A shared desire to untangle this mess

The U.S.-Israeli dialog needs a responsible adult to put it back on track. U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry has failed to appreciate Israel's sensitivities and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has failed to realize that the U.S. could not ignore his comments at the weekly cabinet meeting on Sunday. Someone should put an end to this tit-for-tat and force the ministers to invoke their right to remain silent.

Even Defense Minister Moshe (Bogie) Ya'alon's comments -- and especially Habayit Hayehudi Chairman Naftali Bennett's recent attacks -- are counterproductive. Although the defense minister may very well be right when he says Kerry's peacemaking efforts are doomed to fail, why does he go out of his way to attack him? The same applies to his statement that Israel would manage even without an agreement. Both Israel and the U.S. have inflicted unnecessary damage on themselves.

This brings back memories of Israel's first president, Chaim Weizmann, who, after listening to a good speech, said the speech was still not as good as silence. If Israel wants to respond to the emerging document on the framework agreement by bolting on the peace talks, than it should go right ahead and do so, even though people might consider that a grave mistake. But if it plans to stay seated at the negotiating table despite the problematic elements of the U.S. document (which would be complemented by other, good provisions) -- it would make no sense to attack the document at this point.

Senior Palestinian negotiators Saeb Erekat and Yasser Abed Rabbo have nothing to lose when they say the U.S. paper is just another way of letting Israel have its way. But Israel definitely loses when it forces Kerry to engage in this wrongheaded clash.

Israelis are not going to view Kerry as an unbiased broker if all he does is talk about the doom and gloom of the post-negotiations boycott without actually condemning it; similarly, even as he sounds the alarm over another Palestinian uprising (after what he calls the "illusionary" sense of security), he should make it clear that former head of the Preventive Security Force Jibril Rajoub and his cohorts hurt peace when they say that they would take up arms.

It is not enough to come out against these statements behind closed doors. Even if Kerry has quietly communicated his displeasure with these statements to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, the U.S. diplomat comes off as biased. People in Western democracies only hear what Kerry says on the podium, with microphones and speakers, not what he says behind closed doors in Ramallah (if he says anything). In that sense, Netanyahu is right on the mark, because Kerry's statements essentially harden the heart of Palestinian pharaoh, who is watching with glee as the Americans and the Israelis get mired in endless squabbles. Nothing could be better for the Palestinians, who have never wanted peace in the first place.

The U.S. plan should have the Palestinians confront reality: You cannot have peace with Israel unless you recognize it as a Jewish state, as mentioned in the 1947 U.N. General Assembly resolution; there can never be a deal unless Israel's security needs are addressed, despite Palestinian wheelers and dealers trying to portray Israel as the paranoid state of the Jews.

Everyone wants to untangle this mess. Kerry is highly motivated to make this work, but he must be even-handed. Although Israel has been too vocal and sounded reckless statements, Kerry will discover that the obstacles to peace lie a few kilometers north of Jerusalem and not in the Jewish capital.

טעינו? נתקן! אם מצאתם טעות בכתבה, נשמח שתשתפו אותנו