US struggles to get Israel, Palestinians to talks
WASHINGTON (AP) — The Obama administration sought Friday to direct Israel and the Palestinians back toward direct peace talks, even as the two sides and much of the world seemed to be ignoring the U.S. attempts at leadership on a Mideast peace strategy.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton met senior Israeli and Palestinian officials Friday, with each side locked in a pattern of actions that the United States had expressly warned against: the Palestinians winning U.N. recognition of their claim to a state on Thursday and the Israelis retaliating Friday by approving 3,000 new homes on Israeli-occupied territory.
The administration has campaigned for nearly two years to prevent the Palestinian action at the United Nations, fearful it would anger Israel so much that the resumption of direct talks between the Jewish state and Palestinians would be impossible. The administration remains concerned as well that statehood could mean International Criminal Court action against Israeli soldiers for their conduct in Palestinian or disputed territory — a scenario Washington believes would greatly debilitate peace hopes.
"We have to convince Palestinians that direct negotiations with Israel represent not just the best but the only path to the independent state they deserve," Clinton said Friday night in a speech at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington. "America supports the goal of a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security with Israel. But this week's vote at the U.N. won't bring Palestinians any closer, and it may bring new challenges for the United Nations system and for Israel."
Most of the world's governments brushed aside Israeli and American concerns, with U.N. member states voting 138-9 to recognize Palestine as a nonmember observer state and grant it the most significant upgrade in diplomatic status in its more than six-decades of conflict with Israel. The United States insists that the result has changed nothing on the ground, but it is struggling to shift the focus to where it believes progress on an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal is possible.
Clinton said Israel, too, needed to reach out to moderate Palestinians and "help those committed to peace to deliver for their people in the here and now" at a time when the U.S. is hoping that a fragile cease-fire Egypt sealed last week between the Jewish state and Hamas will prove durable. On Israel's settlement announcement Friday, she said "these activities set back the cause of a negotiated peace."
The Obama administration has almost nothing to show for four years of mediation efforts. Israeli-Palestinian talks have been mostly dormant since the failure of the last high-level U.S. engagement to produce an agreement, when President George W. Bush brought leaders to Annapolis, Md., with the goal of a treaty by the end of 2008. After a two-year hiatus, talks begun under the Obama administration's guidance in 2010 quickly fizzled out.
The rough contours of any agreement are clear. The two sides would have borders based on Israel's boundaries before the 1967 Mideast war, with agreed land swaps for Israeli security, to take into account population movements on the ground and ensure that Palestinian lands are connected. The two sides would also have to reach long-sought understandings on water supplies, Palestinian refugees and Jerusalem — which both Jews and Muslims consider to be their holy cities and which both sides claim as their capital.
But American efforts have been continuously stymied. The Palestinians won't enter direct talks until Israel halts the construction of new Jewish homes on lands they claim for their state; Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government says there can be no preconditions on negotiations. And despite repeated pleas from Washington, both sides have pressed on with actions that have only made peace less likely and arguably strengthened the position of hardliners on both sides.
Hoping to steer the diplomacy back toward a path to peace talks, and away from the world spotlight of the U.N., Clinton met with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad in Washington on Friday. She also spoke to Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh, a key mediator.
Clinton reiterated strong U.S. support for Israel, while also reassuring the Palestinians that Washington remains engaged in peace efforts. The Obama administration doesn't want to shut out the Western-backed government of President Mahmoud Abbas despite its disagreements, especially after Hamas gained wider legitimacy in the Arab world after its recent weeklong war with the Jewish state.
Unlike Hamas, Abbas' government publicly supports a two-state agreement with Israel. Hamas and other groups in the Gaza Strip have fired thousands of rockets at Israel in recent years.
"A lasting ceasefire is essential for the people of Israel, whose communities lie in the path of these rockets," Clinton said. But she added that Gazans deserve better, too. "Just as Israel cannot accept the threat of rockets, none of us can be satisfied with a situation that condemns people on both sides to conflict every few years. Those who fire the rockets are responsible for the violence that follows, but all parties in the region have a role to play in keeping the peace."
Clinton called on Egypt, specifically, to prevent new weapons from being smuggled into Gaza. And she demanded that U.S. allies that have grown closer to Hamas, such as Turkey and Qatar, make clear to Gaza's rulers that confrontation is no one's interest.
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton met senior Israeli and Palestinian officials Friday, with each side locked in a pattern of actions that the United States had expressly warned against: the Palestinians winning U.N. recognition of their claim to a state on Thursday and the Israelis retaliating Friday by approving 3,000 new homes on Israeli-occupied territory.
The administration has campaigned for nearly two years to prevent the Palestinian action at the United Nations, fearful it would anger Israel so much that the resumption of direct talks between the Jewish state and Palestinians would be impossible. The administration remains concerned as well that statehood could mean International Criminal Court action against Israeli soldiers for their conduct in Palestinian or disputed territory — a scenario Washington believes would greatly debilitate peace hopes.
"We have to convince Palestinians that direct negotiations with Israel represent not just the best but the only path to the independent state they deserve," Clinton said Friday night in a speech at the Saban Center for Middle East Policy in Washington. "America supports the goal of a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security with Israel. But this week's vote at the U.N. won't bring Palestinians any closer, and it may bring new challenges for the United Nations system and for Israel."
Most of the world's governments brushed aside Israeli and American concerns, with U.N. member states voting 138-9 to recognize Palestine as a nonmember observer state and grant it the most significant upgrade in diplomatic status in its more than six-decades of conflict with Israel. The United States insists that the result has changed nothing on the ground, but it is struggling to shift the focus to where it believes progress on an Israeli-Palestinian peace deal is possible.
Clinton said Israel, too, needed to reach out to moderate Palestinians and "help those committed to peace to deliver for their people in the here and now" at a time when the U.S. is hoping that a fragile cease-fire Egypt sealed last week between the Jewish state and Hamas will prove durable. On Israel's settlement announcement Friday, she said "these activities set back the cause of a negotiated peace."
The Obama administration has almost nothing to show for four years of mediation efforts. Israeli-Palestinian talks have been mostly dormant since the failure of the last high-level U.S. engagement to produce an agreement, when President George W. Bush brought leaders to Annapolis, Md., with the goal of a treaty by the end of 2008. After a two-year hiatus, talks begun under the Obama administration's guidance in 2010 quickly fizzled out.
The rough contours of any agreement are clear. The two sides would have borders based on Israel's boundaries before the 1967 Mideast war, with agreed land swaps for Israeli security, to take into account population movements on the ground and ensure that Palestinian lands are connected. The two sides would also have to reach long-sought understandings on water supplies, Palestinian refugees and Jerusalem — which both Jews and Muslims consider to be their holy cities and which both sides claim as their capital.
But American efforts have been continuously stymied. The Palestinians won't enter direct talks until Israel halts the construction of new Jewish homes on lands they claim for their state; Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's government says there can be no preconditions on negotiations. And despite repeated pleas from Washington, both sides have pressed on with actions that have only made peace less likely and arguably strengthened the position of hardliners on both sides.
Hoping to steer the diplomacy back toward a path to peace talks, and away from the world spotlight of the U.N., Clinton met with Israeli Defense Minister Ehud Barak and Foreign Minister Avigdor Liberman, and Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad in Washington on Friday. She also spoke to Jordanian Foreign Minister Nasser Judeh, a key mediator.
Clinton reiterated strong U.S. support for Israel, while also reassuring the Palestinians that Washington remains engaged in peace efforts. The Obama administration doesn't want to shut out the Western-backed government of President Mahmoud Abbas despite its disagreements, especially after Hamas gained wider legitimacy in the Arab world after its recent weeklong war with the Jewish state.
Unlike Hamas, Abbas' government publicly supports a two-state agreement with Israel. Hamas and other groups in the Gaza Strip have fired thousands of rockets at Israel in recent years.
"A lasting ceasefire is essential for the people of Israel, whose communities lie in the path of these rockets," Clinton said. But she added that Gazans deserve better, too. "Just as Israel cannot accept the threat of rockets, none of us can be satisfied with a situation that condemns people on both sides to conflict every few years. Those who fire the rockets are responsible for the violence that follows, but all parties in the region have a role to play in keeping the peace."
Clinton called on Egypt, specifically, to prevent new weapons from being smuggled into Gaza. And she demanded that U.S. allies that have grown closer to Hamas, such as Turkey and Qatar, make clear to Gaza's rulers that confrontation is no one's interest.
"Hamas and other groups in the Gaza Strip have fired thousands of rockets at Israel in recent years."
Â
I believe Israel has shown considerable restraint over the years. They are consistently harassed on almost all of their borders. When Israel does retaliate the rest of the world denounces their actions, yet there is no other country on the earth who would tolerate that same harassment or be expected to not retaliate. You rarely read of the humanitarians efforts Israel has put forth for the innocent people caught in this conflict by their Palestinian leaders.
Â
The U.N. may have pushed this past the point of peace with identifying the "state of Palestine." Israel has been willing to negotiate for peace and their own national security, yet the "leaders" of Palestine have refused and yet have the gall to stand at the U.N. and blame it on Israel, while at the same time promoting more rockets into Israel. They speak out of both sides of their mouths and the U.N. council has bought into it. Shameful.
Â
I'm not sure any of us can predict what will come from the U.N.'s legitimizing the status of Palestine, but I fully expect Israel to step up their actions in a harsh and immediate manner and that they will receive full condemnation from the U.N.
Â
I recognize this is a passionate topic for many and respect everyone's views on this; this is simply mine.
This will be a precursor to a much larger event. Â There has not been a conclusion to the scenario with Iran either. Â If the situation does come to a head, expect Israel to strike at the first opportunity. The admission of Palestine into the U.N. will be the last straw for them. Â Israel is getting backed into a corner and will strike hard when threatened enough.
Â
A major event will take place within the next year. Â Diplomacy WILL not work this time around. Â the U.S might find it's hands getting dirty again soon. Â Except this time, being at Russia's back door.
Â
Iran is going to be the trigger. Just you watch.
 @Silver Surfer I agree that a major event is very likely to occur in the next year, if not the next few months. I don't know whether or not Iran will be the trigger, but I do expect Israel to receive even harsher criticism from the worldwide community as their patience must no longer be in place. If the entire world plans to condemn Israel regardless of their intent and actions, then what obligation will they feel to the U.N.? I suspect they will simply do what they feel is necessary and that will ignite a firestorm. I believe they have been placed into a no win situation and the U.N. has shamefully enabled it.
 @Silver Surfer "Iran is going to be the trigger"
And what will Iran do to be the trigger? Â I mean you do know there is absolutely no proof they are making or want to make a nuke right
Â
http://www.jpost.com/IranianThreat/News/Article.aspx?id=259220
http://news.nationalpost.com/2012/03/23/u-s-and-allies-agree-iran-does-not-have-a-nuclear-bomb-may-not-want-one-and-is-far-from-building-one/
Â
You do know that all the "intel" we have on Iran was passed to us by the MEK, the #24 group on the US terrorism list who has been carrying out attacks in Iran for years, now with Israel's and the US training and help.  Get that, a terrorist group Israel and the US fund and train gave us EXACTLY the intel to prove our side of the story even though all other intel says otherwise!
Â
http://www.dailymail.co.uk/news/article-2099142/Mossad-training-terrorists-kill-Irans-nuclear-scientists-U-S-officials-claim--Israels-real-target-Obama.html?ITO=1490
http://mondoweiss.net/2012/02/msnbc-israel-trains-iranian-terror-group-to-kill-nuclear-scientist.html
http://www.sfgate.com/politics/article/Most-U-S-tips-fingering-Iran-false-envoys-2646358.php
Â
Â
You do know that Iran has been "2 years away from a nuclear bomb" since 1979 right???
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Middle-East/2011/1108/Imminent-Iran-nuclear-threat-A-timeline-of-warnings-since-1979/Earliest-warnings-1979-84
Â
All this is is another false run up to another war like in Iraq.....
Â
Also you do know what country started Iran's nuclear program don't you? Â The same country that overthrew their democratically elected government in 1953.....go ahead, research it...who was it. Â Type in Atoms for Peace and Operation Ajax into goggle!
Â
And lastly, you are aware the "doubling of centrifuges" and Fordo really is not that scary because they have not hooked them up and they are not running. Â You also know, I am sure, that Iran has reduced its stockpile of 20% enriched uranium (not suitable for a nuke but we and Israel hype it as it is) by almost half, using it to do what.....anyone, anyone, anyone.....to make fuel plates for their medical isotope reactor, EXACTLY as they said they would. Â So they are actually further away from making a nuke today than they were yesterday....strange, I didn't hear that on the nightly news....but I did find this little tid bit, which shocked me
Â
http://www.foxnews.com/world/2012/10/06/iran-shifts-enriched-uranium-to-reactor-fuel-stock-in-confidence-show-for-west/
Â
What did the US pull out of that report, "THEY DOUBLED THEIR CENTRIFUGES" no mention of the cut in 20% Uranium, no mention that the centrifuges are not hooked up and are not enriching Uranium....nope, just that they doubled the centrifuges so they can double the rate they enrich......soooooooo transparent.  Learn from the Iraq debacle!
Â
And don't give me the "wipe Israel off the map" BS.....debunked
http://www.washingtonpost.com/blogs/fact-checker/post/did-ahmadinejad-really-say-israel-should-be-wiped-off-the-map/2011/10/04/gIQABJIKML_blog.html
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â
Â
 @B Smizzle Yes, we know that according to you, Iran is a peaceful, loving country who is unfairly vilified by those ##$%! Jews in Israel and by us, the greater Satan. *rolls eyes*
Keep on tilting at that windmill! In the meantime, those of us in the real world don't want war but we realize that there are times when it is necessary to prevent an even greater evil. Like most of us, I will continue to hope that war can be avoided but I will not join you in your silly "make believe" game.
If both sides of this struggle would stay inside their legal boundaries and STOP throwing rocks at each other...
Â
Â
 @yaquina Respectfully speaking, the very issue now is what are those legal boundaries?  However, I agree with your premise, both sides must pursue peace if there is to be peace.
 @DeaconBugg  @yaquina Simple read UN Resolution 242
Â
Operative Paragraph One "Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
(i) Withdrawal of Israel armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;(ii) Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgment of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force."
Â
So the solution is, Israel withdraws to the 1967 boarders and both leave each other alone.  Instead, Israel continues to build on the land it was told to give back, while at the same time taking more of that land and surrounding, oppressing and occupying the indigenous population, then can't understand why they get attacked!  I am not advocating violence from either side but we only get one side of the story here.  This was an eye opener for me....it's and hour and 20 minutes but a good watch as it gives you a glimpse of what Palestinians have to go through on a daily basis. Â
Â
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=e7lLluBf0xsÂ
Â
Also here is a video to see how the settlers in this land treat the people who were there before them.....
Â
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kem1ajIKv1k
Â
 @B Smizzle So, BSmizzle asserts that the 1967 Six Day War between Egypt, Syria and Jordan one on side and Israel on the other was a war of Jewish aggression... This from the same person who believes that Iran isn't a threat to anyone and that the United States is the real danger. This from the person who has repeatedly cited PrisonPlanet, InfoWars and YouTube videos made by political extremists as "evidence" for his black-helicopter-style conspiracy theories. This from the person who considers terrorist attacks by Hamas intentionally targeting civilians - including hospitals and elementary schools morally equivalent to Israeli military counterstrikes to destroy the bases from which those tens of thousands of rockets originated while taking pains to minimize cilivian casualties - including dropping leaflets advising of airstrikes several hours ahead of time and including safe routes for civilian evacuation - are somehow morally equivalent. BSmizzle, this moral sinkhole, now would take advantage of the historical ignorance of many Americans and attempt to rewrite history. This is the same person who cites the "international community" as evidence that Israel is always wrong in everything it does - the same "international community" that has been responsible for persecuting Jews for millennia. The same international community in the U.N. that has spent far more time on Israel than they have actual war crimes such as the genocide in Rwanda, the genocide in Sudan, Joseph Stalin's purges, the mass murder by Maoists and the atrocities of Pol Pot. It would be hilarious if it weren't so pathetic.
@mikew
"the Arab Muslim nations of Egypt, Syria and Jordan invaded Israel with the stated goal of killing all of the Jews and driving Israel into the Sea"
Â
Actually it was Israel that attacked Egypt first and none of the arab countries invaded. Â You do have your drive the jews into the sea talking point down pretty well though!
Â
"There is no modern nation-state that has been required by the international community to return territory it captured during a war in which it was not the aggressor. "
Â
Well then I guess you are admitting Israel was the aggressor as UN Resolution 242 states they are to pull out of all occupied territories to the 1967 border.  By your own argument the UN, which is made up from the International Community, has said Israel must return the land they captured in the 67 war so they had to be the aggressor otherwise they wouldn't have to give it back...right?
Â
"So the politically-correct line now is that Israel must "return" land to a "Palestinian" state that has never existed."
Â
Hmmm, can you explain this map then, looks like the UN created Israel and another state for the muslims that were also living there
http://2.bp.blogspot.com/_EgXqKP0XKGM/Skf5CkLucqI/AAAAAAAAA10/NOaoP_omKww/s400/Palestinian+loss+of+land+1948-2008.jpg
Seems like Gaza and the West Bank were never parts of what is Israel before  the war of 1967.  The UN said give it back, Israel won't.
Â
"Some who support this position simply don't know their history and think mistakenly that they are being "fair.""
Couldn't have said it better myself....do yourself a favor, learn some more history....google USS Liberty, Lavon Affair, Operation Ajax.....thank me later!  However I know you won't check any of this out and have it all "figured out" you unwillingness to learn is shown by your reply in one hour when the videos I posted would have taken almost 2 hours to watch!  Way to be open to both sides of the argument!
Â
"are motivated by good, old-fashioned anti-Jewish bigotry. (After all, they were only trying to kill Jews"
Ahhh yes, the old Anti-Semetic card along with the Holocaust reference.  Wouldn't be a debate about Israel without it!  Attack the person not what the facts they bring to the table
Â
 @B Smizzle In 1967's Six Day War, the Arab Muslim nations of Egypt, Syria and Jordan invaded Israel with the stated goal of killing all of the Jews and driving Israel into the Sea. They lost this genocidal war and during Israel's defensive counterstrike, it captured the Jordanian territory now called the West Bank and the former Egyptian territory now called the Gaza strip (among others.)
There is no modern nation-state that has been required by the international community to return territory it captured during a war in which it was not the aggressor. So the Arab Muslims knew that it was unlikely that they could force Israel to give the West Bank back to Jordan and the Gaza Strip back to Egypt. So they waved their "magic wand" and created the "Palestinian" people who were somehow no longer "merely" displaced Jordanians in the West Bank and displaced Egyptians in the Gaza Strip. So the politically-correct line now is that Israel must "return" land to a "Palestinian" state that has never existed.
In essence, they do not want the Arab Muslims to suffer any consequence for their attempt at genocide.
Some who support this position simply don't know their history and think mistakenly that they are being "fair."
Others who support this position (including some of the regulars on this forum) are motivated by good, old-fashioned anti-Jewish bigotry. (After all, they were only trying to kill Jews - it's not like they're actually people or anything...)
 @yaquina Only one side throws rocks.....the other strikes back with F-16 and white phosphorous!
 @B Smizzle So in this comment, you appear to be suggesting that Israel bears the greater blame for the conflict. While both sides do bear some blame, the reality is that it is the Islamic terrorist "leadership" in Gaza (and elsewhere) who have targeted tens of thousands of rockets at civilian areas, who have bombed numerous transit buses, have stabbed schoolchildren and have used schools and hospitals as shields from behind which to launch their genocidal attacks. When the Israeli's counterstrike, they take great pains to minimize civilian casualties (even so, that's often impossible because the Islamic terrorists used their own women and children as "human shields.") The so-called "Palestinians" have elected a terrorist organization to represent them.
It is very clear which side bears the vast majority of the blame here and it is NOT the Israelis.
"US struggles...." Yeah, like who gives a c r a p what we say or do anymore !