Expectations Build for Obama Mideast Policy Speech

[GuestFellow]

:sl:

WASHINGTON, May 14, 2011 (IPS) - With Jordan's King Abdullah and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu coming to Washington next week, anticipation of a major Middle East policy speech by President Barack Obama set for Thursday is growing rapidly.

Share your views.

[GuestFellow]

I know Obama will do nothing to help the Palestinians. He decided during his election campaign that East Jerusalem will belong to the Israelis...

[سيف الله]

Salaam

The guys a fraud, he just continues decades old policy of supporting the politicide of the Palestinian population.

Dont know why anybody expects different from President 'Change we can believe in' Obama.

[GuestFellow]

US President Barack Obama has said it is "more vital than ever" for Israelis and Palestinians to restart negotiations on a peace deal.

This is pointless...it is like a cycle.

Hey there! Looks like you're enjoying the discussion, but you're not signed up for an account.

When you create an account, you can participate in the discussions and share your thoughts. You also get notifications, here and via email, whenever new posts are made. And you can like posts and make new friends.
Sign Up

[czgibson]

Greetings,

This BBC page has Obama's speech in full. On the radio the BBC emphasised this soundbite:

"The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognised borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state."

Peace

[GuestFellow]

UPDATE

US President Barack Obama and Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu have admitted to "differences" on the path to Mid-East peace, after they met in Washington.

[GuestFellow]

UPDATE!

Livni praises Obama, blasts Netanyahu

I actually agree with Livni on this one. o_o

[Ramadhan]

I dont expect much.

The sun will go cold first before Israel agree to go back to pre-1967 border and allow contiguous Palestine state.

[Maryan0]

I've never seen anyone talk more than Obama that's all he does, he should seriously consider joining the Arab league. In his defense though he is only one man and people who were expecting sweeping change in his presidency were just fooling themselves.
Salam

[سيف الله]

Salaam

Greetings,

This BBC page has Obama's speech in full. On the radio the BBC emphasised this soundbite:

"The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognised borders are established for both states. The Palestinian people must have the right to govern themselves, and reach their potential, in a sovereign and contiguous state."

Peace

Sure Obama I believe you, I really do. . . .

Its interesting though, he had a slight tiff with Netanyahu, (probably responding because of the Arab uprisings) but was quickly smoothed over.

Thought this was a suitable reaction to Obamas rhetoric



Lots of rhetoric – but very little help

Then we had to hear what America's 'role' was going to be in the new Middle East. We did not hear if the Arabs wanted them to have a role

It was the same old story. Palestinians can have a "viable" state, Israel a "secure" one. Israel cannot be de-legitimised. The Palestinians must not attempt to ask the UN for statehood in September. No peace can be imposed on either party. Sometimes yesterday, you could have turned this into Obama's forthcoming speech to pro-Israeli lobbyists this weekend. Oh yes, and the Palestinian state must have no weapons to defend itself. So that's what "viable" means!

It was a kind of Second Coming, I suppose, Cairo re-pledged, another crack at the Middle East, as boring and as unfair as all the other ones, with lots of rhetoric about the Arab revolutions which Obama did nothing to help. Some of it was positively delusional. "We have broken the Taliban's momentum," the great speechifier said. What? Does he really – really – think that?

Of course, there was the usual rhetoric bath for Libya, Syria, Iran, the usual suspects. And there were the words. Courage. Peace. Dignity. Democracy. A creature from Mars would think that the man had helped to bring about the revolutions in the Middle East rather that sat primly to one side in the hope that the wretched dictators might survive.

There was some knuckle-rapping to Bahrain (no revolution there, of course) and there was not a word about Saudi Arabia, although I rather fancy its elderly king will be on the blower to Obama in the next few days. What's all this about change in the Middle East?

We got one timid reference to "Israeli settlement activity", a crack at Hamas (naturally), lots of tears for the Tunisian vegetable vendor, Mohamed Bouazizi, who started off the revolutions – Tunisia being one state that Obama never actually mentioned until Ben Ali had run away. The "humiliation of occupation" for the Palestinians – this was a straight repeat of Cairo two years ago – and the tale of a Palestinian "who lost three daughters to Israeli shells" in Gaza. I got the point, of course. The man just "lost" his daughters to shells that happened to fall on them; no suggestion that anyone actually fired them.

Is Obama just talking too much? I fear so. He was cashing in, bathing in his own words as he did in his miserable performance when he got the Nobel Peace Prize for Speechmaking.

And then, I guessed it before he said it, he compared the Arab revolutions to the American revolution. We hold these truths to be self-evident, etc, etc. That many Arabs fought and died to be free of us than to be like Americans was quite lost on him. And then we had to hear what America's "role" was going to be in the new Middle East. We did not hear if the Arabs wanted them to have a role. But that's Obama for you. Always searching for a role.

Well, this weekend is Netanyahu's weekend and the Israeli settlements – more were flagged only hours before Obama spoke – will go on as before. And by the time Obama ends up swearing eternal loyalty to the Israelis, the Arabs will forget yesterday's posturing. And the reference to the "Jewish state" was obviously intended to make Netanyahu happy. Last time I went there, there were hundreds of thousands of Arabs who lived in Israel, all of them with Israeli passports. They didn't get a reference from Obama. Or maybe I was just imagining.

http://www.independent.co.uk/opinion...p-2286711.html

[ProudMuslimSis]

Obama was awarded the Nobel Peace Prize 2009 "for his extraordinary efforts to strengthen international diplomacy and cooperation between peoples".



He needs to start producing something or give the prize back. But, he has a great challenge...Netanyahu is impossible!

[GuestFellow]

Palestinian officials have dismissed Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu's speech to the US Congress, saying it will not lead to peace.

^ UPDATE

[سيف الله]

Salaam

Finkelstein on DN!

Did Obama’s Mideast Speech Signal U.S. Shift on Israel-Palestine? Democracy Now! Roundtable

Good discussion on Obamas speech

http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/finkelstein-on-dn/

[GuestFellow]

^ Salaam,

I managed to listen to it on my PS3 but not all of it. He said the Palestinian land will be based on 1967 borders, but at the AIPAC conference, he said that East Jerusalem would belong to Israel. How does he expect to reconcile this? I'm loving the change Barack.

[ProudMuslimSis]

I am trying to find the total $ amount of support from "Israeli (or pro-Israel) Lobby" groups for Barack Obama during the 2008 election campaign. It is clear that Hiliary Clinton had to received a lot of support from them to win the Senate race in NY. So, I don't know how she can be unbiased during the current Israeli–Palestinian negotiations.
Interesting information below...

The Washington Post summarized for the year 1990–2006, data and concluded that "Pro-Israel interests have contributed $56.8 million in individual, group and soft money donations to federal candidates and party committees since 1990." In contrast, Arab-Americans and Muslim PACs contributed slightly less than $800,000 during the same (1990–2006) period.

J.J. Goldberg wrote in his 1994 book Jewish Power that 45% of the Democratic Party’s fundraising and 25% of that for the Republican Party came from Jewish-funded Political Action Committees. Richard Cohen, a columnist for the Washington Post, updated those figures in 2006 citing figures of 60% and 35% respectively for the Democratic and Republican Parties. According to the Washington Post, Democratic presidential candidates depend on Jewish sources for 60% of money from private sources.

[Ramadhan]

I am trying to find the total $ amount of support from "Israeli (or pro-Israel) Lobby" groups for Barack Obama during the 2008 election campaign. It is clear that Hiliary Clinton had to received a lot of support from them to win the Senate race in NY. So, I don't know how she can be unbiased during the current Israeli–Palestinian negotiations. Interesting information below...

The money that US politicians received from pro-Israeli lobby groups is nothing compared to the money The US federal government gives to Israel every year for free for the past half century. In fact, even discounting indirect military aid, the Israel citizens on average receive more US federal money than US citizens themselves.

[سيف الله]

Salaam

^ Salaam,

I managed to listen to it on my PS3 but not all of it. He said the Palestinian land will be based on 1967 borders, but at the AIPAC conference, he said that East Jerusalem would belong to Israel. How does he expect to reconcile this? I'm loving the change Barack.

He doesnt, he says one thing, to one audience and another thing to another, his policy position is not much different from previous presidents before him.

In fact there was never a peace process, the whole 1993 Oslo Accords could be more properly described as the beginning of aparthied. In the sense Israeli colonisation of the occupied territories. Settler colonialism so to speak. Where Arafat and his cronys would serve as Washingtons enforcer keeping the restive natives under control. . . . . . . .

More potential bad news


Arab suburbs in East Jerusalem could be rebranded with Hebrew names

Arab suburbs in East Jerusalem could be forcibly rebranded with Hebrew names, under plans being considered by Israel's parliament.


The controversial initiative is designed to entrench Israeli "ownership" of East Jerusalem, which was captured by Israel in the Six Day War of 1967 and subsequently annexed – a move that has not been recognised by the international community.

The bill was introduced by Tzippi Hotovely, a prominent hawk in the Likud party of Benjamin Netanyahu, the Israeli prime minister. It is understood to have the support of a majority in the Israeli parliament, the Knesset, which has been accused of passing a series of anti-Palestinian laws in recent years.

Under the bill, Israeli television channels would be instructed to refer to the suburbs only by their new Hebrew names.

"The goal of the initiative is to strengthen the connection with Jerusalem by making it obligatory to give Hebrew names to neighbourhoods in the capital with Jewish residents," Miss Hotovely wrote in her proposal for the bill. "It is important that the neighbourhoods no longer be called by their Arab names."

Several dozen Israeli settlers have managed to gain a foothold in Arab suburbs, leading to frequent clashes with their Palestinian neighbours.

Earlier this month, a sniper shot dead a Palestinian boy with a bullet fired from the fourth floor window of a settler building in the suburb of Silwan, which is to be renamed "Kfar Hashiloah" if the bill is passed.

Sheikh Jarrah, the scene of weekly protests by Israelis opposed to the occupation of Palestinian territory, would become "Simon the Just", after a Jewish high priest of antiquity who is said to be buried there.

Most Israeli residents of East Jerusalem live in purpose-built settlements on the periphery rather than in Arab suburbs like Sheikh Jarrah.

Left-wing Israeli activists denounced the proposed bill as unworkable and pointed to attempts to rename former Arab suburbs in Jewish West Jerusalem that have failed to become part of common parlance.

"This is part of the attempt by the right to create a fantasy land that might go down well in the US Congress but will not be accepted anywhere else," said Daniel Seidemann, whose Ir Amim foundation works to further "Jewish-Arab coexistence" in Jerusalem. "It is another act of desperation."

http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worl...rew-names.html

These action will really lead to a lasting peace. . . . . . . . . . . yes

[ProudMuslimSis]

The money that US politicians received from pro-Israeli lobby groups is nothing compared to the money The US federal government gives to Israel every year for free for the past half century. In fact, even discounting indirect military aid, the Israel citizens on average receive more US federal money than US citizens themselves.

I was afraid to look, but this is what I found:

"The U.S. is providing Israel with at least $8.2 million each day in military aide which is roughly one-fifth of America's entire foreign aid budget. In per capita terms, the United States gives each Israeli a direct subsidy worth about $500 per year. This largesse is especially striking when one realizes that Israel is now a wealthy industrial state with a per capita income roughly equal to South Korea or Spain."
Source: John J. Mearsheimer and Stephen M. Walt, "The Israel Lobby and U.S. Foreign Policy


THIS HAS TO STOP!!!