It Isn't Ever Going To Happen
May 31st 2011 15:41
On May 19, President Obama said,” 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, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states." (“Obama Speech Backlash on Call to Reinstate 1967 Mideast Borders,” Huma Khan, ABC News/Politics, 5/19/11).
What prompted the President to suddenly give this speech? George Mitchell, President Obama’s special envoy to the Middle East, unexpectedly resigned, probably out of frustration, from dealing with Palestinian factions and Israelis who, although they proclaim a desire for peace, are satisfied with the current situation that allows for the retention of power among the various parties. Strangely, it was George Mitchell who brokered the peace deal in Northern Ireland, and that conflict seemed as difficult and intractable as the current Palestinian/Israeli one. With Hamas and Fattah in an alliance to push for a Palestinian state, and with most of the countries in the world seemingly ready to back such a move, the United States stands virtually alone in backing the Israeli position.
“Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zahri said Obama's speech was full of empty words and an indication that U.S. policy has failed. Abu Zahri said people in the Arab world have no need for lectures on democracy from Obama while he is supporting what they view as Israeli crimes. Abu Zahri said Obama's rejection of Palestinian unity is an intervention of Palestinian affairs.” (“Obama Speech Backlash on Call to Reinstate 1967 Mideast Borders,” Huma Khan, ABC News/Politics, 5/19/11).
Immediately after the President’s speech, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flew to Washington, D.C., and, appearing with the President at a photo opportunity after a 90 minute meeting, lectured the President in front of TV cameras in the White House: “While Israel is prepared to make generous compromises for peace, it cannot go back to the 1967 lines -- because these lines are indefensible," Netanyahu said, looking Obama squarely in the eye.” (“Benjamin Netanyahu lectures Barack Obama in Oval Office,” PTI, 5/21/11).
A return to the 1967 border would mean the repartitioning of Jerusalem, and you know that isn’t ever going to happen. Even under the Bill Clinton administration, when a peace accord with Yasser Arafat and the Palestinians was imminent (Arafat backed out at the last minute), the question of Jerusalem was put off for further discussions. Even the President has backtracked somewhat during his recent speech to the powerful Jewish lobby AIPAC: “This means the negotiated border “is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967,” he said.” (“AIPAC event draws praise for Bibi; some pan Obama,” Marilyn H. Karfeld, Cleveland Jewish News, 5/25/11).
It’s surprising that the President called for the return to 1967 borders after he was riding a wave of popularity following the killing of Osama bin Laden. Republicans were all but conceding the 2012 election to him. Now, with his return to the 1967 borders speech, the Republicans have new life. But wait! If there’s a politician, and a political party to back him/her, he/she and they will find a way to self-destruct. Just when the Republicans thought they had a way to attack the President again with his foreign policy, they got hammered in upstate New York backing a candidate who was in favor of Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan to overhaul Medicare; the Democratic candidate, Kathy Hochul, won because she frightened seniors by saying that the Republican candidate, Jane Corwin, backed Ryan’s plan to substitute traditional Medicare with a voucher plan to allow seniors to shop around for their own medical insurance, something that is projected to cost seniors who are 55 and younger now an additional $6,400 out of pocket by 2020. This was enough to secure a Democratic victory in a traditionally Conservative district.
Peace in the Middle East isn’t ever going to happen in my lifetime, and neither is the dissolution of traditional Medicare. There’s too much at stake for anyone to give an inch.
What prompted the President to suddenly give this speech? George Mitchell, President Obama’s special envoy to the Middle East, unexpectedly resigned, probably out of frustration, from dealing with Palestinian factions and Israelis who, although they proclaim a desire for peace, are satisfied with the current situation that allows for the retention of power among the various parties. Strangely, it was George Mitchell who brokered the peace deal in Northern Ireland, and that conflict seemed as difficult and intractable as the current Palestinian/Israeli one. With Hamas and Fattah in an alliance to push for a Palestinian state, and with most of the countries in the world seemingly ready to back such a move, the United States stands virtually alone in backing the Israeli position.
“Hamas spokesman Sami Abu Zahri said Obama's speech was full of empty words and an indication that U.S. policy has failed. Abu Zahri said people in the Arab world have no need for lectures on democracy from Obama while he is supporting what they view as Israeli crimes. Abu Zahri said Obama's rejection of Palestinian unity is an intervention of Palestinian affairs.” (“Obama Speech Backlash on Call to Reinstate 1967 Mideast Borders,” Huma Khan, ABC News/Politics, 5/19/11).
Immediately after the President’s speech, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu flew to Washington, D.C., and, appearing with the President at a photo opportunity after a 90 minute meeting, lectured the President in front of TV cameras in the White House: “While Israel is prepared to make generous compromises for peace, it cannot go back to the 1967 lines -- because these lines are indefensible," Netanyahu said, looking Obama squarely in the eye.” (“Benjamin Netanyahu lectures Barack Obama in Oval Office,” PTI, 5/21/11).
A return to the 1967 border would mean the repartitioning of Jerusalem, and you know that isn’t ever going to happen. Even under the Bill Clinton administration, when a peace accord with Yasser Arafat and the Palestinians was imminent (Arafat backed out at the last minute), the question of Jerusalem was put off for further discussions. Even the President has backtracked somewhat during his recent speech to the powerful Jewish lobby AIPAC: “This means the negotiated border “is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967,” he said.” (“AIPAC event draws praise for Bibi; some pan Obama,” Marilyn H. Karfeld, Cleveland Jewish News, 5/25/11).
It’s surprising that the President called for the return to 1967 borders after he was riding a wave of popularity following the killing of Osama bin Laden. Republicans were all but conceding the 2012 election to him. Now, with his return to the 1967 borders speech, the Republicans have new life. But wait! If there’s a politician, and a political party to back him/her, he/she and they will find a way to self-destruct. Just when the Republicans thought they had a way to attack the President again with his foreign policy, they got hammered in upstate New York backing a candidate who was in favor of Rep. Paul Ryan’s plan to overhaul Medicare; the Democratic candidate, Kathy Hochul, won because she frightened seniors by saying that the Republican candidate, Jane Corwin, backed Ryan’s plan to substitute traditional Medicare with a voucher plan to allow seniors to shop around for their own medical insurance, something that is projected to cost seniors who are 55 and younger now an additional $6,400 out of pocket by 2020. This was enough to secure a Democratic victory in a traditionally Conservative district.
Peace in the Middle East isn’t ever going to happen in my lifetime, and neither is the dissolution of traditional Medicare. There’s too much at stake for anyone to give an inch.
| 36 |
| Vote |
subscribe to this blog
