Clinton backs Israel on settlements stance

[IndianaGreen]

Another of those changes we can believe in... NOT!

Clinton backs Israel on settlements stance

Agreement would allow settlers to finish 3,000 houses plus public buildings

By Ben Lynfield in Jerusalem

Monday, 2 November 2009

Palestinian leaders angrily accused Hillary Clinton of undercutting Middle East peace prospects yesterday after she endorsed Israel's plans to continue expanding West Bank settlements.

The US Secretary of State for the first time voiced support for Israel's argument that since a freeze on settlement construction had not been a precondition for previous peace talks, it should not be one during the negotiations the US is now trying to convene.

Instead of a freeze, Mrs Clinton urged the Palestinians to accept what she termed an "unprecedented" Israeli offer of "restraint" in settlement construction and to go to the negotiating table as soon as possible without preconditions. "What the Prime Minister has offered in specifics on restraints on a policy of settlements is unprecedented," she said in a clear departure from the Obama administration's former position that there needed to be a total freeze. Mrs Clinton was speaking during a joint appearance with Mr Netanyahu. He said that his government would conduct a policy of "restraint" while at the same time enabling "normal life" for the settlers.

However, Palestinians are convinced that use of the word restraint is a deception because, according to US-Israeli understandings, 3,000 housing units whose construction has started will be completed during the freeze, new public buildings can be constructed, and there will be no restriction of settlement construction in annexed East Jerusalem. Ghassan Khatib, a spokesman for President Mahmoud Abbas's Palestinian Authority, said he was "surprised and disappointed" by Mrs Clinton's remarks, terming them "unhelpful" for peace prospects.

Palestinian politicians and analysts doubted that Mr Abbas would, at least in the short term, give in to US pressure to negotiate with Israel after repeatedly saying he would not do so without a settlement freeze. That leaves the US efforts in limbo on an issue Mr Obama had set as one of his top priorities.

Mr Khatib said the US had "deviated" from the international peace blueprint, known as the roadmap, which calls for a settlement freeze. The PA is now expected to mount a diplomatic campaign to oppose the US stance on settlements.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/clinton-backs-israel-on-settlements-stance-1813190.html

[madrchsod]

1. hmmm...having a bit of nasty toward the african students.

disrespecting the young Afghan ladies who dared to ask her about terrorism directed to their country by cia missiles. now throwing the Palestinians concerns about the settlement issue under the bus. i`d say she doing a wonderful job in keeping up the bush administrations fuck you world policy.

it`s a real toss up in obama`s cabinet on who shows the most disdain for us mere mortals.

[cqo_000]

3. Why is Mrs Clinton undermining the President?

By Glenn Kessler
Washington Post Staff Writer
Friday, May 29, 2009


Obama, who met last week with Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, said, "In my conversations with Prime Minister Netanyahu, I was very clear about the need to stop settlements, to make sure that we are stopping the building of outposts . . .


http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/05/28/AR2009052803771.html

[Scurrilous]

2. AIPAC praises Clinton’s comments on Israel, settlements

<snip>

"AIPAC is applauding Secretary of State Hillary Clinton's praise for Israel's "unprecedented" willingness to restrain settlement construction.

Clinton made the remarks Saturday evening in a press conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Saturday evening.

"As Secretary Clinton emphasized, at the very moment Israel is taking 'unprecedented' steps to aid the cause of peace -- making greater concessions than any previous Israeli government -- it is Palestinian pre-conditions never heard before and the PA's continual refusal to sit down and negotiate with Israel that are the immediate obstacles to restarting peace talks," said the pro-Israel lobby in a statement."

more

[bemildred]

4. Clinton: Israel's settlement offer falls short of U.S. wishes

Now I'm really confused.

Israel's offer to restrain settlement expansion is an unprecedented and positive step but still falls short of Washington's wishes, U.S.
Secretary of State Hillary Clinton said on Monday.

"The Israelis have responded to the call of the U.S., the Palestinians and the Arab world to stop settlement activity by expressing a willingness to restrain settlement activity," she told reporters in the Moroccan city of Marrakesh.

"This offer falls far short of what our preference would be but if it is acted upon it will be an unprecedented restriction on settlements and would have a significant and meaningful effect on restraining their growth."

Arab states are deeply disappointed that U.S.-Israeli talks last week failed to produce greater pressure for a freeze on West Bank settlement-building, Arab League Secretary-General Amr Moussa said on Monday.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1125311.html

[azurnoir]

5. The missing word is "precondtion"

Israel is making "unprecedented" concessions on West Bank settlement construction, Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton said on Saturday after arriving in Israel in the latest U.S. bid to renew peace talks in the region.

The Obama administration had previously demanded Israel halt all settlement building before negotiations could resume.

But speaking at a joint press conference with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Clinton said there has never been such a precondition.

"It has always been an issue with negotiations," she said. "What the Prime Minister has offered in specifics of a restraint on the policy of settlements which he has just described ? no new starts for example, is unprecedented in the context of prior to negotiations."

"It's also the fact that for forty years, Presidents of both parties have questioned the legitimacy of settlements, but I think that where we are right now is to try to get into the negotiations. The Prime Minister will be able to present his government's proposal about what they are doing regarding settlements which I think when fully explained will be seen as being not only unprecedented in response to many of the concerns that have been expressed," Clinton went on to say.

Netanyahu, for his part, said that Israel while was willing to enter into peace talks without preconditions, the other side was not.

"We think we should sit around that negotiating table right away," he said.

Clinton and Netanyahu met a few hours after Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas rejected a U.S. proposal for the renewal of peace talks. During the press conference, the secretary of state said the talks with Abbas were "very useful."

At the press conference, Clinton also touched on negotiations between Iran and world powers over the Islamic Republic's nuclear ambitions, a significant cause of concern in Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1124825.html

perhaps HRC is just ego stroking Bibi for the moment "oh yes, yes it was such a nice offer and those mean old Palestinians....."until the next time George Mitchell arrives and tells him he'll have to do better call it good cop bad cop maybe and of course I could be wrong

[bemildred]

6. Well, different parties have different agendas.

Bibi's objective is to stall by means of perpetual but empty negotiation, Clinton's is to play the role of peace-broker convincingly, and so on. It seems safe to say the US administration has blinked, or is sending up trial balloons to see if it can get away with blinking, or waffling on what to do, or something along that line ...