WASHINGTON (IPS) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
laid out what he called his vision for peace with the Palestinians Tuesday, but
listed a set of conditions the Palestinians immediately called “a
declaration of war.”

Speaking before a joint meeting of the U.S. Congress that
capped five days of speeches by Netanyahu and President Barack Obama on the
Middle East, Netanyahu insisted on a unified Jerusalem as Israel’s capital,
reiterated his rejection of the borders that existed before Israel began its
occupation of the West Bank 44 years ago, and declared that Israel must
maintain a military presence in the Jordan Valley.

Palestinians have repeatedly declared their desire to
negotiate a two-state solution where Jerusalem would be the capital of both
states, with borders based on the Jun. 4, 1967 lines with agreed and equivalent
land swaps, and full sovereignty over the West Bank, of which the Jordan Valley
is a large part.

Netanyahu was elaborating on some remarks he had made the
previous day, before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a
lobby group described by CNN as “a major force in U.S. politics.”
Obama had spoken to AIPAC the day before, and his speech was well-received by
the audience and observers.

Obama stressed the importance of immediate movement on the
peace process.

“There is an impatience with the peace process – or the
absence of one,” he told the AIPAC audience. “Not just in the Arab
World, but in Latin America, in Europe, and in Asia. That impatience is
growing, and is already manifesting itself in capitals around the world.”

Consistent with his call in a speech three days earlier,
Obama then outlined his vision for borders and security, which he had said
should be the first two issues tackled.

“The United States believes that negotiations should
result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan,
and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel
and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps…
As for security, every state has the right to self- defense, and Israel must be
able to defend itself – by itself – against any threat… The full and phased
withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption
of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarized
state.”

The following day, Netanyahu and Obama met in the Oval
Office, with the subsequent press briefing featuring comments from Netanyahu
that many observers, including leading Israelis, saw as crossing the line.

“Netanyahu understood that he had broken a rule that an
Israeli leader must not break — he had come between the two American parties in
an election period,” Nahum Barnea and Shimon Shiffer, two leading Israeli
commentators, wrote in the leading Israeli daily, Yediot Ahronot.

Staunchly pro-Israel columnist Jeffrey Goldberg of The
Atlantic called Netanyahu’s behavior at the press conference
“pedantic” and “shocking.”

On Monday, Netanyahu struck a more conciliatory tone at
AIPAC, stressing bipartisan support for Israel among U.S. citizens and in
Congress.

He promised that, in his speech at Tuesday’s joint meeting
of Congress, he would “describe what a peace between a Palestinian state
and the Jewish state could look like.”

But his vision seemed only to make the stalemate with the
Palestinians even more intractable, this time with the overwhelming enthusiasm
of both Houses of Congress backing him.

“Rather than committing to a return to negotiations
without preconditions, as he demands from the Palestinians, Netanyahu
introduced his own preconditions,” said Debra DeLee, president and CEO of
Americans for Peace Now.

“Rather than extending his hand to the Palestinians to
come back to the negotiating table, Netanyahu laid out unyielding positions
which he knows cannot serve as the basis for, or be the realistic outcome of,
negotiations. Such preconditions are a non-starter and such positions are
anathema to reviving negotiations and to achieving real peace and security for
Israel.”

The speech was “a declaration of war against the
Palestinians,” said leading Palestinian official, Nabil Sha’ath.
“This is an escalation and unfortunately, it received a standing ovation.
We have nothing but to continue our struggle in the international arena and to
continue building our state and to continue our popular struggle. We don’t have
a partner for peace.”

Nabil Abu Rdainah, spokesman for Palestinian President
Mahmoud Abbas, said, “What Netanyahu put in his speech before the U.S.
Congress does not lead to peace, but puts more obstacles to the peace process.
For us, peace must be the establishment of a Palestinian state on 1967 borders
and East Jerusalem as its capital. We will not accept any Israeli presence in
the Palestinian state, especially on the Jordan River.”

But while many applauded President Obama’s speech at AIPAC
and his insistence on the 1967 borders as a starting point for negotiations,
other observers blamed Obama for the failure to take a strong enough stand with
Netanyahu.

“Obama did not call for a complete withdrawal of
Israeli troops and settlers from occupied Palestinian territory,”
Professor Stephen Zunes, chair of the Middle Eastern Studies programme at the
University of San Francisco, told IPS.

“Unfortunately, despite Palestinian president Mahmoud
Abbas agreeing to reciprocal territorial swaps… Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin
Netanyahu has refused to consider trading any land within Israel while
simultaneously insisting on annexing large swathes of occupied Palestinian territory,”
he said. “How such ‘mutually agreed-upon’ swaps will take place without
the United States exerting enormous leverage is hard to imagine.

“This raises serious questions regarding Obama’s
commitment to being an honest broker in resolving the conflict,” Zunes
said.