President Obama's remarks to State Department

[subsuelo]

I don't know how many of you have seen this but here are the parts relevant to I/P. What do you all think?

It will be the policy of my administration to actively and aggressively seek a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians, as well as Israel and its Arab neighbors. To help us pursue these goals, Secretary Clinton and I have asked George Mitchell to serve as special envoy for Middle East peace.

George is renowned in this country and around the world for his negotiating skill. He brings international stature and a lifetime of service. His years in the Senate were marked by strong leadership and bipartisan achievement. His efforts on behalf of peace in Northern Ireland were indispensable in reconciling a painful and protracted conflict.

Time and again, in public service and private life, he has acted with skill and acted with integrity. He will be fully empowered at the negotiating table, and he will sustain our focus on the goal of peace.

No one doubts the difficulty of the road ahead, and George outlined some of those difficulties. The tragic violence in Gaza and southern Israel offers a sobering reminder of the challenges at hand and the setbacks that will inevitably come.

It must also instill in us, though, a sense of urgency, as history shows us that strong and sustained American engagement can bridge divides and build the capacity that supports progress. And that is why we will be sending George to the region as soon as possible to help the parties ensure that the cease-fire that has been achieved is made durable and sustainable.

Let me be clear: America is committed to Israel's security. And we will always support Israel's right to defend itself against legitimate threats.

For years, Hamas has launched thousands of rockets at innocent Israeli citizens. No democracy can tolerate such danger to its people, nor should the international community, and neither should the Palestinian people themselves, whose interests are only set back by acts of terror.

To be a genuine party to peace, the quartet has made it clear that Hamas must meet clear conditions: recognize Israel's right to exist; renounce violence; and abide by past agreements.

Going forward, the outline for a durable cease-fire is clear: Hamas must end its rocket fire; Israel will complete the withdrawal of its forces from Gaza; the United States and our partners will support a credible anti-smuggling and interdiction regime, so that Hamas cannot rearm.

Yesterday I spoke to President Mubarak and expressed my appreciation for the important role that Egypt played in achieving a cease-fire. And we look forward to Egypt's continued leadership and partnership in laying a foundation for a broader peace through a commitment to end smuggling from within its borders.

Now, just as the terror of rocket fire aimed at innocent Israelis is intolerable, so, too, is a future without hope for the Palestinians.

OBAMA: I was deeply concerned by the loss of Palestinian and Israeli life in recent days and by the substantial suffering and humanitarian needs in Gaza. Our hearts go out to Palestinian civilians who are in need of immediate food, clean water, and basic medical care, and who've faced suffocating poverty for far too long.

Now we must extend a hand of opportunity to those who seek peace. As part of a lasting cease-fire, Gaza's border crossings should be open to allow the flow of aid and commerce, with an appropriate monitoring regime, with the international and Palestinian Authority participating.

Relief efforts must be able to reach innocent Palestinians who depend on them. The United States will fully support an international donor's conference to seek short-term humanitarian assistance and long-term reconstruction for the Palestinian economy. This assistance will be provided to and guided by the Palestinian Authority.

Lasting peace requires more than a long cease-fire, and that's why I will sustain an active commitment to seek two states living side by side in peace and security.

Senator Mitchell will carry forward this commitment, as well as the effort to help Israel reach a broader peace with the Arab world that recognizes its rightful place in the community of nations.

I should add that the Arab peace initiative contains constructive elements that could help advance these efforts. Now is the time for Arab states to act on the initiative's promise by supporting the Palestinian government under President Abbas and Prime Minister Fayyad, taking steps towards normalizing relations with Israel, and by standing up to extremism that threatens us all.

Jordan's constructive role in training Palestinian security forces and nurturing its relations with Israel provide a model for these efforts. And going forward, we must make it clear to all countries in the region that external support for terrorist organizations must stop.

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/01/22/AR2009012202550.html">Washington Post

[Lucinda]

1. Thank you for that! The whole transcript is worth a read.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

2. Wish I'd voted for Nader. That's what I think.

[oberliner]

3. Thank you President Obama!

I look forward to seeing his vision of "two states living side by side in peace and security" come true.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

6. With Abbas and Fayyad at the helm? Fat chance.

Haven't we been down this road umpteen times?

This is a recipe for nothing. Honestly. Same demands as 6 months ago, as 1 year ago... Palestinians have to recognize Israel, it's rights and its borders. What does Israel have to recognize?

It's absurd. This differs from the neocons how????

[The Magistrate]

8. So You Want The People Of Arab Palestine To Tell President Obama To 'Fuck Off!' Ma'am?

Sounds like a recipe for progress and peace to me....

[ProgressiveMuslim]

10. Nah... I edited it out after 15 seconds.

[The Magistrate]

11. Have You Ever Heard A Song Called 'Too Long In The Wasteland', Ma'am, By James McMurtry?

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qEFwM3lGGj8

It is an old favorite of mine, with some excellent lyrics, including this gem....

"I didn't mean to say it, but I meant what I said."

[ProgressiveMuslim]

17. Luckily for them, Palestinians don't take advice from me...

And honestly, what Obama said is really no different than Bush's policy... I find that pretty disappointing.

Do I get very angry about my country's utterly racist position toward the people of Palestine? Damn right I do.

Before I lived there, I used to go crazy about what was printed in papers, spent time writing letters to editors, etc. Living there for 2 years was so freeing. It was so nice to not have to care what was written/spoken/assumed/taught here in the US. I learned that ultimately, the solution will come from *there* and from those people, not from here. I take some comfort in that.

[Douglas Carpenter]

40. there are certain things politicians simply HAVE to say, whether its the newly inaugurated

President of the United States or some 80 year-old podunk Congressman from the backwaters of Louisiana. Middle Eastern leaders of all persuasions, pro or anti Western, modernist or traditionalist, religious or secularist -are master of saying things that their respective positions require them to say - no matter how far their comments might be removed from what everyone knows to be the case.

When I look at these comments above by Presdident Obama - the ones that might, if taken at face value, give me cause for concern, I frankly see those kind of comments - the kind of comments that established public political orthodoxy would require the President to say, words that do not necessarily have a whole lot of baring on on-the-ground reality in the real world. And words that may or may not have any baring on actual policy as it actually develops.

This I take as the normal game of politics and brings me neither encouragement or discouragement. I am however encouraged by his selection of George Mitchell. When Sen. Mitchell headed the commission that investigated the causes of the second intifada, he did seem to handle the job quite honorably and established his findings with some measure of independence - not perfect - certainly not pro-Palestinian -but with some measure of honesty and independence, for a change.

[azurnoir]

48. IMO Obama 's statement was quite 'canny" if you will

by handing the responsibility for handling aid off to Abbas he created a "sink or swim" situation for Fatah one in which they will have the "opportunity" to prove themselves as effective and fair leaders for all of the Palestinian people or not. As to his requests not quite demands yet he also put some onus on Israel to open the crossings to allow the flow of aid, his statement was a well worded shot across the bow if you will and the next few weeks should prove interesting to say the least/

[bemildred]

13. I disagree.

Although I understand your attitude. One should not take public political rhetoric at face value. Mr Obama is clearly not one to egage in rhetorical excess, he guards his words closely. We are going to have to watch and see what he does, and the doing part is hardly started yet. Mr Mitchell is a very good choice. Mr Obama is a very ambitious man. Let's see what he does. I am quite sure it won't be like the Bushites.

Edit: I will add that, as I said before, I think Mr Obama wants to restore the PNA, which requires elections, and in the meantime requires Abbas and what's his name. I am impressed that he immediately hit on that approach, it's a very good sign, IMHO. If he does not press for elections in due course, or let's Israel slide on aid to the Palestinians, or repressive political tactics, or several other things, I will reconsider this.

[The Magistrate]

14. Sen. Mitchell Is Certainly An Excellent Choice For The Job, Sir

It bodes well, at least.

[bemildred]

15. It ain't going to be easy. nt

[The Magistrate]

18. No, Sir, It Will Not

Heads will have to be knocked, if not actually set to roll in the sand.

Our country does have leverage over the Israeli government, and will need to use it sternly.

In an odd way, the political disaster of this Gaza fighting may be of some help in doing so. Israel's position among the people of this country is weaker than usual at present, and its governments over the last eight years have been a bit too cozy with our Republican right, weakening their position with Democrats particularly.

[bemildred]

21. President Obama appears to prefer avoiding those obstacles which he can.

A sound attitude. I admit I am curious to see how he handles the knocking heads part.

[The Magistrate]

22. Anyone That Calm, Sir, Has Some Steel Somewhere

[bemildred]

23. Indeed Sir.

One need only consider the known facts.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

19. I agree, but they are simply going to have to deal Hamas in.

Time to revisit the old rules and throw them out.

Perhaps some of the requirements could be made reciprocal, which might make them more palatable to the Palestinians... eg., have MUTUAL recognition of the right to exist as a nation... have mutual cessation of violence...

[The Magistrate]

20. Hamas Will have To Be Part Of Negotiations, Ma'am

Negotiations must deal with what actually is, rather than what one might prefer things to be.

Hamas, however, will have to do the same, and recognize the fact and the legitimacy of the Israeli state. If, in negotiation, it simply restates positions it knows will not be accepted, and clings to the dream of 'liberating' territory now part of Israel, it will simply be a obstacle on a different field.

Sooner or later, obstacles will have to be removed, on either side.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

26. Can I ask you a serious question

without the snark?

How in the world does anyone expect recognition of Israel's "legitimacy." That's absurd. No other country asks for it.

"Legitimacy" and "right to exist" are illegitimate concepts in this conflict. Recognizing a sovereign nation is one thing. Pledging to wear its pin is quite another.

Does anyone get what this really means for the people of Palestine? In order to live, they are required to agree that yes, Israel has a right to exist as a Jewish state, that any Jewish person any place on the globe has a right to go there and live... all the while Israel is marginalizing and suppressing the people who are actually born on the land? Isn't that a bit insane on the face of it?

Shall a sovereign Palestinian state be required to recognize a sovereign Israeli state? Certainly. When? I think it most appropriate at the point of settlement, when there are actual borders to be recognized.

If we're going to require one side to recognize legitimacy and rights, why not make the pill less bitter and require it of both? Why not require Israel to recognize that PALESTINIANS TOO have a right to a nation?

At the end of the day, these requirements function to limit Israel's partners for peace.

[The Magistrate]

47. On The Courteous Assumption You Really Are Not Aware, Ma'am

Of the lines of argument and propaganda that have been pressed by opponents of Israel for many decades, some small amount of my time will be spent in providing an answer.

Your statement 'no other country asks for (recognition of its legitimacy)' is more or less true, so far as it goes. But no other state on earth is the object of a decades long campaign of propaganda describing it as an illegitimate and criminal entity, that ought not by rights to exist at all. In negotiations with representatives of Arab Palestinians, such rejectionism by entities like the Islamic Republic of Iran need not be addressed, but it must be foregone by any representatives of Arab Palestine engaged in negotiation. The text of 1(ii) of Resolution 242 ("Termination of all claims or states of belligerency and respect for and acknowledgement of the sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every State in the area and their right to live in peace within secure and recognized boundaries free from threats or acts of force") embodies this well: the word 'legitimacy' has fewer syllables, and so is easier to employ in discussion.

It is certainly true that there needs to be reciprocation by Israel. The Israeli state must extend, at the start of serious negotiations, this same recognition and unequivocal acceptance of a state of Arab Palestine, and the Arab Palestinian people, under this same text. Technically that text did not envision any state of Arab Palestine, there being no such entity in 1967, nor anyone describing such an entity in potential as anything but a replacement of Israel. But conditions have certainly changed, and such an entity needs to come into being. You will have read a few weeks ago my views of what it is necessary for Israel to do in making concrete this understanding, and recognition of the legitimacy of Arab Palestine, and should recall this includes liquidation of the settlements and relinquishing any territorial ambitions on the territory of Arab Palestine in perpetuity.

It is my view that absent such understandings being undertaken at the start of negotiations by all parties to them, a sizeable portion of the people in each camp will regard the other's negotiating as simply a form of jockeying for future advantage in an on-going conflict, which is not the most healthy atmosphere for real progress.

[bemildred]

25. It seems worth considering that the fastest way to get aid into Gaza,

to open it up, at the moment, considering Israeli objections, is to go through Abbas and the PNA. It is true that Hamas won't like it, and that it will shore up Abbas; but the first is OK, and the second desirable if one wants to shore up the PNA. The interesting question is how he is going to get Hamas to go along, which I don't have any idea about, but I don't expect he is foolish enough to think he can just exclude them.

Edit: supporting the PNA/Abbas is the weak spot in Israel's rhetorical position, they say they want it, so it's going to be hard to object to. If he actually does that, it's going to be good for Palestinians. You can do a lot of things with it, if you want to.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

27. Consider this:

Firstly, note how one of the pro-Zio talking points on this board is: "look at the propersity in the WB! See what happens when the PA is in charge?"

Israel and the US tried many strategies to have Abbas run Gaza. Elections (didn't go their way), coup (was pre-tempted by Hamas), collective punishment (failed), siege (failed)...

Looks like they finally landed on one: utterly destroy the territory and allow only Abbas to control money for rebuilding.

At long last, Abbas will be de facto running Gaza. Mission Accomplished!

[cali]

28. Pro-Zio? That's just so much better than Pro-Pal

uh, no it's not.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

32. Awesome contribution to the discussion. nt

[cali]

34. I love the smell of hypocrisy in the morning.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

36. You're an intelligent person.

Why not weigh in on the actual topic that's being discussed?

Obviously I am to the "left" or "hardline" or whatever you want to call it, of your position. I have insight into the situation from a different POV. I would think that as someone in the middle, who says she wants a just settlement, you would want to engage that harder-line position. But you really don't.

I never could figure out why you want to shut me down, especially in a sub-thread that is actually discussing something. Do you want this forum only to be for liberal zionist-supporters? To only express the same POV?

I imagine you'll have some snarky answer, but I ask the question with all genuineness.

[cali]

41. you can't figure me out

because you've crowded yourself into a narrow pov- Israelis=Evil, Palestinians=good victims. I take a more complex view of the issues involved- and a far more complex view of human nature.

And sorry, but I consider your questions silly, even if you are asking with all genuineness. Still, here's some answers. No, I don't want to shut you down, but that doesn't mean I won't challenge you. No, I don't want anyone to "own" this forum. I want it to be a place for discussion of these issues.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

42. Consider this Cali.

You think I have some sort of black and white view. I am definitely more hardline but do you realize that I represent a POV that has shifted. In 1995 I was so on board with the promise of peace that we sold everything we owned and moved our family, including a 4 year old and a baby, to be part of the new future and to start a new life in Palestine. My husband worked for the Soltha. I was a schoolteacher who passed through the major checkpoint every single day.

My evolution from true-believer to the view I hold today is a valid POV that comes from hard life experience. Stop trying to make my views seem cartoonish. I think that within the Palestinian spectrum of belief, I'm among the mainstream.

So the question is: is this to be a forum for Israeli views only?

And you definitely DO try to shut me down. I would really appreciate it if you would stop doing that.

[cali]

43. I'm not disputing your right to express your beliefs

And no, I don't try and shut you down. I already answered your question about this forum, and no matter how many times you accuse me (in the form of a question or in a statement) of wanting this to be a forum for Israeli views only, it'll still be a blatantly false accusation. Perhaps YOU are trying to shut me down. Furthermore, my views are neither pro-Israeli or Pro-Palestinian. They're not anti-Israel or anti-Palestine. I don't care for the hard line views of either side. I support peace for both Palestinians and Israelis. Sorry, if my antipathy toward Israel isn't virulent enough for you, but I'm just not into hating.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

44. OK. You clearly aren't into dialogue either, unless someone thinks *exactly* like you do.

Whatever.

[cali]

45. I just explained my pov

you don't like it, so you make another false accusation. What did I expect? Oh that's right, you never fail to disappoint.

[Name removed]

46. Deleted message

Message removed by moderator. Click here to review the message board rules.

[bemildred]

30. That's why it will be hard to resist.

The easiest way to get around people is to give them what they say they want.

There are certainly plenty of things to be concerned about.

Hamas will have to be part of the deal. Saying "Hamas will have to stop firing the rockets" in a firm but unhysterical tone is just stating the facts, and it is quite different from saying "we must not talk to Hamas" or "Hamas must be destroyed". Not firing the rockets is exactly what they need to do right now. They should be loudly declaring every day that they have made their point and they are not going to fire anymore rockets and not going to attempt to re-arm, that they only want peace and aid and dialog. Every one else lies about their intentions.

The PNA does not appear to be competent to administer the aid, and means will have to be found to deal with that too, and to keep the various parties from squabbling over it too much, and so on. But you can't do everything at once.

Of course, the proof is in the pudding, and I am largely pulling this out of my ass at this point, but I don't see any better way, pragmatically speaking, for Obama to proceed. The situation is getting very bad, and if the trends are not reversed soon we may well have some real genocide on our hands. The rhetoric coming out of the Israeli right is very bad stuff, this stuff about "we are not going to show restraint" is very bad stuff, especially coming from people using modern heavy weapons.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

31. I can't imagine what will happen.

My husband said the arabic press is all over the place, with a gazillion different opinions flying, though he did say that Obama's "blessing" to Fatah has shored up that movement, evident from already in their rhetoric.

These are interesting times.

[bemildred]

33. Well, it's good the press is in there now.

That offers a great deal of protection. There needs to be press from everywhere though, not just the Middle East.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

35. LOL Bemildred, the real press has always been there.

[bemildred]

37. More is better. nt

[ProgressiveMuslim]

38. ITA. "More" is more difficult to marginalize and dismiss. nt

[bemildred]

39. Noise can be good. nt

[iconicgnom]

4. Well, he's 100% sympathetic to Israel, and lays all the fault on Palestinians..

Myopic in the extreme, never varying from the George W. Bush rhetoric.
My guess is that he'll use his immense political capital to help consolodate Israel's positions, while ignoring Palestinian rights.

[dbonds]

5. I watched this live. He doesn't lay all the fault on Palestinians...

He said Israel has stop denying them supplies and completely withdraw. He did not overtly blame either side but did express remedies for both sides.

[ProgressiveMuslim]

7. Israel's crime isn't denying supplies. The unspoken piece is a 40+ year VIOLENT MILITARY OCCUPATION

The core problem isn't rockets. It isn't checkpints. It's OCCUPATION!!!!

[dbonds]

16. I agree with you, but this was just what needs to happen to make peace right now.

I don't think Obama is going to throw blame on either side, you can't do that if you are going to mediate peace. What the final 2 state solution is will be worked out. Unfortunately I don't guess the solution will contain any punishment for Israel's past actions (or Hamas's) but just where do we go from here.

[Vegasaurus]

29. Well no

Not unless you agree that all of Israel is occupied, like Hamas.

That;s the only "end of the occupation" they will agree to.

Too bad Israel doesn't agree.

[iconicgnom]

9. DIdn't hear about the seige conditions on Gaza. Didn't hear about the encroaching settlements.

ho hum - all I heard was enthusiastic support for Israel's "right to exist" - as if it were seriously challenged. Nothing about Palestine's right to exist. All I heard was a set of conditions on Palestinians, that they must satisfy, that would be enforced -- nothing, nada, zilch, regarding conditions on Israel, that must be satisfied, that would be enforced.

I heard a continuation of a US policy that began long before George W. did his dirty deeds all over the mid-east, and that has no signs of being altered the tiniest bit. I.e., I heard nothing of UN resolutions supported almost unanimously, and even by Hamas - but denied by Israel, US, Australia. I heard nothing of the Arab consensus peace plan, also supported by Hamas. I heard only Obama voicing the unilateral will of the militarily advantaged. plus ça change, plus c'est la même chose

[dbonds]

12. Maybe we didn't hear the same speech.

Let me start by saying I think Israel has been the bad guy here, but Hamas hasn't been innocent either. If it was possible to turn back the clock I don't think Israel should have all that land. But what I heard today was Obama not laying blame on either side, but saying what each side needs to do to bring an immediate peace. There were actions for Israel to withdraw and let in supplies as well as Hamas to stop attacking. I don't think by any means what he said today was the long term plan of all that needs to happen to bring about a 2 state solution, but he did say a 2 state solution is what he desired.

[GoesTo11]

24. Down with Obama, Israel's new tool.

Too bad McCain didn't win.