obama's water (of course) and the end game is forcing a deal on Israel while doing the minimum to discomfit the Palestinians. Perhaps I'm wrong. But I do not think Obama's record on Israel is as pristine as he says. I admit I have a bias toward Israel and due to my faith I cannot see a real peace occurring in the M.E. that has been negotiated by man. But from a purely secular POV there is abundant evidence that these two sides are as far apart as any two groups of human beings EVER have been. The Bible states that a peace treaty of 7 years will be enforced at some point and broken at the 3.5 year mark. I don't think this is the treaty but it could be the immediate predecessor.

Just curious...

Compared to what?

[+and-then]

Just curious...

Compared to what?

I don't understand the question with regard to my statement you've bolded. What are you asking?

[AsteroidX]

I wish our leaders were popular like this.

[Corp]

Blunder? How is pushing for peace talks a blunder? The US has been pushing for peace talks for a while now. There's really nothing new here.

[sear]

"The US has been pushing for peace talks for a while now. There's really nothing new here." C

Yes, when there was a semblance of enthusiasm among the primaries; we tried it repeatedly, and failed all but once (President Carter).

It's obvious at the moment, there's simply not much will to negotiate on either side; and less prospect for success than in most previous attempts.

"Blunder? How is pushing for peace talks a blunder?" C

The U.S. establishes international prowess with success.

Stacking together a tower of doggy doo, and having it collapse all over U.S. is only going to make us look like %#@$!

I predict Secretary Kerry will expend U.S. resources, expend U.S. persuasive capital, and get less in return than he expends.

Peace in the Middle East? Between Israel and Palestine? WHERE DO I SIGN!!

FABULOUS IDEA! ! !

Do you really think whatever Secretary Kerry will do will lead to that? I wouldn't bet on it.

[Corp]

The US has been trying to get a Middle East peace process going for decades now. This is just them taking another kick at the can. This is no more a blunder than the last dozen times this has been attempted.

[sear]

"This is no more a blunder than the last dozen times this has been attempted." C

Without context I might agree.

But in context of Netanyahu's ruthless expansionism, in context of Palestine's redirected focus toward its own prosperity instead of Israel's destruction;

that puts the burden on Kerry.

If Kerry, the mediator, is more interested in negotiating peace than either of the primaries; Kerry insinuates himself into a position of great weakness.

Has the U.S. mediated before? UNQUESTIONABLY!!

Has the U.S. ever mediated against such formidable adversity (aka disinterest)?

I couldn't cite an example.

Can you?

[+and-then]

I wish our leaders were popular like this.

[media=]

[/media]

The look on Putin's face was PRICELESS! Attack of the TATAS

[AsteroidX]

I thought he took it very well. He even gave a

[Corp]

Without context I might agree.

But in context of Netanyahu's ruthless expansionism, in context of Palestine's redirected focus toward its own prosperity instead of Israel's destruction;

that puts the burden on Kerry.

If Kerry, the mediator, is more interested in negotiating peace than either of the primaries; Kerry insinuates himself into a position of great weakness.

Has the U.S. mediated before? UNQUESTIONABLY!!

Has the U.S. ever mediated against such formidable adversity (aka disinterest)?

I couldn't cite an example.

Can you?

Israel and Palestine are actually relatively peaceful when compared to their general relationship. And while neither side is that interested in peace that's hardly new. The fact is the US has been pushing for a peace treaty for decades. Since the latest peace talks broke down the US has encouraged both sides to get together several times. Kerry it just following the set policy for not only the last four years but also the last several decades. Even taking in all the proper context there is still no major blunder here.

[praetorian-legio XIII]

Well at least he didn't referr to them as Israestine & Palerael.

[sear]

"The fact is the US has been pushing for a peace treaty for decades ... Kerry it just following the set policy for not only the last four years but also the last several decades." C

My point precisely!

It's the same old policy, in substantially different political environment.

What might have been perfectly sensible decades ago is in 2013, incongruous; a certain failure.