so general herzog, let me ask you, is there any possible way that the settlements that are being built not within the area that might become part of greater israel in a peace deal, but the part the settlements that are way beyond any security barrier deep into the west bank near the border with jordan, is there any way that those can be viewed as anything other than essentially a policy against the two-state solution? well, i personally support the policy of not doing settlement activities beyond the settlement blocks. i think that israel s policies should be in line with the statement, stated policy of supporting a two-state solution so we don t built in areas where we don t have claims to, and i would certainly hope that our
resolutions calling on the recognition of palestine as a state. here s what deputy national security adviser ben rhoads told me. just to be clear here, when secretary kerry says these are not the choices we will make, which is kind of vague, is he saying that the u.s. would veto any resolution in the u.n. which might dictate a peace solution or might recognize a palestinian state? yes. he would veto that? yes. the u.s. will veto that? yes. pretty clear. cnn s oren liebermann is in jerusalem with the latest. what is the reaction in israel? is this assurance that the u.s. will not permit a recognition by the u.n. security council of palestine as a state do anything to assuage netanyahu s feelings? prime minister netanyahu hasn t changed his tone. he is still furious not only about the speech but also the
that secretary kerry presented yesterday were presented through a person later, mahmoud abbas, on march 2014, in march 2014, at the white house, and he promised an answer in eight days, and never came back. so david, let me ask you, because right now it seems as though secretary kerry and others in the u.s. government, in the obama administration, are concerned that netanyahu and other israeli leaders are essentially abandoning a two-state solution. do you see any evidence that the palestinian leadership, whether the pol or hamas, or any other palestinian leadership group believed that there should be a two-state solution? it seems as though their charters, whether it s hamas or the plo, call for a one-state solution, a palestinian state. okay, i would draw a distinction, jake, between hamas
solution. i think that secretary kerry s concern about the future of two-state solution is being shared by many. i think where he s wrong and where he did not resonate with the israeli people is his contention that the main reason we failed is lack of trust and not guts within the parties, no major guts. as someone who s participated in israeli/palestinian negotiations for over two decades, i d say there are major guts. and what he said ignored the history of two decades of negotiations. and that s why it did not resonate with the israeli people. even those like myself who share the contention on the settlement activities is fonot helpful to peace. that ignores many years of negotiations. in fact, these very parameters
no more moves from obama. still has about three weeks to worry, for netanyahu, until he s dealing with the man he wants to deal with, president-elect trump. oren liebermann, thank you. a spokesman for the prime minister talking to cnn this morning. here s what he had to say this morning about what the real holdup to peace was in his view. what was so disappointing about secretary kerry s speech is it didn t really deal with the core issue of why this conflict continues to rage. and that has precisely nothing to do with the presence of jews in the west bank and everything to do with the palestine leadership s continued refusal to recognize a jewish state. israel s prime minister has called on president abbas literally to meet hundreds of times for peace talk, even invited him to the knesset. president abbas said no to recognizing israel as a jewish state, no to direct negotiations. since the disagreement right now seems focused on the kerry