Quote Originally Posted by Air-On View Post
Before joining SWJ, I had never heard of these Annapolis conferences on the Arab-Israeli conflict. Their conclusions, pointing to the need of "reeducating" the politicians, apparently succeeded although "under wraps", once Obama's current positions towards Israel are in contradiction to his campaign promises.
The Annapolis process was the series of peace negotiations between the then Olmert government in Israel and the PA, started under US auspices (but with little subsequent direct US involvement) in November 2007. The negotiations were reported on pretty much daily in the Israeli press throughout the period, albeit with little detail.

There seems to be a widespread consensus in the Obama Administration that a two state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is in the interests of the US, Israel, and the Palestinians alike--a view still shared by many, and likely most, Israelis and Palestinians. Recent polls show that while many Israelis (40%) think Obama's policies lean towards the Palestinians, but an even larger proportion of Palestinians (61%) thinks it leans towards the Israelis.

Sadly, there is slippage on both sides in the degree of public support for the most likely (Clinton Parameters / Geneva Accord -type) solution. I suspect that this is because of the lack of mutual confidence between the two sides, and it doesn't make the process any easier.

As for the PA security forces, it seems self-evident that the PA needs paramilitary capabilities if it is to contain violent threats to Israel. The gradual but now significant relaxation of IDF checkpoints in the West Bank is clear evidence that the Israeli security establishment has some confidence that this is paying off. The improvements in domestic policing/rule of law also have some political benefits for the Abbas and Fayyad, although this is counterbalanced to some extent by the popular perception that the PA has become a gendarmerie protecting Israeli interests.