Inside the Middle East
January 24, 2011
Posted: 1231 GMT
A former Israeli government official claims Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas almost reached a deal in 2008.
A former Israeli government official claims Ehud Olmert and Mahmoud Abbas almost reached a deal in 2008.

Palestinian negotiators offered to give up large areas of East Jerusalem to Israel during negotiations dating back to 2008, the Al-Jazeera network said, suggesting Palestinian leaders have been willing to offer much larger concessions in private than they had previously acknowledged in public.
On Monday a former Israeli government official said an agreement was almost reached during negotiations between former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas from the end of 2006 to September 2008.
"After dozens of meetings between Olmert and (Abbas) there was a proposal that was reached ... this offer was on all the issues we call core issues," Yanki Galanti, a former Olmert spokesman, said in an interview Monday with Israeli Army radio.
The core issues in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations are considered to be the status of Jerusalem, borders and refugees. Read more...

Posted by:
Filed under: Israel •Jerusalem •Media •Palestinians •Peace Talks

Share this on:
miriam   January 24th, 2011 4:28 pm ET

Once again it is evident how gullible CNN and other international news organizations continue to be.

Obviously these papers are designed to falsely encourage more hate towards Israel however the main aim was to bring about the downfall of the relatively moderate actors within the PA. Nevertheless, CNN etc only focus on the baseless anti-Israel angle.
As time is revealing, those blind accusations are irrelevent.

Anyone who has followed negotiations over the last decade knows that nothing is new in these leaks except for a few words here and there. Such supposed "concessions" were not a secret 10 years ago nor yesterday.

Negotiations involve putting varying positions on the table and discussing them, rather than the current belief that negotiations require the total surrender of one side to the other or the imposition of one side's demands on the other or one side's by-passing of negotiations altogether.

At present, accusations within the Arab community are going wild.
This episode has all but buried the peace process through Arab in-fighting. But of-course the blame is still placed on Israel.

BTW, Israel would never accept an offer that is in any reality impossible to implement on the GROUND even if on PAPER it appears to be a huge Palestinian concession.

miriam   January 25th, 2011 9:27 am ET

Where is the CNN TV or .com response to further Palileaks?

No comment on reported proposed Israeli concessions rejected by the PA who didn't even want to gain control of some Arab towns sitting on the Green Line. Nor any mention of transcripts where the supposed PA concessions do not include large Israeli population centres around Jerusalem.

If the leaks can be twisted to shine bad light on Israel it's worth reporting them but if they are critical of the PA they can be ignored.

Al Jazeera and The Guardian have demonstrated their shameful support for Hamas, meanwhile CNN shows its support for the PA.
In all cases, anti-Israel bias is obvious.

jcpa   January 25th, 2011 9:40 am ET

Today, with the prospect of “separation” from Arab neighborhoods and villages, security circles warn that a relaxation or loss of control within those areas could result in terror attacks originating from those areas. The previous withdrawal of Israeli forces from towns and villages in the West Bank brought about increased attacks on nearby Israeli targets.

read more at:

John A   January 25th, 2011 4:46 pm ET

Another turn in a never ending road.

The Americans are again revealed as a non competent mediators.

Illegal wars, an economy drowning in debt and scores of corrupt politicians have draw America closer to a state of global irrelevance.

I know the Jewish lobby in America will squeal at the idea, but its about time talks between Israel and Palestine were mediated by a nation which is impartial and not in the pocket of Goldman Sachs. How about China, Brazil, India, Russia or any other country for that matter.

America has had 60 years in the role of mediator and achieved nothing except for resentment, suspicion and failure. Surely its time the yanks stopped pretending that Israel is not their strategic investment.

4Bee   January 26th, 2011 9:54 am ET

Miriam, that's a serious dose of paranoia you've got there. Most people would see the main targets of these leaks as the Palestinian authority, not Israel.

Please, go and see a shrink.

miriam   January 26th, 2011 11:18 am ET


You obviously didn't read/understand what I wrote.

I wonder why?!!!!!

miriam   January 26th, 2011 12:01 pm ET

John A,

There is no state in the world that is impartial towards the conflict largely due to the rhetoric and distortions of international media.

The US has been the only state mature enough to mediate objectively even though it too is not impermeable to external influences.
That leaves the Israeli and Palestinians to negotiate by themselves and that means no running to the Arab League, UN, EU, US or anyone else for back-up.

60 years ago there were no negotiations. There was no movement calling for "Palestinian" statehood. The Arabs were only interested in the destruction of the Jewish state and were at the start of their everlasting embarassment at having been defeated by Israel.

The US was indifferent to Israel until after the 1967 war by which time there were still no negotiations since the recently formed PLO (created before the 1967 War to liberate "Palestine" from Israeli rule although not the West Bank from Jordan or Gaza from Egypt) rejected UNSC Res 242, and the Arab League made it clear in their Three "No's" resolution in Khartoum that there were to be no negotiations.

Your persistent problem with Goldman Sachs and its supposed influence on the US's ME policies is a simple resurgence of ages old bigotry. The fact that many banks around the world were established by Jews reflects more the continuous persecution of Jews following their expulsion from their homeland and their prevention from entering the general work force than any conspiracy to rule the world.

4Bee   January 27th, 2011 9:19 am ET

Miriam, I did read your first comment and noted that you saw the PA as the main target, but your comment "Obviously these papers are designed to falsely encourage more hate towards Israel" displayed that paranoia I mentioned.

There's nothing in these papers that would surprise any neutral or critic of Israel's settlement policies, and die hard supporters such as yourself will always see Israels side no matter what the evidence. Your use of quotes around the word Palestine speaks volumes.

John A   January 27th, 2011 10:37 am ET

Miriam, as you well know the first Arab Israeli conflicts were a result of Arab outrage caused by Israels ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Palestinian refugees were running from brutal Israeli terror gangs such as the stern gang and Irgun. Please remember Israeli started middle east terrorism.

In the Arab Israeli conflicts, Israel with its vastly superior weaponry ( given by the west) defeated the Arabs. Since then, Israels unbridled ethnic cleansing of Palestinians has continued to cause outrage and revenge.

Israel is a terror state. Always has been and always will be.

But as stated earlier, America is in decline and within time the USA will be no longer relevant to the peace process. You to claim America is politically the most mature country and best placed to handle negotiations. This just shows how ridiculous you are. America is a relatively new country, with relatively no experience of successfully working with foreign cultures. Americas rise to power was only due to European destruction in World war 1 & 2.

Europe has recovered. China, India and Brazil grow rapidly. America losses its control on the world and Americas biggest scam "Israel", has no future. Don't like it, sorry but it is as what it is.

proud zionist   January 27th, 2011 2:35 pm ET

John antisemitic liar A

"Miriam, as you well know the first Arab Israeli conflicts were a result of Arab outrage caused by Israels ethnic cleansing of Palestinians. Palestinian refugees were running from brutal Israeli terror gangs such as the stern gang and Irgun. Please remember Israeli started middle east terrorism."

As usual you have no concern for facts, nor concern for the truth.

I suggest you google Hebron massacre 1929 and others.

This will prove you to be a liar, and nothing but. But that w eknow already for a long time!!!!

Becket   January 27th, 2011 5:55 pm ET

For the people out there who are surprised at the Israeli intransigence get a life. I suggest you look at a documentary produced by RT. That’s what Israel does better than most, lie. Who supports them? The US. They have lied to the Americans. They have spied on the Americans. Their 5th Column in the US is very pro active. They rely on the US fundamental Christian allies (who by the way they hate) for support in this subterfuge. I am sure Hilary will find some excuse to explain this lie, pat the Israelis on the back and tell the Palestinians that they have not done enough to support the peace process. CNN will advise its commentators how to properly address this inconvenience and move on. Complete HYPOCRESY!

proud zionist   January 27th, 2011 7:21 pm ET

CNN censors: you let anisemite John liar A spread his inciting lies but delete fact disproving his hate campaign,

this makes you collbrators with anisemitic liars

how can you live with youselves?

miriam   January 27th, 2011 10:14 pm ET

John A,

It seems that you still refuse to accept that Arab Jewish conflict started long before the re-establishment of the Jewish state. Arab gangs were attacking Jews over 150 years ago with the first major planned massacres occuring in 1920 when the Jews were forbidden from even defending themselves.

From then on, massacres of Jews continued in 1921, 1929, 1936 and from 1947 onwards, all with the aim, and in some cases success, in ethnically cleansing the Jewish population from their towns and villages. It's no wonder that when Jews attempted to re-establish those communities they were accused of stealing and invading.

With the USSR arming the Arabs, the West supplied Israel with arms during the Arab initiated wars in the Cold War period.
Today, much of Israel's weaponry is domestically produced with other world powers purchasing Israeli arms.

Your desire for Israel's destruction and the demise of the US is an exercise in hate and immoral abuse of freedom of speech.

The lies, myths, distortions and projectionism used in spreading your anti-Israel/US/Western propaganda are nothing more than deception and an insult to humanity.

miriam   January 27th, 2011 10:55 pm ET


If you read the papers and the commentary accompanying them, there is no reason to claim that paranoia is responsible for believing that anti-Israel sentiment is ingrained in the agenda of those responsible for the leaks.

British Mandatory Palestine ceased to exist in May 1948 with the withdrawal of British troops. There has never been an independent state called Palestine. Under British control the Arabs considered it too Jewish or Zionist to be refered to as "Palestinian" and prefered to be known as Arabs, or southern Syrians. Suddenly, in 1967 they became Palestinians with new nationalistic aspirations on land that a few months earlier had been under the control of Egypt and Jordan.

That should explain the quotation marks and nevertheless, despite the obvious distortion of information deceiving many in the world, Israel is ready to accept the two-state solution.

Since nothing is new in these papers and it has been clear for many years that the Palestinians accepted that many of the Jewish settlements were going to remain, the fact that the settlements have become the major issue of the moment is an internationally created, artificial problem that would have been solved by the two sides.

Em   January 29th, 2011 9:50 pm ET

Politics has corrupion inbedded in the nature of its activities full stop!
Blame and revenge ,
Militant action,
Power wrestlers,
The enslavement ,control and abuse of woman
By tyrannical males
In the name of any religion
In the name of anything
Will cease
It will all have to fall!

miriam   January 30th, 2011 6:21 pm ET


It's hardly surprising that you should be deceived by radical left-wing, anarchist, anti-government elements within Israeli society.

In free societies such as Israel, it is very easy to push the limits of freedom of speech in order to damage the state. Such activities are especially attractive to those who have an obsessive interest in bringing about the destruction of the Jewish state.

Fortunately, despite their foreign funding by those who share your hateful desires, they are a tiny minority who make a lot of noise but arouse the disgust of the majority of Israelis through their distortions and disinformation resulting in the endangering of the lives of their fellow citizens.

proud zionist   January 30th, 2011 8:50 pm ET

Palestinians offered to "give up" parts of Jerusalem?

When did they ever have any part of Jerusalem?

If they never had any part of Jerusalem, what can they give up?

John A   February 1st, 2011 3:29 pm ET

Proud Zionist, so you think Jerusalem was built by Jewish immigrants from Poland since 1920? Obviously you have some remedial problems.

But for the sake of argument lets say Israel was the homeland of Jews 2000 years ago. Lets say Jews deserve a unique privilege and the world clock should turn back 2000 years in their favor. Give the Jews what was theirs. Okay.

If the Jews were given back what they claim was theirs 2000 years ago, then the Jews should have a few caves and stick houses returned to them.

Sadly the Jews don't want what they claim was theirs 2000 years ago. Instead they want to take the land and work of non Jews who have built homes and a country over the last 2000 years.

No matter how you slice it, Israel is theft by Jews, Bernie Madoff style.

miriam   February 2nd, 2011 1:20 pm ET

John A,.

In 1850, the year of the first census, Jerusalem was majority Jewish and has continued to be so ever since.

At that time, Jerusalem was entirely what you would now refer to as "east" Jerusalem.

For over 2000 years, Jerusalem has been built, destroyed and rebuilt many times by many conquerors, none of whom claimed or made it their capital, except for the Jews.

None of that abrogates the fact that Jews have an historical, religious and cultural right and claim to their homeland regardless of the obvious reality that their claim does not mean returning the developmental clock back thousands of years. (BTW, 2000 years ago Jerusalem was far more advanced than your mythical beliefs would suggest. We know history is one of your weak points).

Your denial of the centrality of the Holy Land to the Jews is denial of Judaism. But that we know is your agenda.

proud zionist   February 2nd, 2011 10:04 pm ET

John antisemitic liar A

I don't really give a bloody hoot what you think that I think

your lies are a well known fact, take your medicine, willya?

and again, when was Jerusalem part of anything the Palestinians ever owned? when did the palestinians appear for the first time?

I give you a hint, in the last century, dimwit

John A   February 3rd, 2011 11:46 am ET

Miriam in 1850 Palestine was 11% Jewish.

Before 1850 it was 3% Jewish.

Your Israelis were encouraged to immigrate by the British in the 1920s. They arrived on mass from eastern europe. Everyone knows this, so why do you even bother to lie?

The first violence between Arab and Jew occured when the British decided to create Israel and give 55% of the land to an 11% Jew population.

Israel is not the land God promised. It is the land the British Empire carved out with its guns. As the British Empire declined the American Empire assumed the same role.

History has taught us that no empire or product of it will last for ever. Israels time is numbered, no matter what lies and misinformation you spew.

By the way, is Proud Zionist your grandpa? He must keep the nurses busy.

miriam   February 3rd, 2011 3:00 pm ET

John A,

Once again you didn't read what I wrote.

In 1850 there was no Palestine. The Holy Land was divided into different sanjaks of the Ottoman Empire.

It is obvious why any estimated population count of Jews in the area now included in Israel puts them as a minority. When the Jewish population was massacred and expelled repeatedly, their numbers were diminished. When foreign empires invaded, they brought in their people hence the arrival of Arabs, Ottomans, Egyptians etc.

Jews have returned to the area continually throughout history. Increased immigration from north Africa accompanied the brief Egyptian conquest in 1832 and Jews from Europe increasingly returned from the mid 19th century in response to growing anti-Jewish attacks, modern nationalism and the resultant birth of modern Zionism.

The League of Nations recognition of the re-establishment of the Jewish state was an honest and legal position taken in the midst of massive immigration of Jews fleeing oppression, which resulted in rapid development in the region and consequent large Arab immigration.

The League of Nations mandated the British and French to carve out the entire ME into several countries, none based on any historical or nationalist basis other than the Jewish homeland.

Yusil   February 4th, 2011 4:10 pm ET

"As late as 1941, the Zionist group LEHI, one of whose leaders, Yitzhak Shamir, was later to become a prime minister of Israel, approached the Nazis, using the name of its parent organization, the Irgun(NMO)...[The proposal stated:] 'The establishment of the historical Jewish state on a national and totalitarian Pd bound by a treaty with the German Reich would be in the interests of strengthening the future German nation of power in the Near East...The NMO in Palestine offers to take an active part in the war on Germany's side'...The Nazis rejected this proposal for an alliance because, it is reported, they considered LEHI's military power 'negligible.' “Allan Brownfield in "The Washington Report on Middle Eastern Affairs", July/August 1998.

"What if Canada, Australia, South America, England and the United States were all to open a door to some migration? Even today [written in 1947] it is my judgement, and I have been in Germany since the war, that only a minority of the Jewish DP's [displaced persons] would choose Palestine...
"[Roosevelt] proposed a world budget for the easy migration of the 500,000 beaten people of Europe. Each nation should open its doors for some thousands of refugees...So he suggested that during my trips for him to England during the war I sound out in a general, unofficial manner the leaders of British public opinion, in and out of the government...The simple answer: Great Britain will match the United States, man for man, in admissions from Europe...It seemed all settled. With the rest of the world probably ready to give haven to 200,000, there was a sound reason for the President to press Congress to take in at least 150,000 immigrants after the war...
"It would free us from the hypocrisy of closing our own doors while making sanctimonious demands on the Arabs...But it did not work out...The failure of the leading Jewish organizations to support with zeal this immigration programme may have caused the President not to push forward with it at that time...
"I talked to many people active in Jewish organizations. I suggested the plan...I was amazed and even felt insulted when active Jewish leaders decried, sneered, and then attacked me as if I were a traitor...I think I know the reason for much of the opposition. There is a deep, genuine, often fanatical emotional vested interest in putting over the Palestinian movement [Zionism]. Men like Ben Hecht are little concerned about human blood if it is not their own." Jewish attorney and friend of President Roosevelt, Morris Ernst, "So Far, So Good."

miriam   February 9th, 2011 3:45 pm ET


A response to the first cut and paste can be found elsewhere.

Zionism has little to do with the results of the Holocaust and the bartering over refugee distribution around the world to appease the Arabs shows again that the inhuman treatment of the Jews of Europe did not end with the defeat of the Nazis.

Some among world Jewry had to deal with their guilt at having ignored the warning bells sounding in pre-war Europe when they were deceived and persuaded that anti-semitism was exagerated and Zionism was the revival of an historic fantasy not relevent in the "modern" world.

Some things don't change.

boxter   February 28th, 2011 4:19 pm ET

If it is ever reached, the current and any other artificial “peace agreement” will be illegitimate before it is ever signed because (1) all people living in Palestine regardless of religion, race, origin, etc. (hereinafter “All People of Palestine”) were never given a choice on how they want their land to be governed, and (2) all contracts signed under duress are null and void.

The biggest problem in Palestine is that the Zionist regime never offered a choice to All People of Palestine on how they want to govern their land because the Zionist regime cannot exist as a democratic entity. If there was ever any democratic process in Palestine, Zionists would have been outvoted and the Zionist regime would have never existed. That is why the Zionist regime is the occupier because it does not offer choice (i.e. democracy), but instead imposes its regime (i.e. occupies). Imagine if Russians would simply occupy a town in the U.S. where they are in significant numbers and attempt to create a Russian state there without giving the rest of the Americans living there a choice. Imagine then if they would try to institute a “peace agreement” that would attempt to legitimize their occupation. The “peace agreement” would logically and legally be illegitimate because the Americans were not given a choice.

Under all countries’ laws, any contract is null and void if it is signed under duress. The current Palestine “peace agreement” process reminds me of The Godfather movie where the mafia boss (i.e. the Zionist regime) made a guy “an offer he could not refuse” by placing a gun (i.e. Zionist conventional and nuclear arsenal) to his head and making him sign the contract. Like the mafia boss’ offer, any “peace agreement” other than the choice for All People of Palestine is a crime, and the contract is legally null and void.

The bottom line is that All People of Palestine never wanted to divide their land into artificial two states the way the occupation and this “peace agreement” attempt to divide it. From the beginning of the Zionist regime to its unavoidable end, All People of Palestine and the region never wanted the Zionist regime and they do not want it even more after all the atrocities the Zionist regime committed. I just cannot believe how the Zionist regime can be so ignorant to think that this or any other “peace agreement” that does not allow people to choose how they want to be governed will last and ensure its people’s survival. The Zionist regime fails to realize that no matter if it succeeds in muscling this “peace agreement” by unspeakable historic coercion tens of millions of moral people around the world will oppose it until it is corrected, and until justice and free choice prevail. Also, ever increasing number of Jewish people are realizing that Zionism is becoming a destructive force for them and are leading the global resistance to it.

P.S. feel free to copy this comment, email it to other bloggers, and repost it on other blogs, newspaper websites, Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking websites, and include it in any correspondence/lobbying with senators, state representatives and any other public officials so the public learns the truth…

lustboy   February 28th, 2011 4:39 pm ET

All who wish to reproduce my comment on mailing lists, repost on other blogs, or send to congress, senators and state representatives, or use for lobbying are welcome to do so. Let justice be served:

The only solution for a lasting piece is absolute democratic process (that we Americans cherish so passionately) for the entire territory in question, otherwise, the peace will not last. All people who lived there without regard to religion, race, etc. should vote on how they would like their one country to be run. I favor one state solution because two states would only attempt to “legalize” Zionist occupation that will be remembered in history until it is corrected by future large scale conflicts, so no lasting peace will result.

The only issue with the fair democratic process is what to do with all manipulated Jewish people who the Zionist regime imported for decades to increase the Jewish population from around 100,000 to over 5 Million since the start of the occupation. This is obviously an attempt to unjustly manipulate any future democratic process by forcefully increasing the occupier’s population at the expense of others. Any compromise other than the absolute fair democratic process with no manipulated population will be temporary with terrible conflicts looming to correct it in the future.

The truth is that the Zionist regime will not accept any democratic process even if the manipulated Jewish population is included because it cannot exist as a democratic country as Zionists will be outvoted by all others who live there (Zionists were in an infinite minority before the occupation). The Zionist regime can only temporarily exist through the force of its arms as a one people country where only select ones can vote and where different laws apply to different people.

The world must stand up against the Zionist regime by cutting all diplomatic and economic relations with it. Many countries have already stopped all relations with the Zionist regime and others are in the process of doing the same. We Americans need to completely distance ourselves from this oppressive regime through urging our state representatives and senators to do what the rest of the world is doing.

boxter   February 28th, 2011 7:02 pm ET

All who oppose the Zionist regime please STOP calling it “Israel” Every time you do it you reward the occupation of Palestine. Name “Israel” implies a state on the occupied territory. Call the occupiers what they really are: the Zionist regime. This way, every time you refer to it, you will imply its temporary nature (the nature of all occupying regimes). Encourage your fellow comment posters to use the name Zionist regime as well.

We must also be categorically against generalizing, and recognize that many Jews are against the crimes the Zionist regime is committing in their names, and that many Jews are leading the global resistance to it. They should be proud. I wish that they finally find piece wherever they choose to live (including Palestine) through a peaceful democratic process as opposed to the Nazi-style occupation the current Zionist regime is using.

The only way to oppose the Zionist controlled media and Zionist paid bloggers is to take each other’s comments and copy, repost, email, and otherwise distribute them to other blogs, newspaper websites, Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking websites. Please do so with this comment for justice to prevail.

miriam   March 1st, 2011 3:31 pm ET


There is little reason why anyone would want copy your self-righteous, ignorant, hate-filled rants, that is, unless they are also self-righteous, ignorant and full of hate.

The idea behind a peace agreement is to agree to something through negotiation. At the moment, the only side trying to impose an "agreement" are the Palestinians, demonstrating their disregard and misunderstanding of democracy.
For the Palestinians to have a choice they need to have a democracy. Without that, they will have to continue suffering at the will of their corrupt and deceiving leaders who have done little other than mislead their people and incite them to hatred, you know, all that stuff you like to repeat.

The Arabs or Southern Syrians as they were known before 1967, were given a choice in 1947. Unlike the Jewish leadership who took the proposal to their people before the vote, the Arab leadership rejected the Partition Plan, without consultation, choosing war instead which they lost. They made the same choice again and again with the same consequences.

There has never been an independent Palestine. When Israel captured territory in 1967 from Jordan and Egypt in a defensive war, neither country were internationally recognized sovereigns and neither claims the territory today. Therefore there is no "occupation".
However it is obvious from your comments that the occupation you refer to is nothing dating back to 1967, but the very existence of the Jewish state on it's religious, historical and cultural homeland. By doing so, you deny the Jewish people the right that every nation has to self-determination and particularly in a land with which there are undeniable Jewish ties.

The people of British Mandatory Palestine were Arabs and Jews with the former refusing to be refered to as "Palestinian" since it was considered too "Jewish".
You are right that the majority of the people in the region did not want a Jewish state, but then they didn't want another Arab/Palestinian state either. The desire was for a pan- Arab nation within no room for anybody else.

And you have the cheek to talk about justice and democracy!

subscribe RSS Icon
About this blog

Welcome to the Inside the Middle East blog where CNN's journalists post news, views and video from across the region. This is also a place where you can start the discussion so please keep your comments coming. We highlight not only current news stories but also anecdotes and issues that don't always make the top of the headlines.

Read more about CNN's special reports policy

Watch the show

Inside the Middle East airs the first week of every month on the following days and times:

Wednesday: 0930, 1630,
Saturday: 0430, 1830,
Sunday: 1130

(All times GMT)