Washed It!

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu clashed publicly with President Obama on Tuesday over Israeli construction in disputed East Jerusalem, throwing a teetering Mideast peace effort deeper in doubt.

Responding to criticism from Obama, Netanyahu struck a defiant tone in commenting on plans to build 1,300 more Jewish housing units in East Jerusalem, saying his government had never agreed to limit construction in the city.

“Jerusalem is not a settlement. It is the capital of the state of Israel,” Netanyahu said in a statement. “Israel sees no connection between the diplomatic process and the planning and building policy in Jerusalem.”

Netanyahu’s statement came hours after Obama warned that the new construction, announced by Israel on Monday, could harm a renewed Mideast peace effort began in early September. Obama made the remarks a few hours after arriving in Indonesia, his boyhood home for four years, where he was set to deliver the second major speech Wednesday in his outreach to the Muslim world.

“This kind of activity is never helpful when it comes to peace negotiations, and I’m concerned that we’re not seeing each side make that extra effort involved to get a breakthrough,” Obama said. “Each of these incremental steps end up breaking trust.”

Israel also is moving ahead with 800 units in the West Bank settlement of Ariel, Israeli news reports said Tuesday.

Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said Israel’s latest expansions are part of “a premeditated process to kill the possibility of an independent Palestinian state.” He said that if the Obama administration is unable to get peace talks back on track in the coming weeks, it should recognize an independent Palestinian state with pre-1967 borders.

Israel claims all of Jerusalem, but the Palestinians claim East Jerusalem, which was captured in the 1967 Middle East War, as the capital of their future state. The international community does not recognize Israel’s annexation of the city’s eastern sector, and a succession of American administrations have urged Israel not to build there.

Netanyahu’s pronouncement was consistent with Israeli policy, yet his sharp tone may embarrass Obama at a moment of vulnerability. Obama is visiting the world’s largest Muslim country, and the rebuke may again raise questions in the Muslim world about how much influence the American leader really has on a priority issue.

The disagreement also comes a week after Obama suffered a setback in the midterm elections, which gave Republicans, who are likely to be sympathetic to Netanyahu’s point of view, majority control of the House of Representatives. Some Israeli officials and U.S. analysts had predicted before the election that Netanyahu might feel emboldened to push back on Obama if the Democrats fared poorly.

Obama launched a new peace effort Sept. 1, but it has been nearly stalled as the Palestinians refuse to negotiate unless Israel halts construction in the disputed areas. Palestinian leaders contend that the Jewish settlers are taking land whose ownership should be decided in negotiations.

Robert Danin, a former U.S. official and specialist on Arab-Israeli issues, said it may have been politically risky for Netanyahu to oppose the new construction project, since Israelis view such building as fully within their rights.

With Netanyahu planning to meet Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton in Washington on Thursday, the strong words will not help the U.S. efforts to bring the two sides back to the peace table, said Danin, who is with the Council on Foreign Relations.

“For there to be a deal, the temperature has to come down,” he said.

Israel’s go-ahead to build 1,300 homes in East Jerusalem met with a storm of disapproval from around the world, including all four members of the diplomatic “quartet” that seeks to promote the Mideast peace talks: the United Nations, the European Union, Russia and the United States.

The Russian Foreign Ministry said in a statement that Russia views the announcement “with most serious concern.… We find it essential that the Israeli party refrain from the declared construction.”

Obama’s relationship with Netanyahu has gone through alternating periods of warm and cool. Obama was furious with Netanyahu in March, when new construction was announced in East Jerusalem just as Vice President Joe Biden was visiting. In July, Obama warmly welcomed Netanyahu to the White House.

Yet Obama has maintained pressure on the Israeli prime minister like few recent presidents. In September, he called on Netanyahu from the podium of the United Nations General Assembly to halt settlement construction in the name of peace, a plea Netanyahu has so far resisted.

cparsons@latimes.com

paul.richter@latimes.com

Parsons reported from Jakarta and Richter from Washington. Times staff writer Edmund Sanders in Jerusalem contributed to this report.

Netanyahu defiantly answers Obama’s warning over construction in East Jerusalem

Israeli and Palestinian leaders formally reopened peace talks Thursday by setting a work plan for the next year, but adjourned without progress on their conflict over Israeli housing construction in disputed areas, an issue that threatens to quickly undermine the negotiations.

Meeting at the State Department, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas agreed to meet again on Sept. 15 and to work out an outline as the first step to reaching a final peace deal by next September. The two leaders, whose last face-to-face session was 20 months ago, plan to hold discussions every two weeks.

Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton, who hosted the four hours of talks, praised the two leaders.

“The decision to sit at this table was not easy,” she said. “We’ve been here before and we know how difficult the road ahead will be.”

But diplomats said officials on both sides as well as their American colleagues remain deeply anxious over the settlement construction dispute. A partial Israeli moratorium on new settlements in the occupied West Bank ends on Sept. 26 and Jewish leaders are reluctant to extend it. At the same time, Palestinians have threatened to walk out on the talks if construction resumes.

U.S. officials have urged Israeli and Palestinian leaders to stop publicly declaring their positions, in hopes that it will be easier for each to give ground in coming weeks, according to diplomats who declined to be identified because of the sensitivity of the talks.

U.S. officials are hoping that if the talks gain momentum in the coming weeks, it will give officials on both sides the political cover to make compromises that, at the moment, only are likely to inflame their constituencies.

As talks continue, it also will become more difficult for the leaders to break off their participation, diplomats noted.

Yet diplomats and outside observers also say it’s still difficult to see how a compromise could be reached.

Under one proposal, by Israeli Deputy Prime Minister Daniel Meridor, Israel would allow construction only in the large settlement blocs in the West Bank that Israel expects to annex in a final peace deal.

But critics say it will be difficult to sort out precisely which areas would be headed for annexation.

Akiva Eldar, a columnist for Israel’s Haaretz newspaper, said on Israel Radio on Thursday that the Meridor proposal would be hard to implement because it would require both sides to agree, before negotiations take place, on which settlements would be part of Israel and which would be dismantled.

He said there will probably be sharp disagreement over settlements such as Ariel, which is about 12 miles inside the West Bank.

“Talking about the settlement blocs without a detailed map is like playing chess with yourself,” he said. “The Palestinians [will] say, ‘You won’t get them for free. Show us a map.’ “

Another possibility is for Israel to privately agree to construction limits while publicly announcing that the moratorium is over. Netanyahu reportedly agreed to such a deal in recent months regarding building in Jerusalem.

Under such an arrangement, Netanyahu could use his influence to block any large-scale construction.

But Yossi Beilin, a left-leaning analyst and former Knesset member, said that without a moratorium, the possibility would exist for a project to proceed and set off an uproar that would bring the talks to a halt.

“This is the wrong way to have negotiations,” he said.

Despite behind-the-scenes U.S. pressure, Palestinian officials insist their position on the issue is firm. Some officials privately suggested they are willing to face the political consequences of publicly embarrassing President Obama by breaking off the talks.

Middle East talks begin with work plan

The fate of the U.S.-sponsored peace talks launched Thursday in Washington could hinge in part on how things play out in this hotly disputed West Bank city, where extremists on opposite sides suddenly find they share a common purpose: to sabotage the process.

The militant Palestinian movement Hamas, which hasn’t openly attacked West Bank settlers in about two years, renewed its campaign of violence this week with two drive-by shootings. It claimed responsibility for killing four settlers near Hebron on Tuesday and injuring two others a day later near Ramallah.

Jewish settlers around Hebron responded by throwing rocks at Palestinians and setting fire to a field. On Thursday, they demonstrated their contempt for what they termed the “fancy ceremonies” in Washington by rolling out bulldozers and cement mixers to resume construction in defiance of Israel’s 10-month moratorium. Settlers are also calling for the reinstallation of West Bank checkpoints and the waiving of gun permits to enable settlers to carry weapons.

The developments serve as a reminder that before Israeli and Palestinian negotiators can tackle big-picture issues such as the borders of a Palestinian state, the status of Jerusalem and refugees, the peace process will have to survive some daunting short-term challenges. Among them are the Sept. 26 expiration of Israel’s construction moratorium and a spike in Palestinian violence.

Hebron, home to more than 150,000 Palestinians and 400 Jewish settlers, is often at the center of the storm, and it is once again. Residents are bracing themselves and warn that violence could spread to other parts of the West Bank.

“The talks have renewed the cycle of violence,” said Khaled Amayreh , a Palestinian journalist and analyst. “Things are heating up.”

The next month will test the resolve of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, analysts say. Friction and violence at the launch of peace talks is nothing new. The question is whether the leaders will press ahead despite provocations or use them as justification to walk away.

The two leaders agreed in their first direct talks Thursday to meet again in the Middle East in two weeks, and then to reconvene about every two weeks thereafter. U.S. envoy George J. Mitchell cited a “constructive and positive mood” in the meeting.

However, the unresolved conflicts also were apparent. Netanyahu raised the issue of the attacks on Israelis in the West Bank this week. Abbas called on Israel to end all settlement activity.

“In every conflict, the closer the sides have gotten to an agreement, the more the peace spoilers started coming out of the woodwork,” said Professor Tamar Hermann, senior fellow at the Israel Democracy Institute, a research group. “But this is a transitional phase and if we give in to it, we will miss the opportunity.”

The settlement construction issue could offer the first glimpse of how committed both sides are to talks. Netanyahu has resisted Palestinian demands to extend the freeze, whereas Abbas has threatened to quit talks unless the freeze continues. Both men are under tremendous domestic pressure to stick to their positions and equally strong pressure from the U.S. and international community to bend.

Analysts have said that the two sides need to find a way to finesse the issue in coming weeks so they can move on to other, equally weighty topics.

Netanyahu’s position will demonstrate how serious his intentions are, wrote Eitan Haber, Israeli analyst and former advisor to assassinated Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin, on the Ynet news site Thursday. “Americans and Palestinians will view the freeze as a test case.”

At the same time, if Netanyahu refuses to budge, Abbas will face a similar dilemma over whether to reverse his stance or abandon what many experts believe could be the last round of negotiations for some time.

The attacks against Israeli settlers upped the ante for both men.

Netanyahu rejected immediate calls for him to quit the talks and return home.

David Wilder, spokesman of the Jewish Community of Hebron, blasted the U.S.-brokered peace process as an attempt to “sink Israel…. These attacks cannot continue, and the only way to stop them is to stop acquiescing to Obama and the terrorists who want to destroy us.”

The killings also hardened the resolve of many Israelis against pressure to extend the construction moratorium, a move they argue could now be seen as rewarding terrorism.

For Abbas, the killings meant being forced onto the defensive just as negotiations began. They bolstered Netanyahu’s demand that talks begin on the issue of security, rather than borders or settlements, which are Palestinian priorities.

Hamas leaders promised the violence would only continue, calling the first two attacks the start of a “series of operations” to be carried out by its militant wing.

Although Hamas controls the Gaza Strip, where 1.5 million Palestinians live, its operatives in the West Bank moved underground after the 2007 split with Abbas’ more moderate Fatah movement. In response to the Hamas attacks this week, Palestinian Authority security officers arrested several hundred Hamas supporters, Hamas officials said.

The attacks marked a turning point for Hamas, which has generally avoided armed assaults and rocket attacks against Israeli citizens since Israel’s 22-day assault against Hamas’ positions in the Gaza Strip in late 2008 and early 2009. Though rocket attacks from Gaza have continued to strike southern Israel, other militant groups claimed responsibility and Hamas had even tried to prevent such attacks, arguing that they were not in the “Palestinian national interest.”

That informal policy appears to have changed, probably because of the resumption of peace talks. Hamas officials say the resumption of armed attacks in the West Bank is not an attempt to spoil peace talks, but critics note that the Islamist movement has been harshly critical of the process.

The group’s attacks could soon present another challenge to budding peace talks. So far, Israel has not responded militarily, but Hamas officials are bracing for a round of retaliatory airstrikes in Gaza once Netanyahu concludes the peace summit in Washington.

edmund.sanders@latimes.com

Batsheva Sobelman in The Times’ Jerusalem Bureau and special correspondent Rushdi abu Alouf in Gaza City contributed to this report.
West Bank city of Hebron could be powder keg as Mideast peace talks begin

Elena Kagan was sworn in as the 112th justice of the Supreme Court on Saturday, opening the first era in U.S. history with three women serving on the nation’s premier judicial bench.

Chief Justice John G. Roberts Jr. administered the oath at the Supreme Court just two days after the Senate on Thursday voted to confirm her nomination by a 63-37 margin and one day after President Obama hosted a White House reception in Kagan’s honor.

She is not expected to dramatically change the ideological balance of the court because she replaces retired Justice John Paul Stevens, a fellow liberal jurist. But her installation marks a historic demographic milestone. Women now make up one-third of the nine-member court, as Kagan joins Sonia Sotomayor and Ruth Bader Ginsberg as associate justices. The first and only other woman to serve on the court was Sandra Day O’Connor, who served from 1981 to 2006.