RUTHFULLY YOURS

On Monday evening, U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry hosted an iftar dinner, the daily meal with which Muslims break their Ramadan fast. However, this was more than just a gesture of religious tolerance for his guests from the Palestinian Authority; it symbolized Kerry’s great gratitude to Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas for agreeing to accept the invitation altogether, and send a delegation to Washington to talk to Israeli counterparts.

Kerry was thrilled to have pulled it off. Hours before the arrival of PA negotiators Saeb Erekat and Mohammed Shtayyeh and Israeli representatives Justice Minister Tzipi Livni and attorney Yitzhak Molcho, he announced the appointment of former ambassador Martin Indyk to oversee peace talks between the two parties.

Indyk was delighted to be back in the diplomatic loop. From his perch in Ramallah, Abbas was satisfied that he had manipulated the situation to his advantage. But one wonders how Livni and Molcho were able to get through the iftar feast without choking on their chicken bones. Livni was even able to tell Israel Radio on Tuesday morning that peace talks had kicked off in a positive manner, though their content would be kept private.

Considering the nature of the information to which the public has been privy — and the misleading way in which the two-day meetings at Foggy Bottom are being presented — one can only shudder at the thought of what is not being revealed.

Let’s start with the fact that the meetings in Washington this week do not constitute a resumption of peace negotiations. They are solely logistical. If anything emerges by Tuesday’s end, it will be a timetable for future discussions.

What this means, in Arabic diplo-speak and American mistranslation, is that dates will be determined to give the PA advance notice to prepare for each new act of extortion. One need not rely on two decades of experience with the PA to know that this is the case. Looking at what transpired two days ago is perfectly sufficient.

On Sunday, the Israeli cabinet gave Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu the green light to release 104 Palestinian terrorists held in Israeli jails since before the signing of the 1993 Oslo Accords, to satisfy the Palestinians’ demand. The last time Israel caved in to such a demand was in 2011: To extricate kidnapped soldier Gilad Schalit from a tortuous five-year ordeal in Hamas captivity, Israel “exchanged” him for 1,027 terrorists (euphemistically referred to as “political prisoners”).

Abbas now knows for certain that he doesn’t even need to abduct an Israeli to get what he wants. He is also aware that Kerry will do anything to claim credit for rejuvenating peace talks and maintaining their “momentum.”

It is leverage that the PA president will not squander. All he has to do is remain intransigent, upping the demand ante whenever he feels like it. This gives him credibility at home, while guaranteeing the flow of American aid and a tightening of the screws on Israel. It is thus far more in his interest to allow Kerry to court him over the course of the next year than to reach an agreement with the “Zionist entity” whose demise is his goal.

The assumption among Netanyahu defenders is that the Israeli prime minister would not have agreed to a prisoner release without receiving something in return from the U.S. A similar sentiment was expressed about his apology to Turkey for the events of the “Free Gaza” flotilla raid, and consent to compensate the families of those killed in scuffles with Israeli commandoes.

The rumor is that Netanyahu is willing to capitulate on such issues in order to gain American approval for an Israeli (or joint American-Israeli) strike on Iran’s nuclear facilities.

Though it is utterly plausible that this is Netanyahu’s strategy, he shouldn’t imagine that the White House and State Department share his objectives.

In the first place, the nuclear program may have progressed beyond the point of no return. Secondly, Iran’s President-elect Hasan Rouhani is viewed by the Obama administration as a moderate. Rouhani has said that he would be willing to engage in “direct negotiations” about “peaceful” nuclear power. Like Abbas, he knows what Western diplomats like to hear.

Netanyahu should have learned by now that submission never leads to victory; it only breeds further surrender. Abbas is counting on it.

Ruthie Blum is the author of “To Hell in a Handbasket: Carter, Obama, and the ‘Arab Spring.'”