Kick all the motherfuckers out.
Diplomacy problem solved.
Foreign Policy:
In sharp reversal, U.S. agrees to rebuke Israel in Security Council
Posted By Colum Lynch Wednesday, February 16, 2011 - 6:00 PM
The U.S. informed Arab governments Tuesday that it will support a U.N. Security Council statement reaffirming that the 15-nation body "does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity," a move aimed at avoiding the prospect of having to veto a stronger Palestinian resolution calling the settlements illegal.
But the Palestinians rejected the American offer following a meeting late Wednesday of Arab representatives and said it is planning to press for a vote on its resolution on Friday, according to officials familar with the issue. The decision to reject the American offer raised the prospect that the Obama adminstration will cast its first ever veto in the U.N. Security Council.
Still, the U.S. offer signaled a renewed willingness to seek a way out of the current impasse, even if it requires breaking with Israel and joining others in the council in sending a strong message to its key ally to stop its construction of new settlements. The Palestinian delegation, along with Lebanon, the Security Council's only Arab member state, have asked the council's president this evening to schedule a meeting for Friday. But it remained unclear whether the Palestinian move today to reject the U.S. offer is simply a negotiating tactic aimed at extracting a better deal from Washington.
Susan E. Rice, the U.S. ambassador to the United Nations, outlined the new U.S. offer in a closed door meeting on Tuesday with the Arab Group, a bloc of Arab countries from North Africa and the Middle East. In exchange for scuttling the Palestinian resolution, the United States would support the council statement, consider supporting a U.N. Security Council visit to the Middle East, the first since 1979, and commit to supporting strong language criticizing Israel's settlement policies in a future statement by the Middle East Quartet.
The U.S.-backed draft statement -- which was first reported by Al Hurra -- was obtained by Turtle Bay. In it, the Security Council "expresses its strong opposition to any unilateral actions by any party, which cannot prejudge the outcome of negotiations and will not be recognized by the international community, and reaffirms, that it does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity, which is a serious obstacle to the peace process." The statement also condemns "all forms of violence, including rocket fire from Gaza, and stresses the need for calm and security for both peoples."
U.S. officials were not available for comment, but two Security Council diplomats confirmed the proposal. The Arab Group was scheduled to meet this afternoon to formulate a formal response to the American offer. Council diplomats said that the discussions were fluid and that there was still the possibility that the U.S. draft would be subject to further negotiations. They said it was also not yet certain that the U.S. offer would satisfy the Arab Group, and that the U.S. may be forced to veto the Palestinian resolution.
U.S. officials argue that the only way to resolve the Middle East conflict is through direct negotiations involving Israel and the Palestinians. For weeks, the Obama administration has refused to negotiate with the Palestinians on a resolution condemning the settlements as illegal, signaling that they would likely veto it if it were put to a vote. The Palestinians were planning to put the resolution to a vote later this week. But Security Council statements of the sort currently under consideration are voted on the bases of consensus in the 15-nation council.
The United States has, however, been isolated in the 15-nation council. Virtually all 14 other member states are prepared to support the Palestinian resolution, according to council diplomats. A U.N. Security Council resolution generally carries greater political and legal force than a statement from the council's president.
The U.S. concession comes as the Middle East is facing a massive wave of popular demonstrations that have brought down the leaders of Tunisia and Egypt and are posing a challenge to governments in Algeria, Bahrain, and Iran.
2 comments:
At the very worst the settlements are a continuing bargaining tool to COERCE A PEACE AGREEMENT.
As Israel showed when she left the Sinai, and Gaza settlements are abandoned, and the process WILL BE enforced by the IDF against it own people WHEN THE GOVT DECIDES.
This is nothing more than the US CAVING IN TO A PEER GROUP.
Can anyone think of a reason why the Israeli would not cut military technology sales deals with Russia and China?
F-35 production is now 5 years behind with nothing in sight, and BOTH Russia and China have airframes which are stealthy and cheap. We have ended F-22 production at 187 and have refused to sell any more (at all) ti Israel (or Jaopan or Australia). Russia and China don't care about the policies of their partners. They only measure their own advantage.
Israeli electronics and radars in Russian and Chinese airframes. Israeli drones which can loiter for 36 hours sold or LICENSED for production to Russia.
Worse, when Netanyahu sees this admin behaving this way, WHAT FEAR CAN HE HAVE ABOUT USA RETRIBUTIVE ACTIONS if Israel simply move in that direction precipitously?
NONE.
This STUPID STUPID ACTION will end up hardening Israel's position, since BEREFT of any dependable ally geographic SIZE (especially with Egypt unsteady) is the only POSSIBLE aid for a nation otherwise NINE MILES WIDE. That is less than distance from my home to Bangor, Maine. A drive we make to the supermarket without thinking.
A T-72 goes 45 MPH. 12 minutes.
Who is thinking ahead in DC?
Hi guys.
He's just proving me right once again ,i always said he would turn against Israel.He doesn't want a peaceplan he wants Israel gone.
Post a Comment