U.S. Vetoes Palestinian Bid at UN to Halt Israeli Settlements

[Purveyor]

Source: Bloomberg

By Bill Varner

Feb. 18 (Bloomberg) -- The U.S. today vetoed a draft resolution in the United Nations Security Council that would have declared Israel’s settlement construction in the West Bank and East Jerusalem to be illegal and demanded a halt to such activity.

U.S. Ambassador Susan Rice sought until the final hours before the vote to reach agreement with Palestinian and Arab diplomats on a compromise statement that would have increased pressure on Israel to cease settlement construction, while stopping short of calling it illegal or demanding a moratorium.

Rice was alone in opposing the measure on the 15-member council, the UN’s principal policy making panel. It was the Obama administration’s first veto of a UN resolution and marked the 10th time in the past 11 years that the U.S. has voted against a text considered to be critical of Israel.

The veto, coming amid widespread protests against autocratic rulers in the Middle East and North Africa, may divert attention toward anti-American and anti-Israeli sentiments in the region and complicate Obama administration efforts to mediate Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

Read more: http://noir.bloomberg.com/apps/news?pid=20601087&sid=aT2ZL9O_crA8&pos=9

[here_is_to_hope]

1. Israel would have ignored it any way so

what would be the point?

[lsewpershad]

7. It would

have reinforced once again that Israel is in charge of US policy in the Middle East.

[Why Syzygy]

2. Blatant

Blatant disregard for HUMAN rights.

[Catherina]

3. No one expected anything different. Good thing the people will out manouver US vetoes.

It's good they finally got the US hypocrisy on undeniable record.

[oberliner]

20. The resolution already passed over 30 years ago

With no veto from the US.

[Name removed]

21. Deleted message

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

[oberliner]

22. Which are the few different places where you've seen this posted?

I thought it was an original.

Can you post some links?

[sulphurdunn]

4. I thought we were officially

opposed to settlement expansion in the West Bank.

[Catherina]

5. A convenient fairy-tale to make the hand-wringing look more genuine.

The long trail of checks, vetoes, weapons, military aid, tax exemptions for settlement expansion all tell a different story.

[2banon]

10. Bingo..

as if even the most disinterested observer would not eventually recognize this... gotta wonder at the level of denial with policy makers and "leadership"... the emperor has no clothes, how long much longer must this be endured?

[Catherina]

12. 2banon? Is that for Lebanon?

Welcome to DU :hi:

[2banon]

17. no....

it's just a moniker for the anon movement..."to be anonymous"... :) and thanks for the welcome! :hi:

[boppers]

6. "expansion"

The settlements already there are illegal, regardless of any expansion... or so says 14 of 15 diplomats. The US was opposed to any language indicating as such.

Never mind the fact that settlements are a war crime in and of themselves:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Fourth_Geneva_Convention#Section_III._Occupied_territories

[azurnoir]

8. How can the US still claim any validity ias a mediator

no matter how much the US claims to be against further settlement we will not do anything official

IMO if George Mitchell has any integrity he should resign

[2banon]

9. As Expected..

Making yesterday's headlines a complete farce..

Source: Raw Story (Foreign Policy Feb. 16, 2011)

In sharp reversal, U.S. agrees to rebuke Israel in Security Council

The U.S. informed Arab governments Tuesday that it will support a U.N. Security Council statement reaffirming that the 15-nation body "does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity," a move aimed at avoiding the prospect of having to veto a stronger Palestinian resolution calling the settlements illegal.

The very next paragraph reveals that the earlier edict (as suggested in the FP headline) from the U.S., was in fact nothing more than a farsical dog and pony show.

But the Palestinians rejected the American offer following a meeting late Wednesday of Arab representatives and said it is planning to press for a vote on its resolution on Friday, according to officials familar with the issue. The decision to reject the American offer raised the prospect that the Obama adminstration will cast its first ever veto in the U.N. Security Council.

Sheesh!

[AnOhioan]

11. Woo boy...proud to be an american..I tell ya

:sarcasm:

[Arrowhead2k1]

13. Seriously not impressed... nt

[azurnoir]

14. In Washington, the pro-Israel lobby group AIPAC expressed "appreciation" for Obama's veto.

http://www.maannews.net/eng/ViewDetails.aspx?ID=361242

what more needs to be said?

[oberliner]

19. AIPAC shares the administration’s dedication to reaching a two- state solution

"AIPAC shares the administration’s dedication to reaching a two- state solution between Israel and the Palestinian Authority (PA) through bilateral negotiations."

[tootrueleft]

15. Well thats me FINISHED with Obama. He stands for nothing.

[Vicar In A Tutu]

16. By extension, Israel is the most powerful nation in the world.

The proof is in the pudding. Regardless of who is President of the United States and from whichever party, Israel gets what it wants. I don't think this is an Obama thing or a Bush thing or a Clinton thing or a Democratic or Republican thing. It's an American thing, and it's not something which is likely to change in the lifetime of anyone who posts on this forum.

[Behind the Aegis]

18. good.

[defendandprotect]

23. Disgusting -- US is never part of anything they can't dominate --