QnA| Presidents Obama and Abbas joint Press Conference

Q    After you meet leaders from both sides, is there any chance to resume peace talks as soon as possible?  And do you think that the two-state solution is still valid in this policy of expanding settlements is continuing going on?  And my last question -- did you raise the freezing of settlement activity with Prime Minister Netanyahu when you met him?  Thanks.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Based on the conversations that I've had with Prime Minister Netanyahu and President Abbas, I do think the possibility continues to exist for a two-state solution.  I continue to believe it is our best, and indeed, in some ways, our only chance to achieve the kinds of peaceful resolution of old conflicts, but also the opening up of new opportunities for peoples on both sides to thrive, to succeed, for both Israel and a state of Palestine to be incorporated into the global economy.

One of the striking things, one of the ironies of this conflict is that both the Israeli people and the Palestinian people are extremely entrepreneurial.  They have a keen business sense.  They could be hugely successful in helping to lift up the economy of the region as a whole.

I was with President Peres this morning before I came here, looking at a high-tech exhibit that was taking place in Jerusalem.  And there was actually a program that U.S. -- a U.S. company, Cisco, had set up, where it was hiring young Arab engineers and Palestinian engineers because they were so well qualified, so talented and there was a great hunger for those kinds of skills.  Well, imagine if you have a strong, independent state that’s peaceful -- all the talent that currently is being untapped that could be creating jobs and businesses and prosperity throughout this area.

So I absolutely believe that it is still possible.  But I think it is very difficult.  I think it’s difficult because of all sorts of political constraints on both sides.  I think it’s difficult, frankly, because sometimes, even though we know what compromises have to be made in order to achieve peace, it’s hard to admit that those compromises need to be made, because people want to cling on to their old positions and want to have 100 percent of what they want, or 95 percent of what they want, instead of making the necessary compromises.

And as a politician, I can say it’s hard for political leaders to get too far ahead of your constituencies.  And that’s true for Prime Minister Netanyahu; I’m sure it’s true for President Abbas as well. 

But if we can get direct negotiations started again, I believe that the shape of a potential deal is there.  And if both sides can make that leap together, then not only do I believe that the Israeli people and the Palestinian people would ultimately support it in huge numbers, but I also think the world and the region would cheer.  There would be some who would be upset because they benefit from the current conflict.  They like the status quo, they like the arrangement as it is.  But I actually think that there are majorities out there who right now don’t feel helpful but still would strongly support both Palestinian and Israeli leadership that made the necessary effort and compromises for peace.

Now, one of the challenges I know has been continued settlement activity in the West Bank area.  And I’ve been clear with Prime Minister Netanyahu and other Israeli leadership that it has been the United States’ policy, not just for my administration but for all proceeding administrations, that we do not consider continued settlement activity to be constructive, to be appropriate, to be something that can advance the cause of peace.  So I don’t think there’s any confusion in terms of what our position is. 

I will say, with respect to Israel, that the politics there are complex and I recognize that that’s not an issue that’s going to be solved immediately.  It’s not going to be solved overnight.
On the other hand, what I shared with President Abbas and I will share with the Palestinian people is that if the expectation is, is that we can only have direct negotiations when everything is settled ahead of time, then there’s no point for negotiations. 

So I think it’s important for us to work through this process, even if there are irritants on both sides.  The Israelis have concerns about rockets flying into their cities last night. And it would be easy for them to say, you see, this is why we can’t have peace because we can’t afford to have our kids in beds sleeping and suddenly a rocket comes through the roof.  But my argument is even though both sides may have areas of strong disagreement, may be engaging in activities that the other side considers to be a breach of good faith, we have to push through those things to try to get to an agreement -- because if we get an agreement then it will be very clear what the nature of that agreement is:  There will be a sovereign Palestinian state, a sovereign Jewish State of Israel.

And those two states I think will be able to deal with each other the same way all states do.  I mean, the United States and Canada has arguments once in a while, but they’re not the nature of arguments that can’t be solved diplomatically.  And I think we can keep pushing through some of these problems and make sure that we don’t use them as an excuse not to do anything.

Q    Mr. President, President Abbas, on behalf of all my colleagues, I want to get a little bit more specific on the question of settlements and the overall peace process.  Mr. President, when you started your administration, you called for a halt of new settlement activity.  That held up for a while, then dissipated.  And then late last year when the Israeli government announced very sensitive settlement activity in the E1 zone, your administration put out a statement that many in this region thought was either tepid or completely nonresponsive.  What would you say here, in Ramallah, Mr. President, to those entrepreneurial Palestinians you referenced who believe you’ve either been equivocal or nonresponsive to the issue of Israeli settlements? 

And do you, President, Abbas, do you believe it is necessary for the peace process to start with a declaration publicly from the Israeli government that it will either slow down or stop entirely new settlement activity? 

And broadly, on the peace process itself, Mr. President, you talked about thinking anew.  Historically, the theory has been nothing is agreed to until everything is agreed to.  Are you,
Mr. President Obama and President Abbas, open to a theory that would say if things are agreed to, they shall be implemented, to build confidence on both sides and restart the peace process?  Thank you.

PRESIDENT OBAMA:  Well, Major, I think I answered the question previously about settlements.  You mentioned E1, in particular.  I think that is an example of at least a public statement by the Israeli government that would be very difficult to square with a two-state solution.  And I’ve said that to Prime Minister Netanyahu.  I don’t think that’s a secret.

With respect to whether there’s a requirement for a freeze or moratorium, I want to repeat what I just said earlier, which is if the only way to even begin the conversations is that we get everything right at the outset, or at least each party is constantly negotiating about what's required to get into talks in the first place, then we're never going to get to the broader issue, which is how do you actually structure a state of Palestine that is a sovereign, contiguous, and provide the Palestinian people dignity, and how do you provide Israel confidence about its security -- which are the core issues.

The core issue right now is, how do we get sovereignty for the Palestinian people, and how do we assure security for the Israeli people?  And that's the essence of this negotiation.  And that's not to say settlements are not important.  It is to say that if we solve those two problems, the settlement problem will be solved. 

So I don't want to put the cart before the horse.  I want to make sure that we are getting to the core issues and the substance, understanding that both sides should be doing what they can to build confidence, to rebuild a sense of trust.  And that's where, hopefully, the U.S. government can be helpful.

On your last point, I think that part of my goal during this trip has been to hear from both President Abbas and Prime Minister Netanyahu about what they would need and how they would see a potential path -- how it would be structured.  And so I think it's premature for me to give you an answer to the question you just posed.  I think it was a good one; I think it was a legitimate one, but I'm still hearing from them.  And me, Secretary Kerry, others, we're going to go back and look at what we've heard from both sides and make a determination as to what has the best prospect for success.

I will say this, that I think incremental steps that serve to delay and put off some of the more fundamental issues, rather than incremental steps that help to shape what a final settlement might look like, are probably not going to be the best approach, because it's not clear that that would, in fact, build trust.  If you have a situation where it looks like the incremental steps replace the broader vision, as opposed to incremental steps in pursuit of a broader vision, then I think what you end up getting is four more years, 10 more years, 20 more years of conflict and tension, in which both sides are testing boundaries of those incremental agreements. 

Whereas if we can get a broad-based agreement that assures the Palestinians that they have a state, and you have a comprehensive approach that ensures Israel the kind of security that they need, the likelihood of that deal holding and, ultimately, the sense of trust that comes from people-to-people relations, not just governmental relations, I think that's much more likely to occur. 

PRESIDENT ABBAS:  Regarding the issue of settlements, it is not only our perception that settlements are illegal, but it is a global perspective.  Everybody considers settlements not only a hurdle, but even more than a hurdle, towards the two-state solution. 

We mentioned and we remember that the Security Council, during the '70s and '80s, had issued more than 13 resolutions not only condemning settlements, but demanding ending them and removing them because they are illegal.  We are asking for nothing outside the framework of international legitimacy.  Hence, it is the duty of the Israeli government to at least halt the activity so that we can speak of issues.  And when we define our borders and their borders together, each side will know its territory in which it can do whatever it pleases. 

So the issue of settlement is clear.  We never give up our vision, whether now or previously, but we continue to maintain this vision, and we believe the settlements are illegal and that settlement activity is illegal.  We hope that the Israeli government understands this.  We hope they listen to many opinions inside Israel itself speaking of the illegality of settlements. 

We spoke about this with Mr. President and we clarified our point of view on how we can reach a solution.  Many Palestinians, when they see settlements everywhere in the West Band -- and I don’t know who gave Israel that right -- they do not trust the two-state solution or vision anymore.  And this is very dangerous that people and the new generation reaches the conviction that it’s no more possible to believe in the two-state solution. 

We continue to believe in the two-state solution on the 1967 borders, and consequently, if peace between us and the Israelis is achieved, the Israelis will know very well that the Arab and Islamic world all together, which means 57 Arab and Muslim states, shall immediately recognize the State of Israel according to the road map and the Arab initiative.

Thank you.