Sergeant Shalit was taken from Gaza to Egypt, and then to an airbase in Israel where he was reunited with his family.

Meanwhile the first of 477 Palestinians to be released have arrived in Gaza and the West Bank, amid jubilant scenes.

Another 550 jailed Palestinian are to be freed next month under the deal between Israel and Hamas.

Shalit, 25, was seized in 2006 by Hamas militants who tunneled into Israel.

BBC Coverage

Gilad Shalit salutes Israel Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu after landing in IDF airbase in the center of Israel. (Photo: IDF/Wiki Commons)

Read tweets about Gilad Shalit’s release

Gershon Baskin says the deal he helped broker between Israel and Hamas is the pinnacle of his career, and even more than that. “This is the biggest and most important thing I have ever done in my life,” he said.

Which is funny, because Baskin was never supposed to get involved in the negotiations in the first place. He’s a peace activist, a Long Islander who moved to Israel in 1978. He has a bushy beard and a non-profit think tank, the Israel Palestine Center for Research and Information.

Israeli newspaper reporting that "Gilad is returning home." (Photo: Daniel Estrin)

Still, every time Baskin offered to help with the Shalit case, the official Israeli response was “no, thanks.”

“I refuse to take no for an answer,” said Baskin, in his Jerusalem home. “I will be the persistent pest, and I decided I was going to bring Gilad Shalit home.”

In 2006, right after Hamas kidnapped Shalit and Israel responded with airstrikes, Baskin’s Palestinian friend in Gaza called, saying that they had to find a way to get things back to normal. He put Baskin in touch with the Hamas Deputy Foreign Minister, Ghazi Hamad, and Baskin got Hamad to talk to the Israeli soldier’s father, Noam Shalit.

“Shalit said, ‘I want my son, I want to know that he’s alive,’” Baskin remembered. “Ghazi told him, ‘Your son is well, he’s being taken care of, he will be treated well by the Hamas. We will issue our demands to Israel, and when Israel meets our demands, he will be released.’”

It was kind of like in the movies: Hamas demanded ransom – in the form of a prisoner exchange.

But at the time, Israel wouldn’t talk to Hamas. Baskin wanted to relay the message to the then-Prime Minister, Ehud Olmert. He didn’t know the Prime Minister, but he knew the Prime Minister’s daughter, Dana, was also a peace activist. She agreed to pass messages from Hamas to her father.

“She said, ‘I will, of course I will, but you shouldn’t expect anything from him. He’s not going to listen. He won’t change his mind,’” said Baskin. “I said, ‘Let’s try.’ And as expected, her father’s response was, ‘We don’t negotiate with terrorists.’”

Baskin kept trying – but he got in trouble. Baskin said Israeli intelligence heard Hamas officials tossing around Dana’s name. Olmert was furious – and he let Baskin know.

Still, the peace activist persisted. He faxed a list of Hamas’ demands to the Prime Minister’s official envoy for the Shalit case. The envoy called him.

“He says, ‘You’re out of the picture now. There are official channels, official tracks working now. Thank you for what you did, we don’t need you anymore,’” Baskin recalled him saying.

At that point, the Egyptians had also become intermediaries between Israel and Hamas. Baskin’s contact at the Egyptian embassy told him not to give up.

Baskin recalls him saying, “We need someone who is independent, who will be there, who can pass messages. Just ignore him. Keep doing what you are doing.”

Baskin kept pushing. A new Israeli envoy took on the case; he also wanted Baskin out. But after two years, that envoy stepped down, and in May of this year, current Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu appointed a new emissary to the Shalit case, former Mossad agent David Meidan.

Gershon with the Hamas document presenting their final demands, and the Israeli document acknowledging his role as an officially recognized Israeli negotiator. (Photo: Daniel Estrin)

“But in the last paragraph, it had the names of the arch-terrorists. The worst. The baddest and the worst. David said to me, in no uncertain terms, ‘Israel will not negotiate on these names,’” recalls Baskin.

Baskin relayed the news to Hamas. “I was very harsh, direct, categorical. They could not expect to get all they wanted. If they were serious about the idea of negotiating, they had to understand, that first thing they had to remove was these names.”
And in the end, they did.

On July 14, Hamas sent Baskin a document outlining their final demands for an agreement. The most senior prisoners weren’t on the list. Baskin immediately faxed the document to David Meidan.

“David called me back, saying, ‘This is exactly what we need. This is a breakthrough.’”

Baskin agreed to help facilitate final negotiations, but Hamas wanted proof that Baskin really represented Israel. So David Meidan typed out a letter, in Hebrew, on a plain white sheet of paper, with the words “private” and “sensitive” on the top.

It’s the document that turned Baskin from a freelance nudge with a fax machine, to an official Israeli mediator.

Since the deal was signed last week, Baskin has received a flood of emails from peace activist colleagues, thanking him for proving that the peace camp is still relevant.

And he was all smiles when Ghazi Hamad from Hamas called him on a recent morning. This deal succeeded, Baskin said, because of their rapport.

“Ghazi Hamad and I are friends. We may not agree on things politically, we don’t see lot of things eye to eye, but we’re friends. And we trust each other. And his happiness today is not just because a thousand Palestinian prisoners have been released. I know that he is sincerely happy because Gilad Shalit is going to be reunited with his family. And that makes a big difference. There’s the human element here which goes beyond everything.”

Ghazi Hamad declined to confirm Baskin’s version of the negotiations, and preferred not to comment on his relationship with the American-Israeli peace activist.

Now, Baskin has his eyes on the big prize: joining the official Israeli Palestinian peace-making team.

“There is no trust between the two parties,” he said. “And I guess, that’s what I have to do, is work on building trust.”

Building trust – one fax at a time.

Mahmoud Abu Tahir was one of the nearly 500 Palestinian prisoners freed by Israel today. He was serving a 10 year sentence for plotting suicide bombings. Speaking to the BBC shortly after his release, he said the Israeli government only understands power. Tahir added that the Palestinian resistance must continue.

“Our land is in occupation,” he said. “We have the right to resist the occupation. This is our right and we will not stop this.”

Without a doubt, today was a victory for Hamas and its ideology, said political science professor Mkhaimer Abusada of al-Azhar University in Gaza.

“Even though the Palestinians, especially in Gaza, have paid a very heavy price over the past five years as a result of capturing Shalit,” Abusada said. “Hamas was able to bring back 1,027 Palestinian prisoners back.”

The second group of about 500 Palestinian prisoners are expected to be released by Israel two months from now. Hamas leaders say they also expect Israel to lift restrictions on the movement of people and goods in and out of Gaza, now that Gilad Shalit is free.

If that happens, it would be seen by many Palestinians as another achievement by Hamas. And it would come at the expense of Fatah, the rival faction of Hamas that controls the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank and rejects armed resistance against Israel.

Hussein Ibish of the American Task Force on Palestine said Israel has taken a big risk by striking this deal with Hamas.

“This proves that armed resistance gets results,” Ibish said. “Whereas negotiations, diplomacy and institution building – the policies of the PA and the PLO – don’t get results.”

In the West Bank today, Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas made a very public show of support for the prisoner swap. He even appeared standing next to leaders from Hamas.

Abbas had been riding a wave of popular support following his speech at the United Nations last month in which he called for Palestinian membership at the UN. But Ibish says the Palestinian president is the short-term loser here, and that was precisely the intention of both Hamas and the Israeli government in finally striking a deal.

“It’s clearly a blow directed by both of them at President Abbas,” he said. “An effort to deflate him from his UN success and bring his popularity down to size.”

It is not clear though how much Hamas stands to gain in the long term. Ibish doubts Israel will hand Hamas another easy victory by lifting its blockade of Gaza in any significant way. He said the prisoner swap is also unlikely to shake up the moribund peace process.

“It is moribund and it’s going to stay moribund until after the next (US) presidential election,” Ibish said. “I don’t see any huge change in the strategic equation here in the long run.”

Secretary of state Hillary Clinton commented on the release of Gilad Shalit during her visit to Tripoli, Libya today. She said the soldier was “held for far too long in captivity.”

The United States did not play a significant role in bringing about the prisoner swap. Germany was involved for some of the indirect talks between Israel and Hamas. But it was two regional players – Egypt and Turkey – who finally brokered the deal.

The deal reportedly includes numerous prisoners convicted of murder.

Israelis have mixed feelings about the agreement.

A senior Hamas source confirmed Friday that kidnapped Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit has been told of his imminent release.

Shalit has been held capitive by Hamas for more than five years but a deal announced this week is supposed to lead to his freedom soon.

That’s sparked celebrations in Israel but some Israelis are questioning the deal between Hamas and the Israeli government.

They said releasing hundreds of Palestinian prisoners accused of violent crimes is dangerous. An Israeli group representing victims of Palestinian attacks petitioned a court on Friday to delay the impending deal.

Few in Israel can forget the suicide bombings of the second Intifada.

One of the most memorable, and horrific, was the attack on the Sbarro Pizzeria in central Jerusalem in the summer of 2001. 15 people were killed.

There’s word that the Palestinian man responsible for that bombing will be released as part of this prisoner swap deal.

The men behind other attacks will also walk free, including the perpetrator of a bus bombing in Tel Aviv that left 16 dead, including an American.

The families of many of the Israeli victims of these attacks have spoken out against this agreement. They sympathize, they said, with the family of Gilad Shalit, but they also said they cannot accept that those who have killed their loved ones will walk free.

Uzi Landau is one of just three of the Israeli cabinet ministers who didn’t back the prisoner swap. “I think that voting for such an agreement would be a tremendous encouragement for future terror,” Landau said. “In the Middle East it will be perceived as a move that simply says terror pays off.”

In another protest against the prisoner swap, an Israeli man was arrested early this morning after a memorial to former prime minister Yitzhak Rabin was vandalized. The suspect’s parents and three of his siblings were killed in a Palestinian suicide bombing.

There is clearly concern about releasing prisoners, especially those “with blood on their hands,” as the saying here goes.

That’s why, according to Israel’s chief rabbi Yona Metzger, many have struggled with this deal.

“This is very, very difficult for us. But for us one soul of one soldier is so important that even this, we have to pay so many,” Metzger explained. “You can understand the difference between us and our neighbors, our enemies. This is our specialty of our heart. Of the Jewish heart. And the responsibility we take for every soldier.”

There are more details today about the 1,027 prisoners who will be set free. Two hundred eighty of them are serving life sentences, including men who have killed and abducted Israeli soldiers.

Some of those released will be allowed to return home to their families in the West Bank. A few dozen will be sent abroad, perhaps to Turkey and Jordan. Others will be deported to Gaza.

At Friday prayers, the leader of the militant group Hamas in Gaza told worshipers that Palestinians have paid “a great price” to see the prisoners freed. “Today we reap the benefits of our resistance, of our perseverance,” said Ismail Haniyeh. “We have paid a high price in martyrs and we have sacrificed much as our enemy has worked to save Shalit,” he said.

In Gaza and the West Bank families are preparing to welcome their loved ones home.

Samira Imshedi’s husband has been in an Israeli jail for more than 30 years, convicted of killing a senior Israeli soldier.

“I say thank you to those who kidnapped Gilad Shalit,” she said. “They need to keep kidnapping Israeli soldiers until all our Palestinian prisoners are free.”

In Israel, where most 18-year-olds are conscripted into the Army, there is much sympathy for what Shalit’s family has gone through.

And soldiers such as Jay Goldberg said the possibility of being abducted is a constant worry. That’s why he thinks this lopsided prisoner swap is fair.

“To see that the country and the people would go so far as to return one of their soldiers is just amazing and baffling and gives me even more inspiration to work harder.”

Goldberg said he and his comrades cannot wait until Tuesday. A party is being planned on their military base to mark the day Gilad Shalit is expected to come home to Israel.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: Akiva Eldar is a political columnist for Israel’s Ha’aretz newspaper. He says there are a couple of reasons this deal was struck now.

Akiva Eldar: Hamas have a clear interest in pleasing the Egyptians and as far as I understand, the Egyptians offered them to move their headquarters from Damascus to Cairo and to operate the political operations instead of Damascus that as you know, is not welcoming these days, Khaled Mashal and the Hamas. And I think that they would rather move elsewhere because they know that they are not safe because of their ties with Bashar al-Assad, and even the leadership of the Muslim Brotherhood, which is you know, the mother of Hamas, is very unhappy with what Assad is doing to his own people. So they have a clear motivation to please the Egyptians. And the other thing is since Mahmoud Abbas our senior president has been on the headlines, the limelights at the UN they have have an interest also in hijacking the headlines to make sure that we keep mentioning Hamas rather than [inaudible 1:13].

Werman: As you say, the deal was brokered by the Egyptians. What was in it for Egypt to try and make this deal happen now and you know, in terms of, especially in terms of what happened in Egypt this year, the ouster of President Hosni Mubarak in the Arab Spring, how did that play into the timing of this?

Eldar: That’s a very interesting question. You know, the Egyptians keep putting out statements that may appear that they were very unhappy with the tap on the attack on the Israeli embassy. They have a clear interest to respect the peace agreement with Israel. What they need more than anything else is international support, economic support, because they are in deep trouble. Mubarak left them with an empty budget and the revolution of the Arab Spring cost them a lot of money because I don’t know many people who travel these days to the pyramids. They are in a great need of cash and this deal put them in the position that they are playing a positive role in the Middle East. They show that even without Mubarak they can still play a major and positive role in this area.

Werman: And what about the larger kind of motion of the Arab Spring, do you think the uncertainty in the region about what comes next has put pressure on both Israel and Hamas to make this deal kind of sooner rather than later?

Eldar: I think the Prime Minister Netanyahu realized that once he decided it’s his interest to bring Gilad back home. He’s not going to get a better deal and there is no use keep this poor kid in jail for a longer time. I just hope that he will be healthy emotionally and physically when he reunites with his family. I think that Netanyahu, when you look at the pulse after our holiday, I’m sure that you will find out that he has added maybe 10% to his approval rating. The other thing is that at least for a while he draws the attention away from the pressure that has been put on this government by the quartet in New York on the 23rd to accept the new formula and to start negotiations with the Palestinians, which for Netanyahu this is much harder things to do, it’s a greater challenge than to bring Shalit back home.

Werman: Akiva Eldar, political columnist with the Israeli newspaper, Ha’aretz, thank you so much.

Eldar: With pleasure as always.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said the deal had been reached after arduous talks, and that Sgt Shalit would be back with his family “within days”.

The soldier was captured in a cross-border raid in 2006 and taken to Gaza.

Gerald Steinberg is a professor of Political Studies at Bar Ilan University in Israel.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: The other big news story today comes from Israel. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said his government and the Palestinian militant group Hamas have signed a deal for the release of captive Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit.

Benjamin Netanyahu: [Speaking Hebrew]

Werman: Netanyahu said he called Shalit’s family to them their son would be home in the coming days. In exchange Israel will free as many as a thousand Palestinian prisoners. Shalit was grabbed by Hamas in a cross border raid more than five years ago. The Israel – Hamas deal was brokered by Egypt and Germany. Gerald Steinberg is an Israeli is a professor of Political Studies at Bar Ilan University in Israel. He says the timing of the announcement is due to a few factors.

Gerald Steinberg: First of all, there has been some change in the Israeli security leadership. The head of the General Security Service like the FBI has, the new one, has said that he thinks that his organization and Israeli capabilities will be able to contain most of the terror that will resolve from the release of a thousand people who have been involved in some very very massive terror attacks against the Israelis. That’s a major change. Up until now, some of the leaders of the security services have opposed this type of agreement. Also I think the changes that are going on in Egypt have led Prime Minister Netanyahu to want to reach an agreement before things become even more chaotic in Egypt. At least now Egypt being the source of the core of this agreement and the only way it can be actually be carried out is to see Gilad Shalit brought to Egypt and then over the next period of time Israel release the Palestinians with it’s holding without having an Egyptian partner. That would probably be impossible to do.

Werman: Is this news related at all to the Palestinian bid for statehood? Is it some kind of PR campaign on either side?

Steinberg: No, in fact it’s interesting that Fatah, the Palestinian authority Mahmoud Abbas who was just in the UN, the President of the Palestinian I think, they’re not involved in this in any way, manner, or form. Some of the issues that come up is among the prisoners that are going to be released, those who have been involved in terror. Such as Marwan Barghouti who was convicted of some very major terrorist activities. Whether he will also be in this, as a future leader of Fatah or a leader of Fatah, will that be also a part of the agreement and to what degree that will play into the Fatah – Hamas conflict in competition. That, I’d say, is a secondary issue certainly for Israelis. The main issue is Gilad Shalit seeing his parents every day outside the Prime Minister’s house and knowing he was someone who was captured, kidnapped from Israeli soil as an Israeli soldier who has been basically lingering in Gaza for five years. The Israeli public wants to see him out even if there’s a high cost.

Werman: And if this swap happens, what kind of impact do you think it will have on negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians now? And on Israeli public opinion about those negotiations?

Steinberg: If there’s a results of this exchange, of this agreement, there’s a big spike in terrorism, then you will see becoming even more unwilling to take major security risks, but if in the next year or two we do not see any kind of increase in terrorism, then it wont have a negative impact, but it wont necessarily have a positive impact. The deal was being made with Hamas through Egypt and the negotiations take place with an entirely different group of Palestinians, so in reality there’s probably no link between the two.

Werman: For some of the Jewish community in the US who know the precise number of days Shalit has been held by Hamas, this is huge news. Remind us of the significance of Gilad Shalit. Not just for Israelis and Jews, but also why he’s a high value prisoner with the Palestinians.

Steinberg: Gilad Shalit was kidnapped in June of 2006 while he was on guard duty within Israel and whisked across in Gaza and held there. It’s very frustrating for Israelis when you have your soldiers, you have your sons and your daughters to be brought into the army, to have someone who’s kidnapped and being unable to release him and unwilling to pay the price because if you released, the argument has been made over the years and it will be made again tonight by opponents of the agreement. If you allow this agreement to go through, you’re setting [xx] for more terrorist attacks and them more kidnappings to release the terrorists involved. So this is something that has been a very high emotional issue, but because most Israeli families send their sons or daughters or fathers into the army and having him there and not being able to release him has been a source of major frustration. He has become a symbol of basically the most fundamental violation of the human rights of any Israeli and the fact that there’s been a large silence in terms of that, to have him back will be, I think, a significant closing of a circle for many other people, even those who did not know him and the whole family, but seeing him as that symbol.

Werman: Gerald Steinberg, professor of Political Studies at Bar Ilan University in Israel. Thanks so much.

Steinberg: Thank you.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Huge posters with pictures of Abbas were hung from street lights in Ramallah on Sunday, while crowds of Palestinians stood on the sidewalk to see the president’s motorcade pass by.

Returning from his trip to UN headquarters in New York, one of the first things Abbas did was lay a wreath at the tomb of the late Palestinian leader, Yasser Arafat.

But it was clearly Abbas himself who was the man of the hour.

Youth from the West Bank town of Jenin – a hotbed of Palestinian militancy during the last intifada – carried pictures of Abbas and they shouted allegiance to their president and “the revolution” as they entered the Mukataa in Ramallah. The site is both Arafat’s final resting place and the central headquarters for the Palestinian Authority.

Upwards of 5,000 people gathered to welcome Abbas back from what many Palestinians see as their president’s historic trip.

“My brothers and sisters,” Abbas told the crowd, “hold your heads up, you are Palestinians!”

But the president also said, “the diplomatic and political campaign of the Palestinian leadership is just getting started.”

“There’s a long way to go,” he added, “and we need your help.”

Many Palestinians doubted that Abbas would ever defy the United States by asking the Security Council for full UN membership. But by doing just that, and by giving a defiant speech on the floor of the UN General Assembly last Friday, Abbas seems to have come into his own.

Palestinian journalist Bassem Barhoum said the president has finally emerged from the shadow of the late Yasser Arafat, who is still revered by Palestinians and described as a leader with great charisma.

“Now, we [have] started with Abbas stage,” Barhoum said. “We were still living with Arafat’s stage and now, we started with Abbas stage.”

Barhoum said he was not sure what is next for the Palestinian president.

The US has promised to veto the Palestinian bid for UN membership in the Security Council. Abbas is then expected to ask the General Assembly to recognize Palestine as a non-member observer state.

Whatever happens in New York though, university teacher Iman Taher said Palestinians are feeling a newfound sense of dignity and hope. She was attending the rally in Ramallah on Sunday.

Palestinians might not know exactly how to get there, but Taher said Abbas has articulated to everyone where they want to go.

“We need life,” Taher said. “To have life like others, this is [what] people here are looking forward [to] in the future: to have their state.”

For all his newfound success, it is not clear what comes next for Abbas the politician.

The 76-year-old leader is said to be conscious of his legacy. He has said he won’t run in another election. There’s speculation that Abbas is looking to resign sooner than later.

But Alaa Yagui – a member of the president’s Fateh party – says the president should stick around and take advantage of his new political momentum.

“It should be a very good start for the Palestinian politics,” he said. “For the Palestinian future.”

“It wouldn’t be a good step if he’s going to resign.”

But if Abbas is serious about leading the way back to negotiations with Israel, the Palestinian president has not started to move in that direction. Paul Hirschon of the Israeli foreign ministry gave one example; he said Abbas has signaled just the opposite by accusing Israel of the following.

“Occupation for 63 years,” Hirschon said.

“If we’re talking about the Israeli being an occupier for 63 years, then it’s not about the West Bank, it’s not about the Gaza Strip,” he said. “It’s about the existence of a Jewish state.”

If Abbas really wants a genuine two-state solution, with a state of Palestine living side-by-side with the Jewish state of Israel, Hirschon said, “then, we can do a deal.”

But it is tough to see how a deal would be possible anytime soon between Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu.

The Palestinian president was just quoted saying that he viewed Netanyahu as the most inflexible Israeli leader he’s ever known. And Mahmoud Abbas has a lot of experience.

Abbas has taken part in negotiations with five previous Israeli prime ministers.

Matthew Bell’s Palestinian Statehood Coverage on The World:
• Palestinian Reaction To UN Statehood Bid
• Israelis who support Palestinian UN Membership
• Palestinians Seeking Public Support for UN Membership
• Israel And US Call On Palestinians To Back Down On Statehood
• More of Matthew Bell’s stories
• Matthew Bell on Twitter

Read tweets about Palestinian Statehood

Lisa Mullins gets more from the BBC’s Kim Ghattas at the United Nations

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

LISA MULLINS: I’m Lisa Mullins, and this is The World. Today, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas made it official. He formally asked the United Nations to recognize Palestine as a full member state. Abbas then addressed the UN General Assembly. Here he is speaking through a translator.

PRESIDENT ABBAS: Mr. President, the heart of the crisis in our area is very, very simple and obvious. Either there is those who believe that we are an unnecessary people, unwanted people in the Middle East, or those who believe that there is in fact a missing state that needs to be established immediately.

MULLINS: Later it was Israel’s turn to address the General Assembly. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu told the delegates that Palestinian statehood must be preceded by new talks.

PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: The truth is that Israel wants peace. The truth is that I want peace. The truth is that we cannot achieve peace through UN resolutions, but only through direct negotiations between the parties. The truth is that so far, the Palestinians have refused to negotiate. The truth is that Israel wants peace with a Palestinian state, but the Palestinians want a state without peace. And the truth is you shouldn’t let that happen.

MULLINS: After the speeches, the US and other members of the quartet mediating group seemed to back the Israeli position. In a statement, they urged Israelis and Palestinians to meet within the next month to agree on an agenda for resumed peace talks. The BBC’s Kim Ghattas is at the United Nations. She says Abbas and Netanyahu struck a similar note today.

KIM GHATTAS: They both said they were ready for peace talks. But of course they’re coming at this from very different perspectives. The Palestinian President, who got, I have to say, a very warm welcome at the General Assembly, rousing applause, a full house for his speech. He said that he was ready for peace talks, but it had to be on the basis of a clear timeframe, a clear framework, and it could only happen after Israel stopped building settlements. He was very animated, more energized than I’ve really ever seen him. And he was really able to express the frustration that Palestinians have felt over the last two years, as American efforts faltered in trying to get the peace process off the ground. Now, Mr. Netanyahu, as I said, also said that he was ready for peace talks. He said that he was ready to travel to Ramallah to meet President Abbas. Even better, he said, let’s meet here today, at the United Nations. He said Israel was ready for peace, but he says the Palestinians are still refusing to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. Mr. Netanyahu also said that settlements were not at the core of the conflict, they were a result of the conflict. So there is still quite a big gap between those two sides.

MULLINS: OK, and what happens next?

GHATTAS: Well, now that President Abbas has given his application to the Secretary General, it’s in the hands of the Security Council. They will study the request, and they will determine at the some point in the coming weeks whether this should come to a vote or not. We all know that the Americans have said they will veto this if it comes to a vote, or otherwise they will try to make sure that there are enough abstentions at the Security Council that in essence, a resolution on this just dies on the table. But in the meantime, it’s important to point out that all week long, while the Americans and the Europeans were trying to convince the Palestinians not to go to the UN, they were also trying to make sure that whatever happened at the United Nations, that this could possibly be inscribed in the wider context of resumption of negotiations. They’ve been lobbying very hard behind the scenes, trying to see whether it’s possible to bridge the gap between the two sides. It’s not clear yet whether they’ve managed to pull it off.

MULLINS: All right, the BBC’s Kim Ghattas reporting from the New York, at the United Nations. Thank you.

GHATTAS: Thank you for having me.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Comprehensive BBC Coverage

On The World: 
• Israel And US Call On Palestinians To Back Down On Statehood
• What Palestinians Want From UN Membership
• Diplomacy Around Statehood Bid

Read tweets about Palestinian Statehood

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

LISA MULLINS: Palestinians in the West Bank celebrated events at the United Nations. Thousands of them watched Mahmoud Abbas’ speech on giant outdoor screens, in town squares across the territory. The World’s Middle East correspondent, Matthew Bell, was at one such event in Ramallah. Who turned out for it, Matthew?

MATTHEW BELL: Well, it was a big crowd, Lisa. The people started streaming into Clock Square in Ramallah late in the afternoon. There were several thousand people there, like you said. A big screen where the speech was shown. It was a festive atmosphere. There were families, vendors selling food. There was music, dancing. A couple of speeches, but mostly people were there to listen to Mahmoud Abbas. And there was a real sense that this might be an historic day for Palestinians. I talked to Mustafa Barghouti, who’s a Palestinian legislator about this, and here’s what he had to say.

MUSTAFA BARGHOUTI: What you see today is the rebirth of hope. We didn’t have hope. All these negotiations, they were useless. And with the passage of negotiations every day, things were getting worse. More settlements, more expansion, more land appropriation. Now there is a chance for a change. And people are getting hopeful.

BELL: Again there, Lisa, you heard that message of hope. And there’s sort of uncertainty about where this is all heading. However, there is a real sense at least in Ramallah today, I really felt it, a real sense of an accomplishment already.

MULLINS: An accomplishment which is why this particular date, September 23, 2011, is the one that’s on so many people’s lips there, despite what happens with a vote of Palestinian membership in the UN or not. I mean, this is the day.

BELL: Yes, it was the day. It was the day for Mahmoud Abbas. Here is a 70-something year old politician who Palestinians have known for decades. He seemed to be giving every point that Palestinians talk about, when they talk about how much they despise the Israeli occupation. He talked about settlements, he talked about frustration with the peace process, he talked about Palestinian refugees, he talked about prisoners in Israeli jails. He seems to be a politician with a consciousness of his legacy here.

MULLINS: But how about the present, instead of in the future, and thinking about his legacy? Because we also know he spoke about the rule of law, strengthening the role of women as well. Has he made any progress, has he done anything about those things?

BELL: He does like to talk about institution building and state building as well. He made a point of saying since negotiations have gone south over the last couple of years, he said that the Palestinian Authority has worked hard to build the economy, to build up education, to build up the institutions that would be needed for the state of Palestine, when it comes into being, to survive and to thrive. Another real sense here, Lisa, when I talked to people today, was real frustration, not just with Israel, but with the United States. And with those 18 years of negotiations with the United States, that Palestinians say really haven’t led anywhere. There’s also great frustrations with President Obama himself. Another person I talked to today is Javier Abouid [sp]. He’s a Palestinian negotiator. Here’s what he had to say.

JAVIER ABOUID: One of the banners you have now here in the square says in 2010, President Obama promised Palestinians a state. In 2011, President Obama promised Palestinians a veto. And today, what you have all over there, not only in Palestine, are reactions of a lot of anger. Because we see that the role of President Obama, unfortunately, has switched from what we thought was going to be an honest broker, to basically just continue the historic US policy of being biased only on one side.

BELL: So you hear there the frustration with President Obama himself. And Palestinians also have a sense that when they heard the President speak the other day, and gave his support for the revolutionary movements in the so-called Arab Spring, they said wait a minute, where’s your support for us? We’re doing the same thing, trying to establish independence, trying to get a state of our own.

MULLINS: All right, The World’s Matthew Bell speaking to us from Ramallah, in the West Bank. Thanks for the update.

BELL: Good to talk with you, Lisa.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

(Photo: Matthew Bell)

Ramallah (Photo: Fouad Abu Ghosh)

By Assia Boundaoui

The Palestinian leadership hopes this dramatic move would reenergize their quest for an independent homeland.

But in New York City, Palestinian-Americans are on the fence about whether a state of Palestine will ever exist and are worried about what statehood would actually mean.

At the Bayridge Café on 5th Avenue in Brooklyn, Palestinian-American Yousef Jadallah sips his coffee as he watches experts on Al Jazeera discuss the statehood bid. And he did not look too optimistic.

“It’s a good step, but useless. It’s all politics,” he said. “We’re not gonna get full membership in the UN so what’s the use. My opinion: waste of time, it is 64 years past due.”

Down the street at Badran Halal meats, owner Mamoun Hammouri is equally pessimistic about the possibility that the UN will grant membership for Palestine.

“I hope, of course I hope,” he said, “but I don’t think it is going to happen or exist.”

Habib Joudeh runs the pharmacy next door to the butcher shop. He said what he wants to happen and what he believes is going to happen are two different issues. In fact, he said, the bid for a Palestinian state will be futile.

“Though I know it is not going to pass, though I know even if it passes what we are given is nothing,” he said. “But you know what, anything is better than having this conflict, anything that will bring peace to the region, to the world, that will be much better than what we are living now.”

While the lack of hope that the UN will ever recognize a Palestinian state is pervasive, some Palestinians in Bayridge are outright hostile to the bid for statehood. On Twitter, the hash-tag #fakestate has become a trending topic among Palestinian activists who think that the bid for statehood at the UN will do more harm than good.

A Palestinian neighborhood in New York. (Photo: Ali Abbas)

Kenazi has written about the Palestinian situation and the frustration many feel with stalled negotiations.

“If there are still these restrictions, if there’s still the cutting off from West Bank Palestinians to West Bank Palestinians, never mind East Jerusalem and the Gaza Strip, then you really have a structure of the status quo,” he said. “It’s just a formalized situation where you would have statehood but no real rights, no real autonomy, no control over your territory, no functioning body that could actually exercise the fundamental rights of Palestinian people.”

Some Palestinians say the division over whether to support or oppose the UN bid is generational: younger Palestinians are opposed to the move while the older generation is looking for something, anything to change.

Others say the divide is a geographical one, with Palestinians who live in the West Bank and Gaza generally in support of full membership in the UN, and Palestinian refugees and those who live in Israel are opposed to a recognized state that would not include them.

Dr. Ahmed Jaber, a Palestnian-American who runs a gynecology practice in Brooklyn, says whether you are for, or against the UN statehood bid, the fact is that it has raised more questions than answers. Questions no one can answer now.

“Is it going to make problems on the street in the West Bank and Gaza? Will there be a third intifada? What is really the 1967 border, does that exclude the Palestinians who were inside the Green line in 1948 Palestine? What will happen to them? Are we abandoning them? How about the right of return?” Jaber asked. “Whether this step is good for the Palestinians or not, I don’t know, we have to wait and see.”

The United States is planning to veto the move at the Security Council. Israel is officially against it, too.

But at least some Israelis are not. This week, a poll showed that 69 percent of Israelis thought that if the UN were to recognize a Palestinian state, Israel should accept the decision. The poll was conducted jointly by Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah.

The World’s Matthew Bell attended a rally in Tel Aviv in support of Israeli recognition of a Palestinian state.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: I’m Marco Werman, this is The World.  Today it was full-on diplomacy at the United Nations.  American and European officials are feverishly trying to come up with a new Mid East negotiation framework.  They’re working against a tight deadline.  Tomorrow, Palestinian officials plan to present their official request for full UN membership. The United States is planning to veto the move at the security council.  Israel is officially against it too.  But at least some Israelis are not.  This week, a poll shows that 69% of Israelis thought that if the UN were to recognize the Palestinian state Israel should accept the decision. The poll was conducted jointly by Hebrew University in Jerusalem and the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research in Ramallah.  The World’s Matthew Bell attended a rally today in Tel Aviv in support of the Palestinian president’s effort to win membership at the UN. Matthew, who as at this rally and what was the message you were hearing?

Matthew Bell: The rally, Marco, was only about 100 people, but it was an interesting mix of academics and public figures.  Generally, these were people who support the two state solution and they’ve lost faith in both their government for making this happen.  There was also a lot of disappointment with Barack Obama’s speech yesterday at the United Nations. Marco, one of the people I talked to today was Ilan Baruch, a former Israeli ambassador to South Africa.  I asked him if he agreed with experts who say that it’s actually too late to realize a two state solution, and he said no, absolutely not.

Ilan Baruch: I think we can walk back and build an architecture of a two state solution in spite of everything that was done to undermine it so far.

Bell: And if the Palestinians do get recognition or membership at the United Nations, you think this will help?

Baruch: I think that the peace cause after that will be in a quality of way different to the stagnation that took its course up to now.

Werman: Ilan Baruch, former Israeli ambassador to South Africa there clearly supporting the Palestinian initiative.  He was speaking with The World’s Matthew Bell.  Matthew, what else were you hearing at the rally today?

Bell: Well, as I said, there was a lot of disappointment with President Obama’s speech yesterday.  People pointed out that here was the American president who came into office talking about setting a goal of bringing about the two state solution as one of his top priorities, and then yesterday going to the United Nations and essentially saying that the Palestinians should be blocked. Another person that I talked to at the rally was Tal Harris, he’s the director of an organization called the One Voice, it’s an Israeli advocacy group that sponsored the rally, and they stand to support the two state solution.

Tal Harris: Right now we are calling Israel to use this as an opportunity, engage with the Palestinians, phrase the basis for an agreement that would serve the peace and security of everyone here.

Werman: So, Tal Harris there also in support of the Palestinian effort to get statehood at the UN.  Matthew Bell, how widespread is that opinion?

Bell: It’s interesting Marco, because over the years there’s been very steady large support in the Israeli public for the two state solution, and that is the creation of an independent Palestinian state.  That’s been steady.  On the other hand, in recent years also there’s been a lot of skepticism and a huge lack of faith in the Israeli public that the Palestinians are actually ready to create a state that would be willing to live in peace with Israel and to end the long grinding deadly conflict with Israel. So, basically, there’s support for it, but then there’s a feeling among a large percentage of the population that the Palestinians just aren’t ready and now is not the time to do it.

Werman: Matthew, one last question, the Palestinian bid for statehood at the UN has been headline news all over the world this week.  How big is this story in Israel itself?

Bell: It’s been huge.  The past weeks and months you had Israeli officials like the defense minister, Ehud Barak, months ago saying that Israel might face a diplomatic tsunami in September.  September, just the word itself, has been code in the Israeli media for this big event here of the Palestinians going to the United Nations and looking for membership in the world body. So it has been a big story and one question in recent days has also been what’s going to happen after everything gets finished this week at the United Nations, that is what happens after the diplomatic maneuvering is over, especially in the West Bank?  There are concerns about violence, there are concerns about the Palestinians expectations being raised to a point where there’ll be more frustration than ever. Just yesterday, Marco, there were some incidents of rock throwing.  There were some clashes between Palestinian demonstrators and Israeli soldiers.  So that’s been a real concern here too.

Werman: The World’s Matthew Bell in Tel Aviv at the sight of a rally held earlier today where Israelis called for recognition of a Palestinian state.  Matthew, thanks a lot.

Bell: You’re welcome, Marco.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

The run-down streets of the Baqa’a camp may be buzzing with activity, but the mood among its residents is somber.

Khalid Arar, a lawyer in the camp, said he and others fear Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas’ attempt to gain full membership status for Palestine at the United Nations will leave them stranded.

“The Palestinian issue involves refugees,” Arar said. “This is a refugee camp. What is the fate of refugees in the camps? What’s our fate? Will we return to Palestine if a state is established on what remains of the West Bank? Are we going to return to Palestine? I don’t think so. This is not a solution. We won’t accept anything that doesn’t include the right of return for the refugees to their homeland.”

The largest host of Palestinian refugees and their dependents, Jordan has 2 million seeking shelter inside its borders. That’s 40,000 more refugees than in the West Bank and Gaza.

For these refugees, the right of return means their right to go back to land or property they were forced to leave decades ago in what is now Israel or the Palestinian territories. This has long been a sticking point for Mideast peace negotiators. And residents here don’t see that changing with u-n membership for Palestine. Ismail Quteit is an employee at the camp’s orphanage.

“The UN initiative doesn’t give Palestinians their full rights,” he complained, “and a UN-recognized state would cover just a fraction of the land that used to be Palestine.

Quteit said he’s also worried about who would represent refugees stuck outside the new state.

Another resident, a social worker named Fadi Abid, said Palestinian refugees feel let down by the world community. They see assistance given to Libya and other Arab countries undergoing major changes with moves toward freedom and perhaps even democracy. But the Palestinian refugees, he noted, have been caught in a holding pattern for more than 50 years.

“We’re frustrated by the biased attitude towards us in the world,” Abid said. “The UN helps refugees from other conflicts return home, but not Palestinian refugees. Now, I’m very afraid of this announcement. I don’t trust there will be an independent sovereign Palestinian state. The declaration at the UN would be very dangerous because I feel at that moment my rights as a Palestinian refugee would collapse.”

That’s not necessarily so, said Daoud Kuttab. He’s a columnist here in Jordan and a former journalism professor at Princeton University. Kuttab said the status of Palestinian refugees is not affected by the membership bid at the UN.

“Their own status as refugees is to be dealt with in negotiations or as part of an agreement with the United Nations organization about who would stay, who would go, who would go to a third country, who would get Palestinian passports, who will be integrated in the countries they are in. These are issues that have to be dealt with at a later stage,” Kuttab said.

When that is, remains as uncertain as ever. And Palestinians say that’s not good news for the refugees who’ve already been waiting for a solution for decades.

Read the Transcript
The text below is a phonetic transcript of a radio story broadcast by PRI’s THE WORLD. It has been created on deadline by a contractor for PRI. The transcript is included here to facilitate internet searches for audio content. Please report any transcribing errors to theworld@pri.org. This transcript may not be in its final form, and it may be updated. Please be aware that the authoritative record of material distributed by PRI’s THE WORLD is the program audio.

Marco Werman: Of course, the outcome of the Palestinian bid at the UN isn’t certain yet.  As we mentioned earlier, the official request for membership will only be made tomorrow.  David Rothkopf is a visiting scholar at the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace.  David, is there any chance that the Palestinians may step back in their bid for statehood?

David Rothkopf: Well, I think in the short term I suppose there is some chance, but right now the Palestinians have momentum on their side.  What they may do is that they may raise the issue in the security council and leave it as an open question, which thus gives them the leverage to have it brought up at any time and may help them in negotiations.  So, that may seem like it’s stopping short of the brink of you know, full statehood recognition, but it actually gives the Palestinians a kind of edge.

Werman: You know, maybe you can remind us briefly why the US is opposed to the Palestinian declaration of statehood.  I mean successive presidents including Mr. Obama had hoped publicly for statehood for the Palestinians.

Rothkopf: Well, the official line from the United States that the way to arrive at statehood is through direct negotiations with the Israelis, because the main impediment or fulfillment of the idea of statehood has to do with resolving border disputes, and more importantly I think, having the Palestinians acknowledge the Israelis right to exist. Having said that, perhaps in different circumstances President Obama would have embraced this Palestinian initiative and Palestinians even suggest that he encouraged them to it.  But as US relations with the Israelis worsened and the Israelis then heightened their ties with the republicans, I think the president felt that he was politically exposed and has therefore sort of more vigorously than he otherwise might have embraced the status quo.

Werman: President Obama has often spoken about being on the right side of history in the context of the Arab Spring.  Could the US opposition to Palestinian declaration of statehood become a problem for the US in terms of relations with the wider Arab world?

Rothkopf: I think it already is a problem in relations with the wider Arab world.  President Obama raised expectations with that speech he gave in Cairo a couple of years ago, and since then he’s been drifting back toward a traditional US position.  He has not really moved forward the negotiations with the Israelis and the Palestinians; and in fact, recently you know, has moved closer to not just an Israeli position, but the Netanyahu government’s position, which is quite intransigent and inflammatory.  In fact, I think at this moment the US and the Israelis missed an opportunity which would have come to them had they embraced the Palestinian initiative, said yes, we recognize your right to statehood and now it’s up to you to recognize us as you’ve resisted doing. That would’ve given them the edge and the upper hand.  As it is, we’re in a reactive position.

Werman: Right, I mean it is kind of unusual for Middle East politics that the Palestinians with this bid for statehood, they’re taking the lead and the US and Israel seem to be following.

Rothkopf: I think the dynamic in Middle East politics has changed very, very dramatically and so, the Palestinians took the initiative on this.  They’ve been driving the issue and the Israelis seeing them do that took the initiative with the US politics and used the lever of republican party criticism to move the president closer to them.  Meanwhile, the Europeans like the French have been trying to move the Palestinian initiative forward. I think the US is at this particular moment in t he most reactive secondary role that it has ever been in modern Middle Eastern politics.

Werman: David Rothkopf, President and CEO of Garten Rothkopf, an international advisory firm in Washington, thanks very much for your time.

Rothkopf: My pleasure.

Copyright ©2009 PRI’s THE WORLD. All rights reserved. No quotes from the materials contained herein may be used in any media without attribution to PRI’s THE WORLD. This transcript may not be reproduced, in whole or in part, without prior written permission. For further information, please email The World’s Permissions Coordinator at theworld@pri.org.

Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas plans to seek UN recognition for a state of Palestine despite what he’s called “tremendous pressure” to back down.

Israel wants the Palestinians to return to direct negotiations. Both sides make their case before the UN this week.

The stated policy of the Israeli government actually favors what the Palestinians say they ultimately seek from the United Nations. And that’s an independent state of Palestine living side by side with Israel. Where the Israelis have objections, however, is on how to get there.

Danny Ayalon is Israel’s deputy foreign minister.

“Our objection is two-fold,” Ayalon said. “First of all this is against all the agreements, the signed agreements between us and the Palestinians. The solution can only be found between the parties, negotiating together and no side will change the status by going to a third party of to the United Nations. What faith can we have on a word or a written signature so this is something of principle?”

And second, Ayalon said, the Palestinians are putting the cart before the horse by ignoring the unresolved questions that must be worked through in negotiations with Israel.

“You cannot go and ask the United Nations of recognition when you have not settled the issues of borders, the issues of recognition,” he said.

Israel said peace talks between the two parties are the only way to achieve a two state solution, not through unilateral recognition by UN member states. Israeli journalist David Horovitz said Palestinian actions in New York are dangerous. Because they could be detrimental to the peace process.

From Israel’s perspective, a UN resolution on Palestinian statehood would have to include some obligations on the state of Palestine. For example, he said, Palestine would have to renounce conflict with Israel and the right of return for refugees.

“The concern has been that the resolution addresses none of Israel’s existential concerns about a Palestinian state,” Horovitz said. “And therefore what will happen is that the Palestinians will claim ostensible international endorsement for uncompromising positions which actually stave off the likelihood for finding viable terms for compromise.”

But not everyone in Israel is so alarmed about the Palestinian campaign for UN recognition as a state.

“I think the most interesting aspect is that this really does stand to change the balance of conflict dynamics in the region,” said Dahlia Scheindlin, a lecturer at Ben Gurion University.

Rather than treating the Palestinian effort in New York as a threat, she said Israel might be presented with an opportunity for positive change in Palestinian society.

“The most optimistic scenario gives them a lot to look forward to, a lot of burden of proof to show they are non-violent, embracing peace and increasingly democratic,” Scheindlin said. “And if they embrace that opportunity and really try to leverage it, I think we can really see a different kind of Palestinian community in the next few years. Which gives Israel a little more incentive to treat it as an equal partner and maybe even make the kinds of concessions we’ll eventually need to make to reach some sort of formal agreement.”

Israeli officials have hinted that they could punish the Palestinian Authority for going to the UN by withholding tax revenues. Members of the US Congress are threatening to cut off millions of dollars in American aid to the Palestinians. But Deputy Prime Minister Dan Meridor said today that Israel’s government has not yet decided how to respond to a Palestinian victory at the United Nations.

“We hope we’ll not reach that point. But if we reach a point where we’ll have to decide what our reaction will be,” he said. “I don’t see any use in airing threats now. I don’t need it. I don’t think it will help anybody now.”

Meridor acknowledged last-minute efforts to dissuade the Palestinians from going through with their plans for seeking recognition as a state. But he would not give any details. He repeated the Israeli offer to re-start negotiations with the Palestinians any time. Meridor said the offer would still stand after this week, whatever happens at the United Nations.

Read tweets about Palestinian Statehood