posted
Appearing before the annual conference of AIPAC, the American pro-Israel lobby, is what all candidates for president of the United States dream about. It's their big chance to attract the Jewish vote and Jewish contributions. It's the setting where they can reap the benefits of declarations of loyalty to Israel, elegantly bypassing anything that might rile supporters. That's where, 16 years ago, Republican candidate Bob Dole announced a legislative initiative, at an inopportune moment, to move the U.S. embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem, in one of the low points in the peace process.
No American president or presidential candidate has ever told this large Jewish audience of supporters of Israel the truth. Until yesterday, that is. Obama did not go to the AIPAC conference to iron out differences between him and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu. He went there to settle misunderstandings with Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas.
Obama's explanation regarding his statement last week at the State Department regarding borders, meaning the 1967 borders with mutually agreed-upon swaps, has been acceptable to the Palestinian side for some time. Any diplomat trainee at the Israeli Foreign Ministry would know that not only would Palestinians never agree to have the Israeli army stationed for decades along the Jordan River, but neither would the Americans support Netanyahu's demand that the IDF control Palestinian territory.
It is not coincidental that seasoned Palestinian adviser Saeb Erekat quickly announced yesterday that if Netanyahu were to accept that principle, the path to negotiations would be open and Israel would be able to spare itself and Obama the headache of a vote at the United Nations in September on recognition of a Palestinian state.
Obama fed Netanyahu a heaping portion of Passover bitter herbs garnished with sweet apple haroset. He did not try to make nice. After long deliberations, the die was cast at the White House. Plans would no longer be tailor-made for the government of hour in Israel, as America's perennial Middle East adviser Dennis Ross was known to do.
Yesterday came the turn of Secretary of State Hillary Clinton, who has learned a thing or two about Netanyahu's maneuvers. Precisely in the run-up to a tough election year, Obama decided to adopt the approach of the secretary of state, to take off the kid gloves and show the true face of the head of the Jewish state on his guest's home court.
Obama's AIPAC speech is the bill the president is submitting to Netanyahu for the dinners that the Israeli prime minister thought he had gotten for free. The time has come to pay for American opposition to the Goldstone commission report on the Israeli incursion in Gaza and the veto of the UN Security Council's condemnation of construction in West Bank settlements. Obama denied Netanyahu the opportunity to exercise a veto on the terms for negotiations with the Palestinians. The U.S. president said that negotiations could not be conducted with Hamas as long as the organization does not recognize Israel's right to exist, refuses to accept existing international obligations and engages in terrorism. The Palestinian party to the negotiations was and remains the Palestine Liberation Organization and not Hamas.
Obama also rejected Netanyahu's demand that negotiations begin based on the principle of Palestinian recognition of Israel as the nation-state of the Jewish people. The president was careful to speak about both parties' right to self-determination. Period.
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon used to liken Israel's participation in negotiations on the future of the territories to cattle being led through the corral to the slaughterhouse. When Netanyahu returns home, he will have to decide once and for all if he is ready to lose the support of an American president who yesterday went into the lion's den or enter the corral of negotiations that in the end, and perhaps even from the beginning, will threaten him with political slaughter. Netanyahu's choice not to attend yesterday's convention session may indicate which direction he will choose.
posted
President Barack Obama said Sunday that any controversy over his remarks last week that Israel-Palestinian negotiations should start from pre-1967 borders and include land swaps was "not based in substance."
In his first speech as president to the main American-Israeli advocacy group, the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), Obama sought to reassure the vital U.S. Jewish lobby of his administration's commitment to Israel's security
...
Obama acknowledged that he expected some controversy from his call last Thursday for negotiations to be based on border demarcations from before the six-day war of 1967, in which Israel seized the West Bank, Gaza Strip and other territory.
However, he said, his policy on the border issue "means that the parties themselves -- Israelis and Palestinians -- will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967," the eve of the war.
...
His proposal contained "nothing particularly original," he said, adding that "this basic framework for negotiations has long been the basis for discussions among the parties, including previous U.S. administrations."
"If there is a controversy, then, it's not based in substance," Obama said.
The Thursday remarks drew a chilly response from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who used a joint appearance with Obama on Friday to reject any possibility that Israel could return to its pre-1967 borders. Netanyahu said such borders would be "indefensible" and noted that major Israeli population centers now lie outside them.
posted
There's an easy U.S. answer to sort things out as in done elsewhere. Just start bombing claiming that the lives and security of the people of the West Bank and Gaza are imperiled. Plus add some drones to target the stubborn Netanyahu. I mean this is the exact equation for Libya, right?
Posts: 5492 | Registered: Nov 2004
| IP: Logged |
posted
A man tries. And either way he's faced with contempt. No other US President has ever publicly stated what President Obama stated. No other President has gone on record emphasizing 1967 borders. Israel wants it all. They want the Jordan Valley too. Obama killed that.
Are ES members even aware of the unofficial Palestian position? Are ES members even aware of the concessions the PA made(Palestian papers) and to which Israel said not enough? Are ES members even aware without US involement the Israelis will maintain the status quo of smoldering Palestianians until the end of time. Israel does not want peace, they have a flourishing economy, they are building settlements left and right. Peace to them them is an inconvience. Here's a president that has publicly stated 1967 as the starting point, even with inevitable land swaps.
Obama 2012 and let's see where he finishes.
Posts: 2275 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Oh wow the world must have changed. Exiled posted an Israeli source LOL.... strange things are happening. Are you okay?
And definitely a NOBAMA 2012 ...... keep on dreaming camel boy. Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Oh wow the world must have changed. Exiled posted an Israeli source LOL.... strange things are happening. Are you okay?
And definitely a NOBAMA 2012 ...... keep on dreaming camel boy.
Chill Out Lilly!
I am a regular reader of Haaretz, and even recommend it in the original Egyptian revolution thread. (Go and check it out, I think it's from Jan/Feb 2011).
Haartez is an intelligent paper. I suggested you read it instead of the dailymail. Really. Read it, maybe it may change your hateful perspective on life. There are many decent Jews and Israelis who don't share the hatred you have for Egypt, Arab and Muslims.
Posts: 2275 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
Oh wow the world must have changed. Exiled posted an Israeli source LOL.... strange things are happening. Are you okay?
And definitely a NOBAMA 2012 ...... keep on dreaming camel boy.
Chill Out Lilly!
I am a regular reader of Haaretz, and even recommend it in the original Egyptian revolution thread. (Go and check it out, I think it's from Jan/Feb 2011).
Haartez is an intelligent paper. I suggested you read it instead of the dailymail. Really. Read it, maybe it may change your hateful perspective on life. There are many decent Jews and Israelis who don't share the hatred you have for Egypt, Arab and Muslims.
And I advise you not to waste your time googling online but to go out and find a job. Only a REAL LOSER can brag to others not to have to work. You haven't had a job in what..... 20 years? 'Student for life' - eh???? Wallahy you are a parasite to your family and society in general, camel boy.
Posts: 30135 | From: The owner of this website killed ES....... | Registered: Feb 2004
| IP: Logged |
Oh wow the world must have changed. Exiled posted an Israeli source LOL.... strange things are happening. Are you okay?
And definitely a NOBAMA 2012 ...... keep on dreaming camel boy.
Chill Out Lilly!
I am a regular reader of Haaretz, and even recommend it in the original Egyptian revolution thread. (Go and check it out, I think it's from Jan/Feb 2011).
Haartez is an intelligent paper. I suggested you read it instead of the dailymail. Really. Read it, maybe it may change your hateful perspective on life. There are many decent Jews and Israelis who don't share the hatred you have for Egypt, Arab and Muslims.
And I advise you not to waste your time googling online but to go out and find a job. Only a REAL LOSER can brag to others not to have to work. You haven't had a job in what..... 20 years? 'Student for life' - eh???? Wallahy you are a parasite to your family and society in general, camel boy.
Here am I thinking this topic is about President Obama Sheesh and all I did was recommend the Haaretz. What triggered this latest onslaught Lilly? Posts: 2275 | Registered: Dec 2009
| IP: Logged |
UBBFriend: Email this page to someone!
![[Roll Eyes]](rolleyes.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)
![[Wink]](wink.gif)
Printer-friendly view of this topic