Right Web

Tracking militarists’ efforts to influence U.S. foreign policy

Netanyahu Conditions Denounced as “War” by Palestinians

Benjamin Netanyahu’s AIPAC speech demonstrates that he is not interested in a fair peace with Palestine.

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Inter Press Service

Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu laid out what he called his vision for peace with the Palestinians Tuesday, but listed a set of conditions the Palestinians immediately called "a declaration of war".

Speaking before a joint meeting of the U.S. Congress that capped five days of speeches by Netanyahu and President Barack Obama on the Middle East, Netanyahu insisted on a unified Jerusalem as Israel's capital, reiterated his rejection of the borders that existed before Israel began its occupation of the West Bank 44 years ago, and declared that Israel must maintain a military presence in the Jordan Valley.

Palestinians have repeatedly declared their desire to negotiate a two-state solution where Jerusalem would be the capital of both states, with borders based on the Jun. 4, 1967 lines with agreed and equivalent land swaps, and full sovereignty over the West Bank, of which the Jordan Valley is a large part.

Netanyahu was elaborating on some remarks he had made the previous day, before the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC), a lobby group described by CNN as "a major force in U.S. politics". Obama had spoken to AIPAC the day before, and his speech was well- received by the audience and observers.

Obama stressed the importance of immediate movement on the peace process.

"There is an impatience with the peace process – or the absence of one," he told the AIPAC audience. "Not just in the Arab World, but in Latin America, in Europe, and in Asia. That impatience is growing, and is already manifesting itself in capitals around the world."

Consistent with his call in a speech three days earlier, Obama then outlined his vision for borders and security, which he had said should be the first two issues tackled.

"The United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps… As for security, every state has the right to self- defense, and Israel must be able to defend itself – by itself – against any threat… The full and phased withdrawal of Israeli military forces should be coordinated with the assumption of Palestinian security responsibility in a sovereign, non-militarised state."

The following day, Netanyahu and Obama met in the Oval Office, with the subsequent press briefing featuring comments from Netanyahu that many observers, including leading Israelis, saw as crossing the line.

"Netanyahu understood that he had broken a rule that an Israeli leader must not break – he had come between the two American parties in an election period," Nahum Barnea and Shimon Shiffer, two leading Israeli commentators, wrote in the leading Israeli daily, Yediot Ahronot.

Staunchly pro-Israel columnist Jeffrey Goldberg of The Atlantic called Netanyahu's behaviour at the press conference "pedantic" and "shocking".

On Monday, Netanyahu struck a more conciliatory tone at AIPAC, stressing bipartisan support for Israel among U.S. citizens and in Congress.

He promised that, in his speech at Tuesday's joint meeting of Congress, he would "describe what a peace between a Palestinian state and the Jewish state could look like."

But his vision seemed only to make the stalemate with the Palestinians even more intractable, this time with the overwhelming enthusiasm of both Houses of Congress backing him.

"Rather than committing to a return to negotiations without preconditions, as he demands from the Palestinians, Netanyahu introduced his own preconditions," said Debra DeLee, president and CEO of Americans for Peace Now.

"Rather than extending his hand to the Palestinians to come back to the negotiating table, Netanyahu laid out unyielding positions which he knows cannot serve as the basis for, or be the realistic outcome of, negotiations. Such preconditions are a non-starter and such positions are anathema to reviving negotiations and to achieving real peace and security for Israel."

The speech was "a declaration of war against the Palestinians," said leading Palestinian official, Nabil Sha'ath. "This is an escalation and unfortunately, it received a standing ovation. We have nothing but to continue our struggle in the international arena and to continue building our state and to continue our popular struggle. We don't have a partner for peace."

Nabil Abu Rdainah, spokesman for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas, said, "What Netanyahu put in his speech before the U.S. Congress does not lead to peace, but puts more obstacles to the peace process. For us, peace must be the establishment of a Palestinian state on 1967 borders and East Jerusalem as its capital. We will not accept any Israeli presence in the Palestinian state, especially on the Jordan River."

But while many applauded President Obama's speech at AIPAC and his insistence on the 1967 borders as a starting point for negotiations, other observers blamed Obama for the failure to take a strong enough stand with Netanyahu.

"Obama did not call for a complete withdrawal of Israeli troops and settlers from occupied Palestinian territory," Professor Stephen Zunes, chair of the Middle Eastern Studies programme at the University of San Francisco, told IPS.

"Unfortunately, despite Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas agreeing to reciprocal territorial swaps… Israeli Prime Minister Benyamin Netanyahu has refused to consider trading any land within Israel while simultaneously insisting on annexing large swathes of occupied Palestinian territory," he said. "How such 'mutually agreed-upon' swaps will take place without the United States exerting enormous leverage is hard to imagine.

"This raises serious questions regarding Obama's commitment to being an honest broker in resolving the conflict," Zunes said.

Despite the unanimous support Netanyahu's speeches received, at AIPAC and in Congress, both talks were disrupted by protesters.

Five protesters at AIPAC and one in Congress were removed from the proceedings after interrupting Netanyahu's speeches, shouting slogans in defense of Palestinian rights.

Rae Abileah, the protester arrested for her disruption of the Congressional meeting, is a 28-year old Jewish American of Israeli descent.

"Prime Minister Netanyahu says that the 1967 borders are indefensible," Abileah said. "But what is really indefensible is the occupation of land, the starvation of Gaza, the jailing of dissenters and the lack of equal rights in the alleged Israeli democracy. As a Jew and an American taxpayer, I can't be silent when these crimes are being committed in my name and with my tax money."

Share RightWeb

Featured Profiles

Jon Lerner is a conservative political strategist and top adviser to US Ambassador to the UN Nikki Haley. He was a key figure in the “Never Trump” Campaign, which appears to have led to his being ousted as Vice President Mike Pence’s national security adviser.


Pamela Geller is a controversial anti-Islam activist who has founded several “hate groups” and likes to repeat debunked myths, including about the alleged existence of “no-go” Muslim zones in Europe.


Max Boot, neoconservative military historian at the Council on Foreign Relations, on Trump and Russia: “At every turn Trump is undercutting the ‘get tough on Russia’ message because he just can’t help himself, he just loves Putin too much.”


Although overlooked by President Trump for cabinet post, Gingrich has tried to shape affairs in the administration, including by conspiring with government officials to “purge the State Department of staffers they viewed as insufficiently loyal” to the president.


Former Sen Mark Kirk (R-IL) is an advisor for United Against Nuclear Iran. He is an outspoken advocate for aggressive action against Iran and a fierce defender of right-wing Israeli policies.


A military historian, Kimberly Kagan heads the Institute for the Study of War, where she has promoted the continuation of U.S. war in Afghanistan.


A “non-partisan” policy institute that purports to defend democracies from “militant Islamism,” the neoconservative Foundation for Defense of Democracies (FDD) is an influential base of hawkish advocacy on Middle East policy.


For media inquiries,
email rightwebproject@gmail.com

From the Wires

Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Other than the cynical political interests in Moscow and Tehran, there is no conceivable rationale for wanting Bashar al-Assad to stay in power. But the simple fact is, he has won the war. And while Donald Trump has reveled in positive press coverage of the recent attacks on the country, it is clear that they were little more than a symbolic act.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The reality is that the Assad regime is winning the Syrian civil war, and this matters far less to U.S. interests than it does to that regime or its allies in Russia and Iran, who see Syria as their strongest and most consistent entrée into the Arab world. Those incontrovertible facts undermine any notion of using U.S. military force as leverage to gain a better deal for the Syrian people.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

An effective rhetorical tool to normalize military build-ups is to characterize spending increases “modernization.”


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

The Pentagon has officially announced that that “long war” against terrorism is drawing to a close — even as many counterinsurgency conflicts  rage across the Greater Middle East — and a new long war has begun, a permanent campaign to contain China and Russia in Eurasia.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

Revelations that data-consulting firm Cambridge Analytica used ill-gotten personal information from Facebook for the Trump campaign masks the more scandalous reality that the company is firmly ensconced in the U.S. military-industrial complex. It should come as no surprise then that the scandal has been linked to Erik Prince, co-founder of Blackwater.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

As the United States enters the second spring of the Trump era, it’s creeping ever closer to more war. McMaster and Mattis may have written the National Defense Strategy that over-hyped the threats on this planet, but Bolton and Pompeo will have the opportunity to address these inflated threats in the worst way possible: by force of arms.


Print Friendly, PDF & Email

We meet Donald Trump in the media every hour of every day, which blots out much of the rest of the world and much of what’s meaningful in it.  Such largely unexamined, never-ending coverage of his doings represents a triumph of the first order both for him and for an American cult of personality.


RightWeb
share