By Daoud Kuttab

Whenever peace talks are considered there are two elements that need to be attended to: the actual negotiations and the public at large. The negotiations themselves require agreement on the parties to the talks, the framework on which the talks are based, the duration of the talks and the various procedures that govern the negotiating process.

A parallel, and some would argue as more important, is the role of the general public. Negotiations are a peaceful means of resolving a violent conflict. Rejection by the public of a negotiating procedure or the eventual results can — and have often — ended up in a major spike in violence. Whenever cease-fire agreements fail, it is usually due to a lack of faith by the respective parties that the political elements attached to the cease-fire are acceptable and sustainable.

In the Palestinian-Israeli context there is a tremendous role in how the public reacts to the procedure of the talks, and eventually whether the public signs on and approves the results of the talks or not. Some would argue that negotiations over the final status of the occupied territories that were launched in the White House in 1993 failed because of the refusal of Palestinian and Israeli rejectionists. Islamic Hamas supporters launched suicide attacks, Israeli Jewish settlers killed 29 worshipers in Hebron and assassinated Israeli Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin as well as caused havoc in the occupied territories. Continue Reading »

By Daoud Kuttab

During the difficult reconciliation efforts between the Palestine Liberation Organization (PLO) and Hamas, a resolution was found to deal with the issue of talks with Israel, which the latter refuses to recognize. The Hamas leadership conceded that the PLO could negotiate with Israel provided that any agreement reached is put to a public referendum.

A similar decision to hold a referendum in Israel has also been agreed to by Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and some of his right-wing coalition members opposed to a two-state solution. The Israelis’ decision seems more unusual than the one by the Palestinians.

Normally, when leaders of sovereign countries reach a deal with a foreign entity, the executive branch initials the agreement and then the accord is ratified by a vote in the country’s legislature. That is what Israel did when Prime Minister Menachem Begin signed the landmark Camp David agreement with Egypt in 1978 and what Prime Minister Yitzhak Rabin did when he signed the memorandum of understanding with the PLO in 1993 and the Wadi Araba peace agreement with Jordan in 1995. The Jordanian parliament approved the latter as well. Continue Reading »

By Daoud Kuttab

Following appeared in various publications.

One of the reasons for the success of social media’s Twitter platform is its ability to summarize a major issue in a few characters, while at the same time providing a link to give more details and credibility to the few words.

This week a political activist used some clever research to reveal the hypocrisy and double standards of a politician. Twitter user @bungdan juxtaposed two quotes of maverick US Senator John McCain regarding the situation in Egypt. In a tweet this week he quoted McCain as calling on the Egyptian army and the new powers-to-be to include members of the Muslim Brotherhood in the post-June 30 regime. At the same time, he dug up a quote given by McCain to the German magazine, Der Spiegel, in which the Republican senator states that he is “unalterably opposed” to the involvement of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt’s transition.

It is not clear if McCain was speaking his mind then or now, and if his most recent statement is aimed at his party’s political opponent who is now in the White House.

This double standard is clearly not restricted to senators or to Egypt and the Muslim Brotherhood. It can easily be seen in more basic American values enshrined so eloquently in the US constitution’s bill of rights. Continue Reading »