Palestinians control of most of Hebron, and accepted further withdrawals under the
Epstein Suite indexes the text; the original document lives at its official source. We don't host the original file — view it on the official release to read it in full.
View the original on the official releasePeople & organizations named in this document
Being named here is not an accusation of wrongdoing.
Document text
Text is machine OCR and may contain errors. Confirm against the original source above.
/ BARAK / 126
Palestinians control of most of Hebron, and accepted further withdrawals under the
Wye River agreement. But amid predictable protests from the right, he had
promptly retreated from his Wye commitments. I knew that his default response to
Obama’s call for a settlement freeze would be “no.” And it was, delivered first to
the cabinet and then to the public, as soon as he got back from his talks with the
President.
In my repeated meetings with Bibi in the weeks that followed — both one-on-
one, and within the informal group of close ministers and aides known as the
Group of Eight — I tried to persuade him that, if only because of America’s key role
on Iran, we needed to show some sign of engagement with Obama’s efforts. I was
not entirely alone. One ally was an old friend: Dan Meridor, who had rejoined the
Likud before the election. Another was more unexpected: Avigdor Lieberman. He
was never going to accept a settlement freeze. Not only did his heart, and political
interests, lie on the West Bank. He lived there. But like many in the party he led,
he had come to Israel from the former Soviet Union, shaping a worldview that in
many ways remained European, and pro-Western. He was worried about creating
the impression of blanket Israeli intransigence toward a popular new American
President, and isolating ourselves internationally, if we didn’t go some way
towards helping to restart talks with the Palestinians.
Though Bibi showed no signs of retreat on the settlement freeze, he did accept
that broader point. Ten days after Obama’s Cairo speech, he publicly accepted the
idea of a Palestinian state for the first time, having ruled it out as recently as the
month before in his White House talks with the President. The shift was dismissed
as trivial not just by the Palestinians, but by many in my own Labor party and
almost everyone else on the left. I disagreed. I knew how deep, genuine and
longstanding Bibi’s resistance to Palestinian statehood was. But I had another,
serious concern about the “peace plan” he announced: an entirely new precondition
he insisted the Palestinians must meet if peace was ever going to be possible. He
said they must “clearly and unambiguously recognize Israel as the state of the
Jewish people.” On a whole series of levels, that made no sense to me. We hadn’t
asked Egypt or Jordan to grant us explicit recognition as a Jewish state when we
made peace with them. Even when Bibi himself had briefly tried to open
negotiations with Damascus in his first period as Prime Minister, we’d never felt
the need to ask it of the Syrians either. To the extent there was any logic in
demanding it of the Palestinians, Bibi’s reasoning seemed to be that this would
412
HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_028260
Have a question about what this document contains?
Ask the documents