Obama: U.S. Needs To Be 'Honest' With Israel

[Scurrilous]

<snip>

"President Obama, just days before traveling to the Middle East to deliver a key speech on U.S.-Muslim relations, on Monday reasserted U.S. support for Israel. But in an interview with NPR, the president also said he will continue to push for a Palestinian state and for a freeze on Israeli settlements in the West Bank.

"I don't think we have to change strong support for Israel," Obama said during an interview with NPR hosts Michele Norris of All Things Considered and Steve Inskeep of Morning Edition.

"We do have to retain a constant belief in the possibilities of negotiations that will lead to peace," Obama said. "And that's going to require, from my view, a two-state solution."

It will also require, he said, a freeze on Israeli settlements, including expansion to accommodate successive generations of settlers, and for Palestinians to make progress on security and end "the incitement that understandably makes Israelis so concerned."

The president also suggested that the United States' special relationship with Israel requires some tough love. "Part of being a good friend is being honest," Obama said. "And I think there have been times where we are not as honest as we should be about the fact that the current direction, the current trajectory, in the region is profoundly negative, not only for Israeli interests but also U.S. interests. And that's part of a new dialogue that I'd like to see encouraged in the region."

more

[AnOhioan]

1. Could not agree more

[babylonsister]

2. Please post this in GD/P so I can recommend it! nt

[Scurrilous]

3. "Natural Growth": Netanyahu's Road Map to a Mid East Roadblock - Amb. Marc Ginsberg

<snip>

"Taking on the sacred cow of Israeli settlements construction in the West Bank has historically been a fool's errand for American presidents.

Caught between Israel's concerned supporters at home (many of whom do not appreciate the complexity of the issue) and domestic Israeli politics, no amount of presidential arm-twisting between strong allies seems to have slowed their growth or stopped their spread, even though successive Israeli governments since 1993 have pledged to ice the construction.

Both Labor and Likud leaders have talked the talk, but rarely walked the walk away from that ever so tantalizing next hammer swing. But each swing of that hammer has only dealt another blow to the vision of a viable Palestinian state, as well as a safe and secure Jewish and democratic state of Israel.

I commend President Obama for demanding a deep freeze on settlement construction. Unlike his predecessors, Obama appears no longer willing to engage in the vexing winking and nodding that has characterized American attitudes to settlement growth in the past.

I take that stand as a passionate Zionist dedicated to Israel's freedom and security, who just as passionately believes in the right of Palestinians to have their own state living peacefully and viably side-by-side with a Jewish and democratic state of Israel.

One only need know first-hand the true situation on the ground in the West Bank to understand why these two beliefs inherently are at peace with each other.

When I undertook the first Congressional assessment of the plight of Palestinian refugees for Senator Kennedy's Senate Subcommittee on Refugees back in 1973, I realized then, as I know now, that the construction of settlements, let alone their so-called "natural growth" is patently self-defeating to Israel's desire for Palestinians to drop their demand for the so-called "Right of Return."

How can Palestinians establish a viable homeland if there is no land on which to resettle refugees on the West Bank?"

more

[Sezu]

4. "How can Palestinians establish a viable homeland

if there is no land on which to resettle refugees on the West Bank"

They can get busy and negotiate for REAL instead of turning down offers like Olmert's latest which would have given them LOTS of stuff they want but not everything; the way REAL fucking negotiations work.

Let those with eyes see.

[subsuelo]

5. oh, so it's *their* fault Israel steals their land

:crazy:

[Sezu]

6. What does that matter if the longer they go the worse a

solution gets? That's what facts on the ground mean and it has been a long known tool in Israel's negotiating portfolio right or wrong. So cry about all you and they want as long as you realize it is costing them dearly just crying about it. Realism sucks for some I guess but in the end it's all there is.

[subsuelo]

7. I forgot, opposing land theft and war crimes is "crying about it"

Silly me

[Sezu]

9. You at least got the silly part right. n/t

[subsuelo]

10. Is opposing land theft "crying about it" or not?

You just wrote it above, now you suggest that it isn't the case.

Make up your mind, for the benefit of those interested in rational discussion

[azurnoir]

8. Would it have given them water rights,?

small details like that and the complete and total disarmament clause, Palestinians have no right to defend themselves? Also given Israels tendency to use loopholes or any ambiguous wording to get get around treaties with the Palestinians any agreement have to very precise nothing left to question or amorphous "future decisions"