Palestinians to seek full UN membership Sept. 23

[Sofiyya 1,687]

A British view:

Palestine vote will define Britain’s role in the Arab Spring

By Ian Dunt | Talking Politics – Thu, Sep 22, 2011

Anyone who tells you they support the Arab Spring but not Palestine's bid for statehood is a fraud. It is an untenable position which defeats even the murky logic of foreign policy.

Foreign policy is always a hotbed of contradiction and hypocrisy, but this is one step too far. We accepted it when William Hague praised democracy movements in the region while refusing to comment on the Saudi dictatorship. We looked the other way when David Cameron celebrated Egypt's liberation with a plane-load of arms dealers. And we restricted ourselves to a few grumbles when the government allowed the Saudis and Bahrainis to attend an arms sale in east London while singing the praises of human rights.

Genuinely held principle and hard-headed strategy always make uneasy bedfellows. Traditionally, leftists have interpreted these discrepancies as evidence of a basic corruption in the West's foreign policy. It's an understandable assessment, but not an accurate one. What looks like hypocrisy is usually the presence of idealism within practical limitations.

But you have to draw a line somewhere, and the vote on Palestinian statehood is a good place to do it. President Barack Obama's appalling and imbecilic speech at the UN yesterday employed his usual eloquence for an argument which he will refute with his own actions.

Obama praised the Arab Spring — "a vendor lit a spark that took his own life, but ignited a movement" — and yet he pledges to veto an attempt at Palestinian statehood. It is an act of supreme moral and political poverty. The president's complete capitulation to the Israeli lobby is depressingly predictable, but it still stings to hear his capacity for language used against that which he claims to support.

We are now forced to wait and see if Britain will find the bravery to back up its own professed support for change. The Foreign Office refuses to state how it will vote. There's no such reluctance from other European states, most of whom have openly expressed their intention, even if it's just for 'non-member state' status through the general assembly. Labour is pushing for a 'yes' vote, saying the Palestinian case is "strong". Even Jack Straw, the foreign secretary who presided over the Iraq war, is lobbying MPs for change.

Meanwhile, reports have emerged that Hillary Clinton is arranging secret meetings between Cameron and Tony Blair. We can have little doubt what angle the former prime minister will take. While he pushed for George Bush to support a two-state solution, his guiding political principle is of subservience to America's whim, which, in any practical sense, is Israel's whim. They want to delay, to muddy the waters, to find another route. But there is no reason to do so. This is a unique moment to secure lasting change, change which would protect us against terrorism in the future but removing at least some of the injustice committed daily against the Arab people.

The arguments against Palestinian statehood are so weak it is demeaning to even address them. The US says that a vote will make no difference on the ground. If it's so irrelevant there's no need to veto it. The US says peace can only come through negotiations with Israel, but this is just a euphemism for perpetual slavery. Even on the most basic, widely held demand - that Israel stops building settlements — it is intransigent and unmoveable. Israel has no interest in negotiation and makes no effort to pretend that it does, but at least it is honest. Even as it condemns the settlements, Washington vetoes any effort to take action against them at the security council.

These events constitute a historic turning point for the Middle East. If America vetoes the bid it will have lost any right to preside over talks as an impartial third party — a role that was laughable years ago but which will now clearly be impossible. It will be one further step into irrelevance for a country whose power and influence is on the wane. It will make terrorist attacks considerably more likely, as the US demonstrates to the Palestinian people that the reasonable, incremental and peaceful demands of their moderate politicians will be dismissed out of hand.

Britain does not have to join America down this road. It can serve the old power block of Washington and Tel Aviv or commit to the tide of history and support the Palestinian bid.

The cheering crowds celebrating Britain in Libya give a small indication of what can be achieved with a little vision and commitment, of what we can do if the Foreign Office sees the moment of change for what it is. We have an opportunity to turn a region that is rightfully suspicious of us into one which considers us a supporter in its quest for freedom and self-determination.

Foreign policy is a competition of idealism and practicality. This is one of those rare occasions when both arguments point in the same direction.

Edited September 24, 2011 by Sofiyya

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

A British view:

Anyone who tells you they support the Arab Spring but not Palestine's bid for statehood is a fraud. It is an untenable position which defeats even the murky logic of foreign policy.

[Sofiyya 1,687]

Ya, I'm piling on . . .

Published 03:00 23.09.11Latest update 03:00 23.09.11

Netanyahu doesn't miss an opportunity to avoid peace

Even Bibi's most brilliant speech won't change the bitter fact that he is trying to fool everyone, yet the country he rules is still on the ropes.

By Yoel Marcus

The comment by Israeli statesman Abba Eban, that the Palestinians never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity, was so popular - and not only in Israel - that even U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger quoted it often. Now the joke is on us. Israel is the one that doesn't miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity for an agreement. About two years ago, in the Bar-Ilan speech, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared two states for two peoples. But since then he has not lifted a finger to make it come true. No trick, no speech, no maneuver can change the facts: that he is the prime minister with the greatest parliamentary support, and there is no decision for compromise that he could not have passed in the Knesset.

Had he wanted to reach an agreement he could have done so in spite of the difficulties and the obstacles. But he has a 100-year-old father who wouldn't forgive him for giving up Greater Israel, a wife who doesn't make the road to an agreement easy for him, and a political milieu that opposes decisions that involve giving up territories.

Bibi Netanyahu speaks brilliant American English, but what difference does that make when he is facing a rival whose English is not as good, but who works correctly. Under the noses of our many ambassadors in South America, for example, most Latin countries have promised their support for the Palestinian bid to be recognized as a state by the United Nations. How did Israel wind up in a situation in which it depends on Gabon to rescue Obama from casting a veto in the UN Security Council?

The Palestinian maneuver didn't fall from the sky. It could have been handled before it was too late. Is it possible that we didn't see the revolution against us taking place in the world? Is it possible that we didn't see that Palestinian Authority Chairman Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas ) was pushing us to the wall, and now in Washington he still has half a bullet in his barrel? While we are busy distributing gas masks and preparing for the possibility that missiles will fall on Tel Aviv too, in Ramallah they are preparing for a normal civic life.

And what will be our reaction if Abu Mazen's move in the United Nations succeeds? Will we impose sanctions on him? Will we refuse to transfer the taxes that we collect for the Palestinian Authority? Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman denies reports that he proposed sanctions if the PA joins the UN as a state. But there is no need for him to open his mouth in order for us to know what he is aiming at and what he really wants. He has a deputy minister named Danny Ayalon who makes us break out in a sweat every time he speaks. This is the man who humiliated the Turkish ambassador and seated him on a low sofa. Lieberman can continue to deny it, but the thoughts about sanctions are etched between his beard and his mustache.

During Netanyahu's term we lost the ability to propose smart solutions, to weigh the problems facing us with a long view. Instead of Jewish wisdom and moderation we have gained a reputation for being the regional bully, and that's what is leading us to international isolation. While Israel has never really rejected Ben-Gurion's disdainful attitude toward the United Nations, which he called "Um-Shmum" (Um is the Hebrew acronym for the UN ), the leaders of the PA are the ones who have gained international empathy for their case, and even use that empathy as a diplomatic tool to promote it.

Because the initiative to allow the State of Palestine to join the United Nations is supported by most of the member nations, Bibi is in a panic. As is his custom in such situations, he decided, in his role as Superman, to fly to Washington in order to argue that only countries can be UN members. He torpedoed President Shimon Peres' idea of representing Israel in the General Assembly, and even made sure that Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who in such situations "happens" to find himself in Washington, returned to Israel. Bibi likes to be a soloist in such situations. What did Prime Minister Menahem Begin used to say to Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan when he would fly to Washington? "Take care of the country until I get back."

The UN General Assembly is not the U.S. Congress. Bibi won't get a standing ovation there. A large percentage of the representatives are Muslim, but even the Christians aren't exactly crazy about us. U.S. President Barack Obama - who recently discovered that in several important election districts Republican candidates are defeating Democratic ones among the Jewish electorate - is fighting tooth and nail for a second term. He will try until the last moment to refrain from casting a veto, and he may succeed. The Security Council without a veto may open a time slot for beginning negotiations in the region.

Even Bibi's most brilliant speech won't change the bitter fact that he is trying to fool everyone, yet the country he rules is still on the ropes.

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Even Bibi's most brilliant speech won't change the bitter fact that he is trying to fool everyone, yet the country he rules is still on the ropes.

Careful. If history has taught us nothing else, any beast will fight the hardest, when it has no retreat, and nothing left to lose.

[PalestineMyHeart 1,897]

meanwhile avigdor lieberman actively pursues arming and aiding pkk terrorists, and basically no one bats an eye. go figure.

This story has taken an even more interesting turn - the PKK has not only spurned Lieberman's offer, but they have joined the growing list of people now demanding that Israel apologize for its behavior

Leader of the outlawed Kurdistan Workers’ Party (PKK) has demanded an apology from Israel for helping the capture of PKK’s jailed leader Abdullah Öcalan back in 1999 after reports that Israel may use the PKK against Turkey in the face of increasing tensions between the two countries.

Karayılan’s remarks came three days after a report suggesting that Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman offered to hold meetings with leaders of the PKK in response to Turkey’s sanctions on Israel due to its refusal to apologize for flotilla deaths.

Karayılan told pro-PKK Firat news agency on Monday that the PKK is a “principled organization” and that it is not a movement that “could be used against any state.”

PKK leader demands apology from Israel for Öcalan capture

[luckytxn 2,264]

A British view:

Palestine vote will define Britain’s role in the Arab Spring

By Ian Dunt | Talking Politics – Thu, Sep 22, 2011

Anyone who tells you they support the Arab Spring but not Palestine's bid for statehood is a fraud. It is an untenable position which defeats even the murky logic of foreign policy.

Foreign policy is always a hotbed of contradiction and hypocrisy, but this is one step too far. We accepted it when William Hague praised democracy movements in the region while refusing to comment on the Saudi dictatorship. We looked the other way when David Cameron celebrated Egypt's liberation with a plane-load of arms dealers. And we restricted ourselves to a few grumbles when the government allowed the Saudis and Bahrainis to attend an arms sale in east London while singing the praises of human rights.

Genuinely held principle and hard-headed strategy always make uneasy bedfellows. Traditionally, leftists have interpreted these discrepancies as evidence of a basic corruption in the West's foreign policy. It's an understandable assessment, but not an accurate one. What looks like hypocrisy is usually the presence of idealism within practical limitations.

But you have to draw a line somewhere, and the vote on Palestinian statehood is a good place to do it. President Barack Obama's appalling and imbecilic speech at the UN yesterday employed his usual eloquence for an argument which he will refute with his own actions.

Obama praised the Arab Spring — "a vendor lit a spark that took his own life, but ignited a movement" — and yet he pledges to veto an attempt at Palestinian statehood. It is an act of supreme moral and political poverty. The president's complete capitulation to the Israeli lobby is depressingly predictable, but it still stings to hear his capacity for language used against that which he claims to support.

We are now forced to wait and see if Britain will find the bravery to back up its own professed support for change. The Foreign Office refuses to state how it will vote. There's no such reluctance from other European states, most of whom have openly expressed their intention, even if it's just for 'non-member state' status through the general assembly. Labour is pushing for a 'yes' vote, saying the Palestinian case is "strong". Even Jack Straw, the foreign secretary who presided over the Iraq war, is lobbying MPs for change.

Meanwhile, reports have emerged that Hillary Clinton is arranging secret meetings between Cameron and Tony Blair. We can have little doubt what angle the former prime minister will take. While he pushed for George Bush to support a two-state solution, his guiding political principle is of subservience to America's whim, which, in any practical sense, is Israel's whim. They want to delay, to muddy the waters, to find another route. But there is no reason to do so. This is a unique moment to secure lasting change, change which would protect us against terrorism in the future but removing at least some of the injustice committed daily against the Arab people.

The arguments against Palestinian statehood are so weak it is demeaning to even address them. The US says that a vote will make no difference on the ground. If it's so irrelevant there's no need to veto it. The US says peace can only come through negotiations with Israel, but this is just a euphemism for perpetual slavery. Even on the most basic, widely held demand - that Israel stops building settlements — it is intransigent and unmoveable. Israel has no interest in negotiation and makes no effort to pretend that it does, but at least it is honest. Even as it condemns the settlements, Washington vetoes any effort to take action against them at the security council.

These events constitute a historic turning point for the Middle East. If America vetoes the bid it will have lost any right to preside over talks as an impartial third party — a role that was laughable years ago but which will now clearly be impossible. It will be one further step into irrelevance for a country whose power and influence is on the wane. It will make terrorist attacks considerably more likely, as the US demonstrates to the Palestinian people that the reasonable, incremental and peaceful demands of their moderate politicians will be dismissed out of hand.

Britain does not have to join America down this road. It can serve the old power block of Washington and Tel Aviv or commit to the tide of history and support the Palestinian bid.

The cheering crowds celebrating Britain in Libya give a small indication of what can be achieved with a little vision and commitment, of what we can do if the Foreign Office sees the moment of change for what it is. We have an opportunity to turn a region that is rightfully suspicious of us into one which considers us a supporter in its quest for freedom and self-determination.

Foreign policy is a competition of idealism and practicality. This is one of those rare occasions when both arguments point in the same direction.

Sounds good and thanks for the giving me something to read. This should be directed at Obama. Obama is the only man alive at this time in history that can stop Netanayu. Maybe Obama is too worried about elections to stop Israel. Israel needs to worry though because one day in America we will have a President that will not only say to Israel stop it or we will pull all backing and funds and military support but mean it.

Exactly why did Obama win the Nobel Prize for again?

[I AM NOT THAT GUY 5,715]

Exactly why did Obama win the Nobel Prize for again?

For not being Bush.

[luckytxn 2,264]

Ya, I'm piling on . . .

Published 03:00 23.09.11Latest update 03:00 23.09.11

Netanyahu doesn't miss an opportunity to avoid peace

Even Bibi's most brilliant speech won't change the bitter fact that he is trying to fool everyone, yet the country he rules is still on the ropes.

By Yoel Marcus

The comment by Israeli statesman Abba Eban, that the Palestinians never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity, was so popular - and not only in Israel - that even U.S. Secretary of State Henry Kissinger quoted it often. Now the joke is on us. Israel is the one that doesn't miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity for an agreement. About two years ago, in the Bar-Ilan speech, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu declared two states for two peoples. But since then he has not lifted a finger to make it come true. No trick, no speech, no maneuver can change the facts: that he is the prime minister with the greatest parliamentary support, and there is no decision for compromise that he could not have passed in the Knesset.

Had he wanted to reach an agreement he could have done so in spite of the difficulties and the obstacles. But he has a 100-year-old father who wouldn't forgive him for giving up Greater Israel, a wife who doesn't make the road to an agreement easy for him, and a political milieu that opposes decisions that involve giving up territories.

Bibi Netanyahu speaks brilliant American English, but what difference does that make when he is facing a rival whose English is not as good, but who works correctly. Under the noses of our many ambassadors in South America, for example, most Latin countries have promised their support for the Palestinian bid to be recognized as a state by the United Nations. How did Israel wind up in a situation in which it depends on Gabon to rescue Obama from casting a veto in the UN Security Council?

The Palestinian maneuver didn't fall from the sky. It could have been handled before it was too late. Is it possible that we didn't see the revolution against us taking place in the world? Is it possible that we didn't see that Palestinian Authority Chairman Abu Mazen (Mahmoud Abbas ) was pushing us to the wall, and now in Washington he still has half a bullet in his barrel? While we are busy distributing gas masks and preparing for the possibility that missiles will fall on Tel Aviv too, in Ramallah they are preparing for a normal civic life.

And what will be our reaction if Abu Mazen's move in the United Nations succeeds? Will we impose sanctions on him? Will we refuse to transfer the taxes that we collect for the Palestinian Authority? Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman denies reports that he proposed sanctions if the PA joins the UN as a state. But there is no need for him to open his mouth in order for us to know what he is aiming at and what he really wants. He has a deputy minister named Danny Ayalon who makes us break out in a sweat every time he speaks. This is the man who humiliated the Turkish ambassador and seated him on a low sofa. Lieberman can continue to deny it, but the thoughts about sanctions are etched between his beard and his mustache.

During Netanyahu's term we lost the ability to propose smart solutions, to weigh the problems facing us with a long view. Instead of Jewish wisdom and moderation we have gained a reputation for being the regional bully, and that's what is leading us to international isolation. While Israel has never really rejected Ben-Gurion's disdainful attitude toward the United Nations, which he called "Um-Shmum" (Um is the Hebrew acronym for the UN ), the leaders of the PA are the ones who have gained international empathy for their case, and even use that empathy as a diplomatic tool to promote it.

Because the initiative to allow the State of Palestine to join the United Nations is supported by most of the member nations, Bibi is in a panic. As is his custom in such situations, he decided, in his role as Superman, to fly to Washington in order to argue that only countries can be UN members. He torpedoed President Shimon Peres' idea of representing Israel in the General Assembly, and even made sure that Defense Minister Ehud Barak, who in such situations "happens" to find himself in Washington, returned to Israel. Bibi likes to be a soloist in such situations. What did Prime Minister Menahem Begin used to say to Chief of Staff Rafael Eitan when he would fly to Washington? "Take care of the country until I get back."

The UN General Assembly is not the U.S. Congress. Bibi won't get a standing ovation there. A large percentage of the representatives are Muslim, but even the Christians aren't exactly crazy about us. U.S. President Barack Obama - who recently discovered that in several important election districts Republican candidates are defeating Democratic ones among the Jewish electorate - is fighting tooth and nail for a second term. He will try until the last moment to refrain from casting a veto, and he may succeed. The Security Council without a veto may open a time slot for beginning negotiations in the region.

Even Bibi's most brilliant speech won't change the bitter fact that he is trying to fool everyone, yet the country he rules is still on the ropes.

Yet this same commentator will say this.

"Letter on the way, start worrying." This saying came to mind in the wake of the discussion between U.S. President Barack Obama and a group of Jewish leaders last week, with its implied warning that Israel is liable to lose its special status in America. The truth is that our discourse with Obama is not as intimate as our discourse was with former president George W. Bush. Obama aspires to accelerate the peace process and is behaving as though everything starts and ends with the question of whether Israel will or will not freeze construction in the settlements.

Sixteen years have passed since the Oslo Accords, and we have gotten nowhere, except for the fact that the Palestinians turned us into moving targets during the intifadas and suicide attacks. Without any connection to the accords, former prime minister Ariel Sharon evacuated 21 settlements, 17 of them in Gush Katif, and the Palestinians, instead of turning the area that was evacuated into a tourist mecca, as the Egyptians did in Sinai, turned it into a base for launching Qassam rockets. And since there is still no serious partner on the Palestinian side, it is hard to get excited by the optimism of Obama, who expects a quick peace treaty not only with the Palestinians but with Syria as well. Optimism reminiscent of the cartoon character Speedy Gonzales.

The year 2010 is in the offing. That is the year in which the entire U.S. House of Representatives and one third of the Senate will be going to elections. About 20 percent of the Democratic members of Congress are Jewish, and the Republicans, who lost their majority in both houses, are looking for a way to restore it. The subject of peace between Israel and the Palestinians will not affect the half-term elections. The president who invented the slogan "Yes We Can" will be judged on internal problems: the economy, the unemployment situation, the collapsing auto industry, the thousands of university graduates who cannot find work, the situation of mortgages, the banks and social security. In short, things that are not solved by rhetoric.

Among those affected are quite a number of Jews, and as American citizens they will judge Obama first and foremost by his success, or his lack of success, in extricating America from the economic and financial crisis. That is more complicated than killing a fly on a live television broadcast.

Dizzied by his historic victory as the first African-American to achieve the presidency, Obama believes in his ability to change the world. A man with all-embracing good intentions: He is committed to leaving Iraq within two years and it is important to him to strengthen the Sunnis in the Islamic world to prevent the Shi'ites from taking it over. He is aiming at some kind of regional conference that photographs well, with himself in the center as orator.

With all of Obama's goodwill and all-embracing ambition, there is something naive, not to say infuriating, about his policy of rapprochement and about the whistle stops he has chosen on his travels dealing with our issue. He spoke in Turkey, he spoke in Egypt, he appeared before students in Saudi Arabia, in Paris, in England, in Ghana and in Australia. Even there the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was mentioned. His plan to begin rapprochement with Iran, which openly threatens to destroy Israel, and to reassure its fanatic leadership, which cruelly suppresses any attempt by the younger generation to get rid of the regime of the ayatollahs, is delusional.

The only place where he hasn't been is as president Israel. He has spoken about us, but not to us. That was precisely what the Jewish leaders complained about in their discussion with him last week. Obama assumed he did a great thing when he spoke in Cairo about the suffering of the Jewish people in the Holocaust. What is infuriating about these appearances is the implied distortion: that we deserve a state because of the Holocaust. Although, as a believing Christian, Obama is familiar with the Bible, his disregard of our historical connection to the Land of Israel, and obscuring the fact that the Palestinians are unable to overcome their passions and to be worthy partners to a peace agreement, is extremely annoying.

The Holocaust took place 65 years ago. The foundation for a Jewish state, on which the United Nations General Assembly decided in 1947, was the historical connection of the Jews to this part of the world. As David Ben-Gurion, Israel's first prime minister, said to the Peel Commission in 1937: "The Bible is our mandate." We deserve to have a sovereign Jewish state with secure borders, without their threatening to flood it with Palestinian refugees with the excuse of the right of return, but with the clear objective of destroying it from within.

Just as the election of Obama brought historical justice to his people, who were exploited as slaves in America for hundreds of years, we expect that, as a leader who aspires to solve the problems of the world through rapprochement, he will come to Israel and declare here courageously, before the entire world, that our connection to this land began long before the Israeli-Arab conflict and the Holocaust; and that 4,000 years ago Jews already stood on the ground where he is standing.

http://www.haaretz.com/print-edition/opinion/yoel-marcus-obama-has-spoken-about-us-but-not-to-us-1.266988Link:

For not being Bush.

Oh, OK. Well that made sense. Did they expect him to earn the thing?

[Dan and Judy 614]

Obama has everything well in hand, In about 6 months he's going to have Mahmo and Benji holding hands and gigling like a couple

of campfire girls at summer camp. Putin will be the bus driver.

[Bad_Daddy 2,209]

Obama has everything well in hand, In about 6 months he's going to have Mahmo and Benji holding hands and gigling like a couple

of campfire girls at summer camp. Putin will be the bus driver.

[MyLittlePony 340]

Not the long yellow bus more like the short one.

[Dan and Judy 614]

Not the long yellow bus more like the short one.

The longer the bus, the more happy campers you're going to have