State department fires back
On Wednesday, I reported that the Netanyahu government had decided not to dismantle 23 'outposts' built after March 2001 that the Sharon government had committed to demolish. The reason for the government's decision was that the commitment to demolish the 'outposts' was given in exchange for a commitment from President Bush to recognize 'changing realities' along the 'green line' and that the major 'settlement blocs' would remain part of Israel in any agreement with the 'Palestinians.' The Obama administration having disavowed that commitment, goes the argument, what's sauce for the goose is sauce for the gander.Except that the US State department doesn't quite get it.
“The Israeli government has pledged to take specific actions,” US State Department spokesman P.J. Crowley said. “They have responsibilities and we would expect them to fulfill those responsibilities.”The American government also pledged to take specific actions, which we expect them to fulfill and which they are now disavowing. Why should we keep our word if you won't keep yours?
At least there's some 'good news' in this report:
State Department officials, however, are denying a report in a Roger Cohen column in The New York Times this week that the US administration had presented the Palestinians with a letter promising an intense effort to produce a Palestinian state in two years, accompanied by a pledge – if Israel seriously undermines trust between the two parties – to withhold its veto from a Security Council resolution condemning Israel.What could go wrong?
posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 5:45 PM
3 Comments:
The State Department has the chutzpah to lecture Israel about broken commitments when the Obama Administration has reneged on all of the commitments the US made to Israel.
At least the good news is they aren't yet ready to impose a solution on Israel but perhaps we should take that denial with a grain of salt. Things have a way of changing in the next five months and that is coincidentally exactly when the freeze in Yesha and in Jerusalem ends.
What could go wrong indeed
Caroline Glick lays out a persuasive case why a Republican takeover of the House Of Representatives in November can constrain Obama's efforts to harm the Jewish State. A massive repudiation of the Democrats can also force the party to return to sanity on foreign policy.
Read it all
They say in America every election is a critical one. The mid-term held there this year be a decisive one for the future of the Jewish State - and a pro-Israel party being in control of Congress will make all the difference in the world even if foreign policy remains the province of the Executive Branch.
Two years gives time for the Republicans to regain a majority in the two houses in November.
Post a Comment
<< Home