Israel and the Middle East News Update

Friday, April 22

Headlines:  Bibi Urges Putin to Strengthen Security Coordination in Syria  Arab League Rejects Netanyahu’s Claim to the Golan Heights  PA Holds Off on UNSC Resolution to Not Disrupt French Peace Initiative  Shin Bet Confirms J’lem Bomber’s Identity, Arrests Father and Accomplices  West Bank on Lockdown for Passover  Israel Guards Temple Mount from Activists Over High Holiday  Israel Plans to Improve Conditions at ‘Shameful’ West Bank Crossing  Kerry, Zarif to Meet Again as Iran Complains US Not Fulfilling Its Bargain

Commentary:  Ha’aretz: “French FM: Summit to Bring Guarantees, Not Just Declarations”  By Dov Alfon, Former Editor-in-Chief, Ha’aretz  Washington Institute: “Next Step for Israeli-Palestinian Security Coordination”  By Ghaith al-Omari, Senior Fellow, The Washington Institute for Near East Policy

S. Daniel Abraham Center for Middle East Peace 633 Pennsylvania Ave. NW, 5th Floor, Washington, DC 20004 www.centerpeace.org ● Yoni Komorov, Editor ● David Abreu, Associate Editor

News Excerpts April 22, 2016

Yedioth Ahronoth Bibi Talks to Putin to Strengthen Security Coordination in Syria While Netanyahu met with the Russian president to discuss urgent matters in the Middle East, it was learned that Russian forces had fired in the past at least twice at IAF planes. This issue arose during Rivlin’s visit to Moscow—at which time Putin said was the first he had heard about it. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Russian President Vladimir Putin met yesterday in the Kremlin for three hours to mainly discuss Syria and the functioning of the military coordination between the two countries. “I came here for one main purpose—to strengthen the security coordination between us in order to prevent mishaps, misunderstandings and unnecessary clashes,” Netanyahu said. See also, “Israel Urges Russia to Tighten Coordination Ties in Syria” (Defense News) See also, “Kremlin Denies Reports on Russian Fire on Israeli Jets in Syria” (Jerusalem Post)

Times of Israel Arab League Rejects Netanyahu's Claim to the Golan Heights Arab League chief Nabil al-Arabi called Thursday for a special criminal court to be set up for Israel, at a meeting to condemn an announcement that it will never return the Golan. Delegates to the 22- member Arab bloc based in Cairo are expected to pass a resolution denouncing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s pledge Sunday that the Golan Heights would remain Israeli “forever.” Israel was acting like “a country that is above the law and accountability,” Arabi told delegates. See also, “EU: Golan Heights Do Not Belong to Israel” (Daily Sabah)

Al Arabiya PA Holds Off on UNSC Resolution to Not Disrupt French Confab Palestinian Foreign Minister Riyad al-Maliki said Thursday that a push for a UN resolution demanding an end to Israeli settlement expansion will be put on hold to focus instead on a French proposal for a peace conference on May 30. The draft resolution was circulated to Arab countries and some members of the Security Council earlier this month as part of a drive for UN action in support of the two-state solution. “We have agreed that our move at the Security Council should not jeopardize in any way the French initiative,” Maliki told reporters in New York. “We should really sail smoothly in a way that the French initiative will continue,” he said, adding that the Palestinians would decide on formally presenting the draft text at a later time.

Jerusalem Post Shin Bet Confirms J’lem Bomber’s Identity, Arrests Father After days of police silence and media speculation, Shin Bet on Thursday confirmed the identity of the Palestinian who detonated a bomb on an Egged bus in Jerusalem. The confirmation comes less than 24 hours after Hamas claimed responsibility, and lauded its operative, Abdel Hamid Abu Srour for carrying out the attack that wounded 20 men, women, and children. Srour died on Wednesday night at Shaare Zedek Medical Center following multiple surgeries after his legs were blown off. See also, “Hamas Suspects Arrested Over Jerusalem Bombing” (BICOM)

2

Arutz Sheva West Bank on Lockdown for Passover Israel has announced the closure of all points of entry between the West Bank and Gaza on the one side and sovereign Israeli territory on the other both on Friday and Saturday for the Passover holiday, amid high terror warnings. Tensions are high with fears of attack attempts targeting the holiday celebrations, especially given the Hamas bus bombing in Jerusalem on Monday that left 15 victims wounded, in what was the first bus bombing of the current Arab terror wave that has claimed the lives of 34 victims since last September. The blockade was decided after "an evaluation of the security situation," a military spokesperson told AFP without giving specifics. See also, “Israel Shuts Entrances to West Bank and Gaza Strip for Passover” (Voice of America)

Israel Radio News Israel Guards Temple Mount from Activists Over High Holiday Two Temple Mount activists, Refael Morris and Yair Kehati, were issued with restraining orders barring them from entering Jerusalem until the end of the Passover holiday due to concern that they and other activists would try to sacrifice a Passover sacrifice at the site of the Temple Mount. The restraining order was signed by OC Yoel Strick. Refael Morris said in response that the authorities would not succeed in silencing him and his friends and keeping them from offering the Passover sacrifice on the Temple Mount. See also, “Israel Arrests Jewish Activists for Passover Plot to Sacrifice Lamb on Temple Mount” (Newsweek)

Times of Israel Israel Plans to Improve Conditions at 'Shameful' WB Crossings As part of a wider effort to boost Israeli-Palestinian economic ties, the Finance Ministry is planning to improve the much-criticized conditions at crossings where tens of thousands of Palestinians enter Israel daily from the West Bank to work, a ministry spokesperson told The Times of Israel on Thursday. The plan to increase bilateral economic ties initially calls for new work permits to be granted for 7,800 additional Palestinian laborers, some of whom will be employed in skilled fields such as high-tech, medicine and construction planning. To facilitate the expected increase of workers crossing into Israel, the plan immediately allocates NIS 10 million (some $2.6 million) to improve crossings, and calls for “upgrading and expanding” the crossings to a level “suitable for regular workers.” See also, “Future of Palestinian Town Bleak After Israel Shuts Quarries” ( News)

Middle East Eye Kerry, Zarif to Meet as Iran Complains US Not Fulfilling Bargain U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry will meet in New York on Friday with Iran's Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif, as Tehran complains that Washington has not lived up to its nuclear deal obligations. Kerry's spokesman, John Kirby, told reporters in Washington that the two top diplomatic chiefs plan to hold another day of talks following a meeting at the UN on Tuesday. Tehran has said it is not receiving enough sanctions relief. See also, “Kerry, Zarif Prepare to Reconvene on Iran’s Sanction Complaints” (Times of Israel)

3

Ha’aretz – April 21, 2016 French FM: Summit to Bring Guarantees, Not Just Declarations

In an interview with Ha’aretz, Jean-Marc Ayrault says the path for Israeli-Palestinian peace is based on the 1967 borders and Jerusalem as a shared capital, and stresses that violence and the settlements are obstacles to talks.

By Dov Alfon  French Foreign Minister Jean-Marc Ayrault elaborated on the French positions on the Israeli- Palestinian peace process on Thursday, saying that violence between the sides and the settlements were the two immediate obstacles to continued talks.  In an interview on Thursday with Haaretz and other international journalists, Ayrault spoke about the French peace initiative, which is to be the focus of a summit meeting of foreign ministers in Paris on May 30. He attributed great importance to active Russian participation in the conference, and said that in his talks with Russian President Vladimir Putin and Foreign Minister Sergei Lavrov, the topic of the freeze in the talks between Israel and the Palestinians has been raised as a focal point of the danger of a broader flare-up in the Middle East.  What is the goal of the conference in Paris?  The goal is clear, he says. “To build a collective commitment of the international community in preparation for paving a diplomatic horizon for peace. It is in everyone’s interest. The guiding principle is also clear and recognized: The two-state solution. I want to return to the guiding principles of this solution, because there is a tendency not to mention them. We are talking about the State of Israel and the state of Palestine living side by side in peace and security, with secure and recognized borders on the basis of the 1967 borders, with Jerusalem their shared capital.”  This is not acceptable to Israel.  “I did not say it would be easy. The parties are now far apart, maybe more than ever. We have on one side, in Israel, a government that shows more and more ambivalence to the two-state plan... and on the other side the Palestinians, who are not only divided [on this question], but also must address growing anger from their public. And we also have the situation itself — there is no need to mention there have already been two conflicts in six years. Is there an alternative to the plan we are proposing? The only other option is a fatalistic acceptance of conflict. I reject that approach.”  In his first response to the French initiative on February 16, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu called it “strange.” Will his response be any different when he receives an invitation to the conference?  “Just today I read the position paper of the association of Palestinian NGOs for peace, which called our initiative ‘almost ridiculous’ because in their opinion it is ‘sentenced to failure in advance.’ We know there is a very narrow opening for this initiative, and it is clear we could also have ignored this opportunity. But all our partners agree there is a clear and present danger to a renewed flare-up of violence. Over 20 countries understood this and confirmed their intention to participate in the conference.

4

 We are working in full transparency with the Israelis and Palestinians on our intentions, and I will clarify them again when I come to the region soon. We are working closely with Egypt, which completely supports the initiative, with the Saudis, with the Jordanians, with the members of the Arab League who support the initiative. All the member countries of the [European] Union are concerned. Everywhere I have gone in recent weeks, from Russia to Japan, I passed on this message. And of course I spoke about this a lot with John Kerry. The American presence at the conference is crucial. The Americans invested great energy in restarting the talks — they can see the conference as renewed appreciation of their actions.”  Will John Kerry come to the conference?  “I still don’t know. The Americans are invited of course; it is impossible to hold the conference without them, and everyone wants their active participation.”  Is the threat that France will recognize a Palestinian state if Israel does not cooperate with the initiative still in effect?  “To speak now about what France will do or not do in the case of failure would not be productive. In the case of failure, France will act according to its responsibility. But today I do not want to speak about failure, otherwise there would not be any reason to try — there would not be any reason to meet with you.”  Is the report correct that in the case of an Israeli refusal, the United States would avoid casting a veto this time if France presents a resolution to the UN Security Council based on the general principles of the initiative?  “I can’t answer you. It depends on which resolution. We must see, I need to speak with John Kerry on the matter. Every time we speak, we see how complicated the situation is.”  How can such a conference reduce the distance between the two parties?  “As for the European Union, the EU and its member states will discuss, for example, the special partnership with Israel and with the Palestinians in case they do sign a peace agreement. This is cooperation that was agreed upon in 2013 and it is the most generous the EU has ever offered countries that are not members. It is not just political cooperation, but also scientific, economic, cultural. We of course will work on the details, among other things, regarding access to the European Union market. I want to remind you that a third of the foreign trade of Israel is conducted with Europe. We will also discuss the Arab peace initiative, a plan that has been on the table since 2002, that is courageous and sensible. And of course, the Europeans and Americans will discuss the ways in which they can bring security guarantees to carry out the agreement, because it is clear the security issue is one of the key questions, maybe the biggest question. We will need to bring guarantees, not just declarations.”  How much does France see the conflict as a matter linked to its own internal policies, for example towards the French Muslim population?  “Our goal is not to let despair take hold of the population at the heart of the conflict, because this will lead to extremism. It is true there and it is also true for our communities, mostly among young people. We definitely feel tension in France too, and it is clear I want to reduce all communal tensions. So this initiative is important and its timing is important.” Dov Alfon is the former editor-in-chief of Ha’aretz. 5

The Washington Institute – April 20, 2016 The Next Step for Israeli-Palestinian Security Coordination By Ghaith Al-Omari  According to media reports, Palestinian and Israeli security officials are inching toward new security understandings that would limit (IDF) operations in portions of "Area A" in the West Bank. The discussions are significant not only because they shed light on one of the few remaining spheres of active bilateral cooperation, but also because they indicate a new approach that holds promise in the absence of official political negotiations.  Background  The 1995 Interim Agreement on the West Bank and Gaza Strip (commonly known as Oslo II) divided the West Bank into three areas. Area C, which constitutes around 60% of the territory, was to remain under full Israeli civil and military control. In Area B -- which covers approximately 20% of the West Bank and is composed largely of Palestinian-populated rural areas -- civil affairs and public order were to be under the Palestinian Authority's control while Israel maintained overriding security responsibility. The remaining 20% was designated as Area A, comprising Palestinian cities and placed under the PA's civil and security control. The Oslo Accords also stipulated mechanisms for security cooperation, including high-level bilateral committees and joint patrols.  These arrangements remained in effect until the breakout of the in 2000, when Palestinian and Israeli security forces ceased cooperation and regularly clashed. During Operation Defensive Shield in 2002, the IDF entered almost all of Area A. It has since largely redeployed outside the area, but it continues to conduct frequent operations into Palestinian cities, often referred to as "incursions." Palestinians regard these operations as an unwarranted breach of the Oslo Accords, while Israel maintains that they have specific, pressing, and sensitive security objectives.  Revival of Security Cooperation  As the second intifada wound down, the PA embarked on rebuilding and reforming its security agencies. These efforts picked up steam when Prime Minister Salam Fayyad took office in 2007 after the violent Hamas takeover of Gaza. A central tenet of the new PA security sector was to deepen and professionalize cooperation with the IDF. To bolster this process, Washington established the Office of the U.S. Security Coordinator for Israel and the Palestinian Authority. In addition to helping with the training of new Palestinian forces, the USSC facilitated the resumption of their cooperation with Israel. Initially skeptical, the IDF later embraced the cooperation and now regularly acknowledges its utility.  While the reimposition of law and order that resulted from security reform was popular among the Palestinian public, the cooperative aspect was less so. Security personnel were accused of acting as collaborators and subcontractors for Israel, and images of Palestinian officers standing down as Israeli forces entered their cities were one of the most visible symbols of this powerlessness.

6

 Yet even as political meetings came to an almost complete halt after the collapse of direct negotiations in 2014, security cooperation was intensified because it served both parties' interests. Israel has since been able to reduce its activities in the West Bank as the PA increased its own -- during a cabinet briefing on April 6, IDF Central Command chief Maj. Gen. Roni Numa noted Palestinian forces are now handling around 35% of security cases there, up from 15% a few months prior. Israel also has more incentive to limit its on-the-ground reaction to various problems (e.g., ongoing diplomatic tensions and the current wave of stabbings), as well as to support measures that facilitate Palestinian economic projects, increase the number of Palestinian workers in Israel, and broaden the sphere of operations for Palestinian forces.  For its part, the PA has no interest in allowing the security situation to deteriorate, since widespread instability could threaten its very survival. Despite these considerations, the Palestine Liberation Organization's Central Council decided in March 2015 that security cooperation should be severed due to growing public opposition. While the PA has not implemented this decision, it faces tremendous political pressure to do so. In particular, President Mahmoud Abbas and his security chiefs have long identified incursions as one of the key factors eroding their forces' domestic credibility. The current proposal for limiting this practice originated within the Israeli security establishment, initially focusing on a potential pilot phase in Ramallah and Jericho that would gradually extend to the rest of Area A. The scope of the proposed measures has evolved as the talks continue, but the parties must contend with a number of challenges before the understandings can become policy.  The Nexus of Politics and Security  The proposal to progressively limit Israeli operations is rooted in the IDF's professional assessment that Palestinian forces can dependably undertake full responsibility in some parts of Area A -- though Israeli security officials maintain that the PA is not yet capable of controlling the entire area. The decision is also motivated by the IDF's understanding that their Palestinian counterparts need some sign of progress in order to bolster their domestic standing and counter their critics. Implementing the proposed measures would address one of the main issues eroding Palestinian public support for security cooperation.  Despite originating from the professional security echelon, the ongoing talks could not have been initiated without the blessing of the political leadership, including the Israeli prime minister and defense minister. Likewise on the Palestinian side, while talks are conducted by security officials, they could not have proceeded without the blessing of President Abbas. Yet formalizing the proposed measures in a negotiated agreement would raise political challenges. In Israel, for example, some members of the current governing coalition would argue that such an agreement "outsources Israel's security" (as Minister Naftali Bennett recently charged) or makes "concessions" without a quid pro quo. On the Palestinian side, the PA's political weakness makes it vulnerable to domestic accusations of excessive concessions to Israel.  Additionally, Palestinians are gearing up for the post-Abbas era, with potential presidential aspirants likely trying to prove their hardline credentials. In this charged environment, Palestinian officials would be loath to formally accept any arrangements that do not mandate full implementation of the Area A security regime spelled out in the Oslo Accords, since anything short of that would be seen as accepting the IDF's right to operate there. The challenge is how to insulate security issues from political considerations as much as possible. 7

 Coordination, not negotiations  So far, the parties have maneuvered these challenges by limiting the talks to interactions between security officials over technical issues that fall under their operational mandate. Instead of a traditional negotiation, they are approaching the talks as "coordination." Under this heading, security officials can finalize modalities for limiting IDF operations in some parts of Area A and start implementing them by presenting them as operational decisions akin to other choices made in the normal course of security cooperation.  Meanwhile, political leaders can maintain their rhetorical positions even as security discussions proceed. Israeli politicians can accurately state that the IDF maintains freedom of action throughout Area A so long as negotiators do not formally agree otherwise, and they can continue to make a slew of diplomatic demands from the PA. Likewise, Palestinian officials can accurately claim that they still reject any Israeli action in Area A and keep making their own diplomatic demands.  Ultimately, then, the outcome of this process rests on the extent to which it can be kept in the security realm: the less political demands are inserted into the process, the more likely it is to succeed. Requiring a formal agreement would encourage both sides to overload the negotiators with political demands that would preclude actual implementation. In contrast, approaching the issue as a set of coordinated operational understandings would allow them to maintain their current posture of technical cooperation, fending off any accusations of excessive concessions by accurately pointing out that no formal concessions have been made.  Despite the best efforts to keep security away from politics, however, Palestinian and Israeli political leaders will continue to face domestic pressure to use the current talks as a means of extracting diplomatic concessions. To help buffer the process from these political winds, the United States could assume a greater role in moving the discussions forward. The USSC has already been active in facilitating the process by virtue of his extensive relations with the Palestinian and Israeli security establishments and the trust he enjoys therein, but strengthening his unique role could greatly increase the prospects for success. In addition to the USSC's efforts on the ground, Washington may need to urge both sides to continue buffering the security talks from political interference. Yet the specific content of the talks -- including the pace and initial scope of the proposed arrangements -- should be left to the parties.  Establishing a process whereby the IDF limits its operations in Area A and the PA maintains security there could empower the Palestinian security forces domestically while meeting Israel's security needs. This could in turn enable further coordinated steps in the West Bank in the future. While such steps cannot bring about a two-state solution on their own, they can bring the parties closer to that goal. Ghaith al-Omari, a senior fellow at The Washington Institute, previously served in various advisory positions with the Palestinian Authority.

8