Obama Dared By Israel’s Toxic Arrogance!

Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu Remain Adamant On Jewish Settlements Expansions. He is recalcitrant and unrepentant even in the face of findings by the United Nations and polite entreaties from the United States.

Recently, Israel’s prime minister, Binyamin Netanyahu, angered American and Palestinian negotiators by saying that 450 previously planned housing units in Jewish settlements on the West Bank should be built, despite demands for a complete building freeze by the United States, the United Nations and lovers of peace worldwide

Even as I write this, The New York Times reported that “Israeli officials on Wednesday bluntly dismissed one of the main recommendations of theUnited Nations fact-finding mission’s report on the three-week war in Gaza last winter: a call for the Israeli government to begin an independent investigation of “serious violations” of international humanitarian and human rights law, including evidence of war crimes, during the military campaign.”

The world should want to know why Israel defies everyone, as of Israel is above the law and above reproach? Not even the United Nations is spared Israel disrespect and disregard, as she continues to belligerent and resort to bellicose tones when prodded to be accountable and held responsible for her harsh and even brutal actions directed at Palestine!

And this week, I was reading an advert place in the current copy of The New Republic Magazine, in it, supporters of Israel excoriated Palestine, as they attempted to justify Israel’s intransigence in the Palestine – Israel peace process. A particular term was deployed by these Israel supporters more than once; it caught my attention because it is very revealing of the pervasive mindsets and attitudes which have made peace impossible in the Middle East. The vexatious term was this, “allow” these supporters of Israel wrote that. Binyamin Netanyahu is willing to “allow” the creation or establishment of Palestine nation to coexist, side by side with Israel! An individual, the prime minister of Israel, will “allow” the creation or establishment of a nation?

The New Republic also published an article ”Back to Reality” by one Shmuel Rosner who in an excerpt here state “Earlier this week, Palestinian Prime Minister Salam Fayyad announced his intention to “establish a de facto state apparatus within the next two years.” On the face of it, his plan sounds quite detached from reality, eliciting guffaws from Israeli politicians such as Finance Minister Yuval Steinitz, who said that "[t]here is no place for unilateral actions.” The plan ignores “a central component of the framework in which Fayyad himself is permitted to function, and from which he derives his own authority,” warned Alan Baker, a former legal adviser to Israel’s foreign ministry.” There is a clear disdain and utter contempt for Palestinians by the Israelis!

Anyone who cares about human rights, justice and peace, would have to read these and be in tears, as it the statement is clearly indicative of the state of affairs in geopolitical power play, and in this case, between Palestine, the clear underdog, and Israel, which plays the role of the hawk, the hyena and lion of the Middle East. Reading that arrogant statement about “allowing” the creation or establishment of the nation of Palestine laid bare, the contempt, disdain and complete disregard which Israel and her load supporters reserves for Palestine, and by extension, all Arabs!  

Reading the statement led me to wonder why it should be up to Binyamin Netanyahu (merely just an individual person) or Israel, merely one nation, to “allow” the creation, establishment and existence of another nation? Palestine will be the national corporate entity of the peoples of Palestine, an independent nation with political, economic independence, and with territorial integrity!

But part of the “conditions” being “generously offered” by Binyamin Netanyahu, as announced by these supporters of Israel, is that Palestine will be demilitarized! In plain English, Palestine, the only version Israel and her supporters can live with will, and must be a Palestine without an army or arms and ammunitions. I am personally against the squander of public resources on arms and armaments .However, I will rather that such decisions are left to individual nations. And perhaps, Israel, and her supporters, will have to defer to Palestinians on such matters. Added to this already unreasonable preconditions by Israel, is the added acid to an open wound, as Israel adamantly insist on pushing ahead with settlement expansions on Palestine territories against the wishes of the whole world. Israel persists in land-grabs even as Israel pretend interest in peaceful coexistence with Palestine and Arabs.

Clearly, the road to peace between Palestine and Israel cannot be paved with dictations from Israel to Palestine. The continuing land grabs by Israel is illegal, unreasonable and quite counterproductive to peace efforts by all.

There is tremendous arrogance on the part of Israel and her supporters. The arrogance displayed in stated conditions, are so toxic in their strengths and capacity to derail any peace overtures. These are industrial strength toxic arrogance on the part of Israel and her supporters. It must be understood that these unreasonable preconditions such as enumerated above, are sure to derail any peace talks with anyone, Palestinians, Albanians or Congolese!

In July 2009 Obama lectured and scolded Africans and peoples of African descent in Accra Ghana and New York City respectively, in Accra, where he addressed the parliament of Ghana, and then, in New York City while he addressed the national of NAACP. Strangely, Obama applauded by panoply of strange bedfellows, replete with a combination of racists, ultra conservatives and revisionists, all of whom latched onto Obama’s inappropriate ill-considered speech. They were all excited because Obama was carrying their mantle. And giving disrespectful disparaging speeches, these racists and conservatives would like to deliver to us, except that they know that we would promptly call them out on it!

In July as now, I disagreed vehemently with those who excused Obama’s inappropriate speech with spurious illogicality by arguing that Obama was merely demonstrating “Tough Love” or alternatively, Obama was telling his continental Africans and peoples of African descent, a so-called “Bitter-Truths”! I was accused of quibbling then and I will remark now, that Obama does not have the political spine to tell Jews and or Israel to zip it! This week, it came to pass only barely a month after I quibbled to the chagrin of some; Mr. Benyamin Netanyahu the current prime minister of Israel has in one full-swoop turned the already fragile-volatile and tentative Israel –Palestine moribund or comatose peace initiative of the Obama administration asunder! Netanyahu has, in flagrant disregard for the desires of the Obama guys, to eschew the continued expansion of settlement upon Palestine territories which is still occupied by Israel, announced that building permits are granted and thereby guarantees the continued boon to the expansion of settlements on the land-grabbed from Palestine by Israel!

Obama does not have the political nerve or political capital with which to compel American Jews and their client-protégé, Benyamin, to tow the line of the fragile peace “talks” which were being brokered by the Obama’s administration between Palestine and Israel in particular, and Jews and Arabs in general. There is this very tempting urge to now say, oh yes, I told you so! Where is Obama’s so-called “Tough-Love and Bitter Truths”? When it comes to Benyamin and Israel in reference to Palestine lands and rights?

Where Is Obama’s Tough Love and Bitter Truth For Israel? Where is truth in diplomacy? These questions are relevant here again as they were earlier this summer. Obama’s lectures and scolding of Africans and peoples of African descent, first in Accra Ghana Obama’s bully pulpit and the second time was, while he addressed the centennial of the premier Civil Rights Organization, the NAACP in New York City.

I was badgered by critics who insisted that Obama was merely telling Africans and peoples of African descent, the bitter truth and in the process, he was showing tough love to representatives of the communities he addressed in Accra Ghana and New York City in the United States, respectively. I argued then, as I will now, that Obama does not have the gravitas to scold, lecture and shame others, and Jews and Israel in particular, the way he had, to with the Africans and peoples of African descent.

The Obama administration have during the past several months, offered polite entreaties and all manners of ego massages with diplomatic finesse for political leaders in Israel, beseeching Benjamin Netanyahu, the current prime minister, not to approve or encourage expansion of settlements in Palestine territories occupied by Israel. When will these benign entreaties yield way to bitter truths and tough love for Israel? Perhaps, when Abbas, Netanyahu and Obama meet in New York City soon?

Regardless of all of Obama’s best efforts, Benjamin Netanyahu’s government have just approved the expansion and upward multiplications of more settlements upon Palestine territories. This action is inimical to the peace process and Israel, which is usually loudest as the side with peace overtures and peace offensive, are again yanking the chains of the peace process. This intransigence flies in the face efforts which are being made by many sides to the Arab-Israeli peace process. Perennially, Palestine have been deftly portrayed by Israel, and pro-Israel groups, as being to blame for continued failure of the intractable dispute between Israel and Palestine, and to some extent, the entire Arab world.

Robot  # 1 | 17.09.2009 08:05

...Read the full article.

I Love Nigeria  # 2 | 22.09.2009 14:08

September 23, 2009 Obama Calls for an End to Stalling on Mideast Talks By HELENE COOPER http://www.nytimes.com/2009/09/23/world/middleeast/23prexy.html?hp=&pagewanted=print President Obama inserted himself directly into the stalled Middle East peace negotiations on Tuesday, exhorting Israeli and Palestinian officials to make haste in formally relaunching peace talks and calling it “absolutely critical” that the two sides move quickly toward a comprehensive peace accord. “It is past time to stop talking about starting negotiations, and time to move forward,” Mr. Obama said. His strong comments came just after he met separately with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel and and the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, but before he went into a three-way meeting intended to further drive home that message. “Permanent status negotiations must begin, and begin soon,” Mr. Obama said, referring to the entrenched final status issues which have bedeviled peace negotiators since 1979: the status of Jerusalem, the borders of a future Palestinian state, the dismantling of Israeli settlements in the West Bank and the fate of Palestinian refugees who fled or were forced to leave their homes. “So my message to these two is clear,” Mr. Obama said, standing with Mr. Abbas and Mr. Netanyahu. “Despite all the obstacles, all the history, all the mistrust, we have to find a way forward.” The meetings came on the outskirts of the United Nations General Assembly opening, which is ongoing in New York this week. Administration officials were hoping that they would be able to announce a formal start to peace talks as one tangible accomplishment to come out of the meetings. But those hopes dimmed last week after Mr. Obama’s special representative to the region, George J. Mitchell, returned to Washington after a fruitless week of shuttle diplomacy which yielded little by way of an agreement on freezing the construction of Jewish settlements and amid fresh signs of differences on the basis for peace negotiations. The failure of Mr. Mitchell to nail down an agreement with Israel on freezing settlements, which the administration views as vital for successful talks, came coupled with the administration’s failure, so far, to secure much support from the Arab world for Mr. Obama’s endeavors on the Middle East peace front. The White House would like Arab leaders to make diplomatic gestures toward Israel, which they believe would give Mr. Netanyahu the political cover he needs at home to make concessions to the Palestinians. None of that, so far, has been forthcoming. Mr. Obama said Tuesday that he has asked Israeli and Palestinian negotiators to return to Washington next week to go back to the drawing table to try to hammer out a deal that will at least get the talks to the starting gate. He said that he has asked Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton to report back to him by October on progress, and he called it “absolutely critical” that the two sides get peace talks restarted.

I Love Nigeria  # 3 | 02.11.2009 16:45

America Blinks and Reverses self on Israel AGAIN? ILN Clinton Denies Easing Pressure on Israel By MARK LANDLER November 3, 2009 http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/03/world/middleeast/03diplo.html?hp=&pagewanted=print MARRAKESH, Morocco — Struggling to stem a chorus of protests from the Arab world, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton reiterated Monday that the Obama administration still wanted Israel to freeze construction of Jewish settlements, even if it regarded Israel’s compromise offer as “unprecedented.” Arab leaders have expressed alarm that the United States seems to be decreasing pressure on Israel, after Mrs. Clinton said in Jerusalem on Saturday that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s proposal of restrained settlement construction was better than what any previous Israeli government had offered. Mrs. Clinton said the administration would not stop pushing Mr. Netanyahu to do more. But she added that in trying to revive a stalled peace process, she wanted to offer Israel encouragement for moving in the right direction, even if that movement fell short of what the United States wanted. “I will offer positive reinforcement to the parties when I believe they are taking steps that support the objective of reaching a two-state solution,” she said here, on the eve of a conference of Arab and Western countries. “I will also push them as I have in public and private to do even more.” Though not a core subject in peace negotiations, Jewish settlements are a charged issue for both Israelis and Palestinians because they involve building in areas that both sides claim as their ancestral lands. The administration’s position on settlements has become a hot-button subject in recent months. The Palestinians have refused to negotiate with Israel in the absence of a complete settlement freeze, and Arab nations have seized on what they view as a retreat by the United States. Amr Moussa, the secretary general of the Arab League, urged the administration not to accept what he called a “slap in the face” by Israel. He said he hoped the Americans would “try hard and in a firmer way.” “I’m really afraid that we’re about to see a failure,” Mr. Moussa said. “Failure is in the atmosphere all over.” On Saturday, Mrs. Clinton met in the emirate of Abu Dhabi with the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, who rejected an Israeli proposal that would put a moratorium on construction of settlements in the West Bank, but allow the completion of about 3,000 housing units and exclude East Jerusalem from any restrictions. The Palestinian foreign minister, Riyad al-Maliki, said that accepting such an offer would jeopardize the Palestinian Authority at a time when Mr. Abbas had already hurt his standing among Arabs by agreeing to defer the consideration of a United Nations report accusing both the Israelis and Palestinians of war crimes in Gaza last winter. “We should not put the credibility and legitimacy of the Palestinian Authority again under jeopardy,” Mr. Maliki said in an interview. He said he was “surprised” by Mrs. Clinton’s comments in Jerusalem. “It was, from our point of view, inconsistent with what we had heard back in Abu Dhabi,” he said. On Monday, Mrs. Clinton read a statement, in which she said, “The Obama administration position on settlements is clear, unequivocal, it has not changed. As the president has said on many occasions, the United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements.” While the Obama administration may not have changed its policy, its public statements have evolved substantially. Last May, Mrs. Clinton said President Obama wanted to see “a stop to settlements — not some settlements, not outposts, not ‘natural growth’ exceptions.” At the United Nations General Assembly in September, however, President Obama used the phrase “restrain” in referring to construction, suggesting the administration recognized they were unlikely to get a total freeze. Subsequent statements have used the word “curtail.” In an interview, Mr. Maliki, the Palestinian foreign minister, said he believed the Israelis had trapped the administration and its special envoy for the Middle East, George J. Mitchell, by drawing them into a technical discussion of how many additional housing units would be acceptable. “He said, ‘No, no, no, don’t worry. I know how to deal with this matter. I’m immune,’” Mr. Maliki said of Mr. Mitchell. “It seems, you know, that such immunity was not that effective,” he said.

I Love Nigeria  # 4 | 03.11.2009 18:41

Where is tenacity of policy on this score? ILN November 4, 2009 White House Seeks Short-Term Fixes in Mideast By MARK LANDLER http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/04/world/middleeast/04diplo.html?hp=&pagewanted=print MARRAKESH, Morocco — For the last seven months, the Obama administration has labored in vain to bring the Israelis and Palestinians together, pushing for a loose quid-pro-quo under which Israel would freeze construction of Jewish settlements while its Arab neighbors undertook diplomatic steps to bolster Israel’s confidence in its security. With that effort going nowhere, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton has begun setting the stage for a new phase of Middle East diplomacy with a more modest goal: get the parties talking at any level to avoid a dangerous vacuum until Plan B emerges. Mrs. Clinton began sketching out this approach Tuesday in a speech and meetings with Arab foreign ministers during a conference of Arab and Western nations in this city of pink sandstone buildings. She flew to Cairo later to hold talks with the Egyptian leader, Hosni Mubarak. Making it clear that the Israeli government will not agree to President Obama’s call for a complete halt to settlement construction, Mrs. Clinton promoted Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s offer as a reasonable compromise that could still form the basis for progress. Mr. Netanyahu has proposed a moratorium on new housing units in the West Bank, but would allow the construction or completion of about 3,000 additional units and would exclude East Jerusalem from any building restrictions. “It is not what we want; it is nowhere near enough,” Mrs. Clinton said to the Al Jazeera television network. “But I think when you keep your eye on what we want to achieve, it is a better place to be than the alternative. And therefore, I think we should be trying to keep moving the parties.” In a meeting with Mrs. Clinton in Abu Dhabi Saturday, the Palestinian Authority president, Mahmoud Abbas, rejected Mr. Netanyahu’s proposal as a “non-starter,” in the words of his chief negotiator, Saeb Erekat. But the United States is not giving up. The administration’s special envoy for the Middle East, George J. Mitchell, met again with Mr. Abbas in Jordan on Monday, and with King Abdullah. In Marrakesh, Mrs. Clinton tried to persuade skeptical Arab foreign ministers of the value of Israel’s proposal. Among those she met was the Libyan foreign minister, Musa Kusa. It is not clear what contacts between Israelis and Palestinians the administration has in mind, though they would be at a lower level than Mr. Abbas and Mr. Netanyahu. Nor has the shape of an alternative strategy to rekindle peace talks emerged, according to senior officials, who spoke on the condition of anonymity because the deliberations were confidential. Middle East analysts predicted Mr. Obama would ultimately have to summon Israelis and Palestinians to the bargaining table and present his own blueprint for an accord — a dramatic heightening of the president’s personal involvement that senior officials said would not occur while he is preoccupied with Afghanistan and the overhaul of health-care policy. In the meantime, though, administration officials are worried that paralysis in the region is a recipe for instability and violence. “We recognized coming into the region that things have stalled,” said a State Department spokesman, Philip J. Crowley. “If there’s a vacuum, there are always lots of spoilers looking to take advantage.” Mrs. Clinton told the Arab ministers that Mr. Netanyahu’s proposal was better than what any previous Israeli government had offered. Under the plan, she said, Israel would issue no new building permits or approvals and would not expropriate new land in the West Bank for settlements. She took pains to say that the administration was not giving up its push for a total freeze. But her effusive embrace of Mr. Netanyahu’s proposal in Jerusalem over the weekend stirred up a tempest in the Arab world, with diplomats asking whether the United States had buckled. “President Obama was absolutely clear,” Mrs. Clinton said to Al Jazeera. “He wanted a halt to all settlement activity. And perhaps those of us who work with him and for him could have been clearer in communicating that that is his policy, that is what we’re committed to doing.” Mrs. Clinton got a taste of the tricky nature of Middle East diplomacy during the interview, when she mistakenly said that in the Camp David summit convened by her husband, former president Bill Clinton, in 2000, Israelis and Palestinians almost reached an agreement that would have created a Palestinian state and made East Jerusalem the capital of Israel. It was a slip of the tongue on a sensitive issue: she meant that East Jerusalem would have been the capital of a new Palestinian state. Her aides jumped to correct her and asked Al Jazeera to tape her answer over again. “Thank you,” Mrs. Clinton said afterward to her aides, palpably relieved at a diplomatic bullet ducked.

Rose  # 5 | 04.11.2009 16:14

They send too many mixed messages...while things remain the "same". http://www.democracynow.org/2009/11/3/israeli_activists_criticize_us_house_for Israeli Activists Criticize US House for Considering Resolution Condemning Goldstone Report on Israeli War Crimes in Gaza The House is expected to overwhelmingly vote today to condemn a UN inquiry that found Israel committed scores of war crimes in its three-week assault on the Gaza Strip. Headed by the South African jurist Richard Goldstone, the inquiry also accused Hamas of war crimes and said both sides should investigate the allegations or face international prosecution. Over 1,300 Palestinians were killed in the Israeli attack, a majority of them civilians. Nine Israelis were killed by Palestinians and another four by so-called friendly fire. The bipartisan, non-binding House measure calls the Goldstone inquiry “irredeemably biased and unworthy of further consideration or legitimacy.” The vote comes one day before the United Nations General Assembly is expected to take up the inquiry’s findings. Continued...