RSSUsing PayPal
Jimmy Carter on Palestine and Peace
Share / Recommend - Comment - Print - Saturday, Mar 11 2006, 5:15PM
CLOSE 
SOCIAL WEBSITES
http://digg.com/submit?phase=2&url=http://twn.riverlab.com/archives/2006/03/jimmy_carter_on/&title=Jimmy Carter on Palestine and Peace&topic=political_opinion" target="_blank">Digg
Del.icio.us
Reddit
Facebook
Newsvine
Stumble UponEMAIL THIS ARTICLE
Two weeks ago, I heard Zbigniew Brzezinski comment that Jimmy Carter had done something that few former U.S. Presidents did -- other than Richard Nixon -- and that was write major articles and give significant oratorical addresses on foreign policy without consulting their former national security advisors.
Bill Clinton probably does much of his speechifying without getting gold stars from Sandy Berger and Tony Lake, but there is still enough consultation with Berger that I'll leave Clinton on the 'other presidents' list for the time being.
But Brzezinski gave Carter robust praise for his bold, serious, and no nonsense comments on the importance of ending the Israel-Palestine standoff over final status negotiations. Carter and an increasingly impressive list of Republicans and Democrats are trying to nudge the administration forward on getting negotiations between Israel and Mahmoud Abbas going.
Here are two items -- the first a speech by Carter at the Council on Foreign Relations which is linked here, and the second a great article, "Colonization of Palestine Precludes Peace," which ran the day before yesterday at TomPaine.com.
Here is a large opening chunk from Jimmy Carter's article:
For more than a quarter century, Israeli policy has been in conflict with that of the United States and the international community. Israel's occupation of Palestine has obstructed a comprehensive peace agreement in the Holy Land, regardless of whether Palestinians had no formalized government, one headed by Yasir Arafat or Mahmoud Abbas, or with Abbas as president and Hamas controlling the parliament and cabinet.The unwavering U.S. position since Dwight Eisenhower's administration has been that Israel's borders coincide with those established in 1949, and, since 1967, the universally adopted U.N. Resolution 242 has mandated Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories. This policy was reconfirmed even by Israel in 1978 and 1993, and emphasized by all American presidents, including George W. Bush. As part of the Quartet, including Russia, the U.N. and the European Union, he has endorsed a "Road Map" for peace. But Israel has officially rejected its basic premises with patently unacceptable caveats and prerequisites.
With Israel's approval, The Carter Center has monitored all three Palestinian elections. Supervised by a blue-ribbon commission of college presidents and distinguished jurists, they have all been honest, fair and peaceful, with the results accepted by winners and losers.
Hamas will control the cabinet and prime minister's office, but Mahmoud Abbas retains all authority and power exercised by Yasir Arafat. He still heads the PLO, the only Palestinian entity recognized by Israel, and could deal with Israeli leaders under this umbrella, independent of Hamas control. He has unequivocally endorsed the Quartet's Road Map. Post-election polls show that 80 percent of Palestinians still want a peace agreement with Israel and nearly 70 percent support Abbas as president.
Israel has announced a policy of isolating and destabilizing the new government (perhaps joined by the United States). The elected officials will be denied travel permits, workers from isolated Gaza barred from entering Israel and every effort is being made to block funds to Palestinians. The Quartet's special envoy, James Wolfensohn, has proposed that donors assist the Palestinian people without violating anti-terrorism laws that prohibit funds from being sent directly to Hamas.
In the short run, the best approach is to follow Wolfensohn's advice, give the dust a chance to settle in Palestine and await the outcome of Israel's election later this month. Hamas wishes now to consolidate its political gains, maintain domestic order and stability and refrain from any contacts with Israel. It will be a tragedy -- especially for the Palestinians -- if they promote or condone terrorism.
The preeminent obstacle to peace is Israel's colonization of Palestine. There were just a few hundred settlers in the West Bank and Gaza when I became president, but the Likud government expanded settlement activity after I left office. President Ronald Reagan condemned this policy, and reaffirmed that Resolution 242 remained "the foundation stone of America's Middle East peace effort." President George H.W. Bush even threatened to reduce American aid to Israel.
Although President Bill Clinton made strong efforts to promote peace, a massive increase of settlers occurred during his administration, to 225,000, mostly while Ehud Barak was prime minister. Their best official offer to the Palestinians was to withdraw 20 percent of them, leaving 180,000 in 209 settlements, covering about five percent of the occupied land.
The five percent figure is grossly misleading, with surrounding areas taken or earmarked for expansion, roadways joining settlements with each other and to Jerusalem and wide arterial swaths providing water, sewage, electricity and communications. This intricate honeycomb divides the entire West Bank into multiple fragments, often uninhabitable or even unreachable.
Trying to imagine a solution to what seems to be an insoluble, complex mess in the Palestinian-Israel border dispute is vital to American and Israeli security interests.
The status quo does not allow America to move forward a credible agenda that will appeal to other Muslim citizens throughout the Middle East. We may not only lose Iraq -- but may end up at war with Iran -- and may find ourselves with no allies or supporters at all in the Middle East, and that makes Israel's circumstances untenable as well.
This border problem must be solved -- and yes, Hamas needs to put some better cards on the table than it has thus far -- but America needs to get more serious than it has been about ending this standoff.
-- Steve Clemons
» Next Article - Open Thread, Oakley Says
I was encouraged to read this piece earlier in the week.
the paradox of the Israeli-Palestinian situation has never been quite so apparent: Hamas, a group that has codified the destruction of Israel in its charter, yet has managed to enforce a fairly successful hudna for the last 18 months; versus Israel, a nation that speaks of peace, yet by its actions creates an inevitable destruction of Palestinian national aspiration, by assassination, wall building and colonization.
Jimmy Carter was a disaster on the Middle east who prefers to coddle the anti-Semitic, murderous, America-hating, west-hating islamic world.
Sure Susan, Israel's citizens should just be sitting ducks to quasam rockets, suicide bombings etc. and not take any measures to defend themselves. Letting their citizens be murdered would prove they are for peace by your lofty standards, as you and the rest of the western left sit in safety and comfort and continually judge Israel's defensive measures, which, considering the vicious enemies they have, are mild. Get off your high horse.
With regard to the so-called "hudna", it doesn't exist, the only reason you don't hear of so many attacks is because Israel has prevented them from succeeding, not because there haven't been attempts. There's numerous threats and attempts every day. Not only are you self-righteous, you are also clueless.
As long as President Jimmy insists that "The preeminent obstacle to peace is Israel's colonization of Palestine" --- not suicide bombers, not an Hamas mission statement that the state of Israel must be destroyed --- he is part of the problem. At the very least, he must explain what the "preeminent obstacle to peace" was from 1967 to 1976 when, as he notes, there were "just a few hundred settlers in the West Bank and Gaza".
The preeminent obstacle to peace is, and has been, the very existence of the State of Israel and the refusal of "the palestinians" to accept the state and to negotiate a true peace with it. Alas, President Bush spent years ignoring the problem in not pushing Israel or Arafat enough. Yet Israel has ceded huge territories gained in 1967, either by treaty when there was a treaty partner, or unilaterally when there was not. The "Palestinians" have ceded nothing and agreed to nothing. Nor are there signs that they will, if they have chosen a political organization dedicated to Israel's destruction.
Israel has not complied with various UN resolutions going on years now. I don't understand why the same people who kept using the UN resolutions as a reason to go to war on Iraq are not consistent with wanting Israel to comply.
We are building too many walls and not talking. Terror is wrong, and ignoring the law is wrong.
"We plan to eliminate the state of Israel and establish a purely Palestinian state . . . We Palestinians will take over everything, including all of Jerusalem." --Yasser Arafat, Chairman of the PLO (in front of an Arab audience in Stockholm in 1996)
"If you are asking me, as a man who belongs to the Islamic faith, my answer is also "From the river to the sea," the entire land is an Islamic Waqf which can not be bought or sold, and it is impossible to remain silent while someone is stealing it ..." -- Faisal Husseini (1940-2001), Fatah leader and PA Minister for Jerusalem, 'Al-Arabi' (Egypt), 24 June 2001.
Article 13 of the Hamas Covenant: "There is no solution for the Palestinian question except through Jihad. Initiatives, proposals and international conferences are all a waste of time and vain endeavors."
I had read Carter's speech on the CFR and totally agree. In fact I send him a letter to that effect and copied his speech to my congressman and Senator with my own comments.
After having gotten a through education on the Isr/Pal conflict..I can say this...get Israel out of US affairs, US taxpayers pocket and out of the US congress.. or else.
For America to support and be a party to what has gone on there is unacceptable.
NO presidentail hopeful who panders to AIPAC in our ME policy will get my vote or the vote of anyone I am able to influence....and no congressman or senator either...I'am done with this preversion of America policy.
I no longer believe that the conflict in Israel and Palestine can be resolved by negotiations between the two parties. First, because there are too many rejectionists on both sides; too many who seek total victory rather than peace.
But a more important problem is that Israel is by far the stronger of the two parties. Israeli maximalists' dreams of total victory are realistic, even if difficult to achieve. The dreams of Palestinian rejectionists are fantastical and absurd. Any bilateral negotiations between Israel and representatives of the Palestinian community are thus bound to lead only to further Israeli attempts to impose onerous, victors' terms on the impoverished and immiserated Palestinians. The Palestinians will reject the terms, and return to violence and savagery. Israel will then appeal to the rejection as further proof of Palestinian intransigence, and relaunch its own long ruthless military and political campaign of annexation by stages - and the long war will continue. You can't have a negotiated settlement to a war in which there is such an imbalance between the sides - no settlement, that is, that is anything other than an abject surrender agreement by the weaker party.
The two parties in this case have been engaged in a century-long war, one that has intermittently run cold and hot. And the Israelis have certainly been winning this war - gradually and by steps, with a few setbacks, but surely and steadily. Over the course of that century, the amount of territory controlled by Palestinians has steadily shrunk. It continues to shrink even as we talk - and the tactical quitting of Gaza is matched by consolidation and expansion in the West Bank. So I fear the Israeli political elite - and really the majority of its population as well - has no real reason to discontinue this war. Why quit when you are winning? Yes, they will continue to suffer some atrocious civilian casualties, but eventually there will be hardly anything left of the Arab community in Palestine. Israelis believe, with some justification, that Palestinians will eventually come to accept the futility of the struggle and move away to seek opportunity elsewhere. Those who remain will be crushed entirely, and Israeli sovereignty will eventually extend to the Jordan river. Some Israelis on the right will celebrate victory; others in the center will merely endorse victory and welcome the end of hostilities; some on the left will cry about the victory, but accept it.
The Palestinian community is plagued by political and strategic incompetence, by backwardness, and by the presence within it of too many people who seem addicted to a life of desperate victimhood and absurd, routinized struggle for struggle's sake - with no clear strategy for success in evidence. Their community is racked by increasing social pathologies, including desperate suicide cults committed to martyrdom for its own sake, with no coherent or rationally executed political ambitions.
I am glad that Carter mentioned Barak and Clinton in all this. The Clinton administration completed the gradual US transformation from halfhearted honest broker to unabashed partisan ally of Israel in the war. It culminated in the farce of Camp David, and the perversion of the Oslo agreement, by which what was originally supposed to be a process culminating in the implementation of UN 242 was transformed into a surprise Israeli victory celebration, along with US support for the Israeli attempt to use Oslo to legitimize its acquisition of territory by force, and to impose acceptance of the settlements on the Palestinians. Clinton's role in this farce was shameful.
So it's time for the US to turn back the clock, rejoin the international community, and together with them adopt a more peremptory, imperative posture. Only if the United States returns to the standards set by international law and UN resolutions, and joins other powerful nations from outside the region to clearly articulate the obvious solution, and then impose that solution on the region, will this problem be solved.
I believe that the most constructive step would be for the permanent members of the Security Council to act to declare and establish final borders in what was once the Palestine Mandate, without formal input from either the Israelis or the Palestinians, and enforce those borders with the threat of sanctions and force. The international community created Israel to begin with, so it is time for that community to step up, declare an end to this miserable conflict, establish borders and lay down the law. They must make it crystal clear clear that UN 242's demand that Israel withdraw for the territories occupied during the 1967 war means all territories. Israel gets twelve months to get out altogether; to dimantle the settlements or convert them to Palestinian ownership; and to destroy those portions of the security barrier that run through Palestinian territory. Failure to do so will result in heavy economic sanctions, including a complete withdrawal of US financial assistance, and the possible use of military force against any Israeli military forces remaining in Palestine.
Jerusalem is to be an open city. Neither state shall be allowed to establish its capital there.
An international fund will be created and administered to compensate dispossessed Palestinians in the refugee camps. With the payment of compensation, Palestinian claims inside Israel will be considered ended.
The Security Council must also make it clear to the Palestinian rejectionists that suicide missions and other incursions into Israeli territory - once that territory is defined - will not be tolerated, and that the next suicide bombing inside Israel will result not in Israeli forces moving into Palestine - but international forces.
The world has had enough of this conflict, and its insidious side-effects and destabilizing nuissances. Israel and the Palestinian territories are two little countries, and it is ridiculous that we all continue to tolerate the social and material destruction, human misery and global blowback their fighting has caused. It's time to say it: This war is over. Here is the solution. You both lose.
UN Resolution 242 mandates Israel's withdrawl from the occupied territories. Israel is non compliant. Please explain to me, a knucklehead idealist 5 year old, why the USA does not bring pressure on Israel. We hollered long and hard about Iraq's non-compliance. What does Israel have on US that we do not require sitting down, making agreements, and enforcing them?
Also, about the WMD motivation for Iraq invasion and the building storm of fear with Iran, please notice that the US, and Israel (again noncompliant with disclosure resolutions), do now have nuclear weapons and a priori threaten the stability of world peace. Please explain this to me. (Ms. Rice is not exempt from answering).
123 Israeli children have been killed by Palestinians and 710 Palestinian children have been killed by Israelis since September 29, 2000.
1,084 Israelis and 3,821 Palestinians have been killed since September 29, 2000.
The U.S. gives $15,139,178 per day to the Israeli government and military and $232,290 per day to Palestinian NGO’s.
Israel has been targeted by at least 65 UN resolutions and the Palestinians have been targeted by none.
No Israelis are being held prisoner by Palestinians, while 9,184 Palestinians are currently imprisoned by Israel.
0 Israeli homes have been demolished by Palestinians and 4,170 Palestinian homes have been demolished by Israel since September 29, 2000.
The Israeli unemployment rate is 8.9%, while the Palestinian unemployment is estimated at 25-31%.
60+ new Jewish-only settlements have been built on confiscated Palestinian land between March 2001 and July 11, 2003. There have been 0 cases of Palestinians confiscating Israeli land and building settlements.
from.....
http://www.ifamericansknew.org/
Some of the leaders of Hamas and the PLO have been heard to say that they do not support Israel's right to exist.
Some leaders of the Knesset have encouraged, supported, and approved the forced takeover of Palestinian land, and the insertion of over 200,000 illegal squatters ("settlers").
Clearly, while some Palestinians are vocalizing a desire to push the Israelis into the sea, the Israelis are actually doing it. To people like Laura, above, it seems that words are more dangerous than deeds. That, or she also supports driving the Palestinians into the sea, or oblivian, or into camps in surrounding countries....
I think that a grassroots backlash against Israel is not out of the question. As our fiscal health continues to deteriorate, and we are finally forced to take a hard look at our budget, more than a few Americans will imagine what the US could do with that $15 mil per day we are sending to the Israelis. Do you think that Peoria will really give a shit about the views of AIPAC when their standard of living is at stake? In fact, the buying off of Congress by AIPAC might become more widely known as the Abramoff scandle continues to unfold.
That AIPAC conference shown on C-Span last week was really creepy. Standing ovations for the likes of John Bolton and anyone else who made outrageously aggressive noises about Iran. This group has gone too far, aquired way too much power, and simply must be reigned in. Reined in and publicly shamed for their role in pushing the Iraq war, conducting spying operations in the Pentagon, and other acts that are against the interests of the United States. How in the world did they grow so powerful? The line up of speakers at the conference was unbelievable. And, you would have thought they were all presidential hopefuls speaking in Iowa and New Hampshire - so fauning and anxious to please. WTF??
For reasons that may have little to do with rational thinking, I have long wondered about how Jerusalem could be removed from contention by making it a sovereign city-state under the aegis of the United Nations. It would become a political laboratory in which all of its occupants would be forced to invent a system of peaceful governance respecting all faiths and ethnic groups. Deprived of their designs on Jerusalem, the Jewish state and the nascent Palestinian state might, maybe, evolve according to more hopeful dynamics.
"In fact, the buying off of Congress by AIPAC might become more widely known as the Abramoff scandle continues to unfold."
It is far bigger than Abramoff, and transcends party. Consider, if you will, that Reid is high up in the top-ten as far as dollars received from AIPAC PAC monies. The ONLY post I have ever seen removed from that internet cesspool that Reid emarrassingly calls a "blog" was a post that listed the dollar amounts various politicians, including Reid, have received from AIPAC.
"That AIPAC conference shown on C-Span last week was really creepy. Standing ovations for the likes of John Bolton and anyone else who made outrageously aggressive noises about Iran. This group has gone too far, aquired way too much power, and simply must be reigned in. Reined in and publicly shamed for their role in pushing the Iraq war, conducting spying operations in the Pentagon, and other acts that are against the interests of the United States. How in the world did they grow so powerful? The line up of speakers at the conference was unbelievable. And, you would have thought they were all presidential hopefuls speaking in Iowa and New Hampshire - so fauning and anxious to please. WTF??"
Posted by stanley
Yes. And it must be noted that the so called "Minority Whip", Steny Hoyer (D-Md.), was making comments that one would exect out of the likes of Dov Zacheim or any number of other neo-con/zionist fanatics.
Laura is absolutely correct; Susan, Clemons and others who prefer to appease Islamic fascism, like Hamas, would do well to listen to this powerful interview given by a respected and astonioshingly courageous Arab psychologist. http://www.memritv.org/Search.asp?ACT=S9&P1=1050
Like any democracy, Israel not only has the right, but has a moral imperative to defend herself and her citizens against the violence and hatred spewed by Iran and groups, like Hamas, that are funded by the Iranians and others throughout the Arab world.
Stanley,
Thanks, but I'll skip any link that begins with "memri". Well-funded propaganda outlets add nothing to the debate.
Steve, nice piece as usual.
"UN Resolution 242 mandates Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories. Israel is non compliant. Please explain to me, a knucklehead idealist 5 year old, why the USA does not bring pressure on Israel."
Okay, Mr Knucklehead Idealist 5-Year Old, I will explain it to you. Step One: read the fucking document before you tell us what it says. Oops- sorry. I shouldn't talk to a 5-year old that way.
Resolution 242 (dated 1967) does not mandate Israel's withdrawal from the occupied territories. It says:
[The Security Council] Affirms that the fulfillment of Charter principles requires the establishment of a just and lasting peace in the Middle East which should include the application of both the following principles:
Withdrawal of Israeli armed forces from territories occupied in the recent conflict;
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...
Note the word "both." Res 242 is about land for peace. Israel withdraws, Arabs recognize Israel and negotiate an end to war. Res 242 does not mandate an Israeli withdrawal before peace. There is no a priori requirement that Israel must withdraw in the absence of an end to war and the recognition of its sovereignty by its neighbors and by the PA.
Further, 242 does not say "the" territories. It says "territories." And if you don't think that the absence of a definite article isn't crucial in a diplomatic document then you don't know how diplomatic language works. Israel has already withdrawn from most of the geographical area it occupied in 1967- all of Sinai, parts of the Golan Heights, and now Gaza. Res 242 contemplates that the scope of the withdrawal will be negotiated in the course of agreements that will lead to the "termination of all claims or states of belligerency..." Until then, Res 242 does not mandate that Israel must withdraw from territory.
So- let's hear the Knucklehead Idealist 5-Year Old and his buddies demand that Syria, Iraq, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran acknowledge the "sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence" of Israel, and then maybe your demand that Israel withdraw from the West Bank can be taken seriously.
"Okay, Mr Knucklehead Idealist 5-Year Old, I will explain it to you. Step One: read the fucking document before you tell us what it says. Oops- sorry. I shouldn't talk to a 5-year old that way."
Well, now I guess you will clarify the OTHER 61 UN resolutions that Israel is violating, eh? While you're at it, explain to us why we send 15 million bucks a day to a country conducting espionage and false flag operations against us.
Mr Pissed Off American, you agree with me that Mr Knucklehead is wrong, do you? Good, that's a start. Now, why don't you tell us about a UN resolution that Israel is violating and we'll talk about it instead of making up numbers?
"Stanley,
Thanks, but I'll skip any link that begins with "memri". Well-funded propaganda outlets add nothing to the debate."
Marky - That link was provided by Alan, not me.
Carter is right about the settlements but he is forgetting one thing with regards to borders. Israel has for years made a condition out of stopping the suicide bombers and arresting and disarming Hamas and other militant groups.This was always a pre-requiste. The Palestinian position was, "first you get out, withdraw to 1967 borders and then we'll see about disarming" and of course under Arafat disarming was a joke since he was secretly arming the militants. When Hamas renounces violence and disarms or the PLO disarms and imprisons the militants Israel will no longer have the need (or the excuse, depending on your point of view) of occupying Palestinian land. Security first, then withdrawl. And when Israel withdraws back to the 1967 borders, both politically and practically the settlements will have to be dismantled since there will be no Israeli support structure for them.
"Now, why don't you tell us about a UN resolution that Israel is violating and we'll talk about it instead of making up numbers?"
Posted by JR
Aside from the core issuesâ€â€refugees, Jerusalem, bordersâ€â€the major themes reflected in the U.N. resolutions against Israel over the years are its unlawful attacks on its neighbors; its violations of the human rights of the Palestinians, including deportations, demolitions of homes and other collective punishments; its confiscation of Palestinian land; its establishment of illegal settlements; and its refusal to abide by the U.N. Charter and the 1949 Fourth Geneva Convention Relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War.
- Donald Neff
Source: Paul Findley’s Deliberate Deceptions (1998, pages 192-4). This number only covers resolutions passed from 1955 through 1992.
UN Resolutions Against Israel, 1955-1992
Resolution 106: "...‘condemns’ Israel for Gaza raid"
Resolution 111: "...‘condemns’ Israel for raid on Syria that killed fifty-six people"
Resolution 127: "...‘recommends’ Israel suspend its ‘no-man’s zone’ in Jerusalem"
Resolution 162: "...‘urges’ Israel to comply with UN decisions"
Resolution 171: "...determines flagrant violations’ by Israel in its attack on Syria"
Resolution 228: "...‘censures’ Israel for its attack on Samu in the West Bank, then under Jordanian control"
Resolution 237: "...‘urges’ Israel to allow return of new 1967 Palestinian refugees"
Resolution 248: "...‘condemns’ Israel for its massive attack on Karameh in Jordan"
Resolution 250: "...‘calls’ on Israel to refrain from holding military parade in Jerusalem"
Resolution 251: "...‘deeply deplores’ Israeli military parade in Jerusalem in defiance of Resolution 250"
Resolution 252: "...‘declares invalid’ Israel’s acts to unify Jerusalem as Jewish capital"
Resolution 256: "...‘condemns’ Israeli raids on Jordan as ‘flagrant violation"
Resolution 259: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s refusal to accept UN mission to probe occupation"
Resolution 262: "...‘condemns’ Israel for attack on Beirut airport"
Resolution 265: "...‘condemns’ Israel for air attacks for Salt in Jordan"
Resolution 267: "...‘censures’ Israel for administrative acts to change the status of Jerusalem"
Resolution 270: "...‘condemns’ Israel for air attacks on villages in southern Lebanon"
Resolution 271: "...‘condemns’ Israel’s failure to obey UN resolutions on Jerusalem"
Resolution 279: "...‘demands’ withdrawal of Israeli forces from Lebanon"
Resolution 280: "....‘condemns’ Israeli’s attacks against Lebanon"
Resolution 285: "...‘demands’ immediate Israeli withdrawal form Lebanon"
Resolution 298: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s changing of the status of Jerusalem"
Resolution 313: "...‘demands’ that Israel stop attacks against Lebanon"
Resolution 316: "...‘condemns’ Israel for repeated attacks on Lebanon"
Resolution 317: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s refusal to release Arabs abducted in Lebanon"
Resolution 332: "...‘condemns’ Israel’s repeated attacks against Lebanon"
Resolution 337: "...‘condemns’ Israel for violating Lebanon’s sovereignty"
Resolution 347: "...‘condemns’ Israeli attacks on Lebanon"
Resolution 425: "...‘calls’ on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon"
Resolution 427: "...‘calls’ on Israel to complete its withdrawal from Lebanon’
Resolution 444: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s lack of cooperation with UN peacekeeping forces"
Resolution 446: "...‘determines’ that Israeli settlements are a ‘serious obstruction’ to peace and calls on Israel to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
Resolution 450: "...‘calls’ on Israel to stop attacking Lebanon"
Resolution 452: "...‘calls’ on Israel to cease building settlements in occupied territories"
Resolution 465: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s settlements and asks all member states not to assist Israel’s settlements program"
Resolution 467: "...‘strongly deplores’ Israel’s military intervention in Lebanon"
Resolution 468: "...‘calls’ on Israel to rescind illegal expulsions of two Palestinian mayors and a judge and to facilitate their return"
Resolution 469: "...‘strongly deplores’ Israel’s failure to observe the council’s order not to deport Palestinians"
Resolution 471: "...‘expresses deep concern’ at Israel’s failure to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention"
Resolution 476: "...‘reiterates’ that Israel’s claims to Jerusalem are ‘null and void’
Resolution 478: "...‘censures (Israel) in the strongest terms’ for its claim to Jerusalem in its ‘Basic Law’
Resolution 484: "...‘declares it imperative’ that Israel re-admit two deported Palestinian mayors"
Resolution 487: "...‘strongly condemns’ Israel for its attack on Iraq’s nuclear facility"
Resolution 497: "...‘decides’ that Israel’s annexation of Syria’s Golan Heights is ‘null and void’ and demands that Israel rescind its decision forthwith"
Resolution 498: "...‘calls’ on Israel to withdraw from Lebanon"
Resolution 501: "...‘calls’ on Israel to stop attacks against Lebanon and withdraw its troops"
Resolution 509: "...‘demands’ that Israel withdraw its forces forthwith and unconditionally from Lebanon"
Resolution 515: "...‘demands’ that Israel lift its siege of Beirut and allow food supplies to be brought in"
Resolution 517: "...‘censures’ Israel for failing to obey UN resolutions and demands that Israel withdraw its forces from Lebanon"
Resolution 518: "...‘demands’ that Israel cooperate fully with UN forces in Lebanon"
Resolution 520: "...‘condemns’ Israel’s attack into West Beirut"
Resolution 573: "...‘condemns’ Israel ‘vigorously’ for bombing Tunisia in attack on PLO headquarters
Resolution 587: "...‘takes note’ of previous calls on Israel to withdraw its forces from Lebanon and urges all parties to withdraw"
Resolution 592: "...‘strongly deplores’ the killing of Palestinian students at Bir Zeit University by Israeli troops"
Resolution 605: "...‘strongly deplores’ Israel’s policies and practices denying the human rights of Palestinians
Resolution 607: "...‘calls’ on Israel not to deport Palestinians and strongly requests it to abide by the Fourth Geneva Convention
Resolution 608: "...‘deeply regrets’ that Israel has defied the United Nations and deported Palestinian civilians"
Resolution 636: "...‘deeply regrets’ Israeli deportation of Palestinian civilians
Resolution 641: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s continuing deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 672: "...‘condemns’ Israel for violence against Palestinians at the Haram al-Sharif/Temple Mount
Resolution 673: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s refusal to cooperate with the United Nations
Resolution 681: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s resumption of the deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 694: "...‘deplores’ Israel’s deportation of Palestinians and calls on it to ensure their safe and immediate return
Resolution 726: "...‘strongly condemns’ Israel’s deportation of Palestinians
Resolution 799: "...‘strongly condemns’ Israel’s deportation of 413 Palestinians and calls for their immediate return.
POA- you haven't read a single one of these, have you? You just cut and pasted. If you want to read a few, then we can talk about them. One thing you'll want to know is that the resolutions you cite are General Assembly resolutions, which are non-binding- Resolution 242 is a Security Council resolution.
Steve,
As always, a fraught and painful issue for everyone.
My thoughts, for what they're worth: Israel finds itself negotiating with adversaries who believe time is on their side. They believe this for three reasons: (1) Logical. Israel can win innumerable wars. It only needs to lose one. (2) Historical. They got rid of the Crusaders after a hundred or so years. (3) Demographic. Palestinian population is growing much faster than Israeli.
In other words, this is a sensible belief on their part. The tactical upshot of this is that if you believe time is on your side, then in negotiations, you drag things out. Because you'll get a better deal tomorrow than you can get today.
How do you negotiate with such an adversary? I think it's obvious that you have to change the dynamic that puts time on their side. You have to change the situation so that time isn't necessarily on their side. You have to arrange things so that your adversary becomes uncertain that he'll get a better deal tomorrow than he will today. That in fact, there's a good chance he'll get a worse deal.
This is what the settlements do. And while there's no doubt that it's intrinsically painful for the Palestinians to see their land gradually expropriated and absorbed into Israel, I think one of the reasons they're so angry about them, is that they understand perfectly well that the settlements directly attack one of their primary sources of leverage in negotiation.
In other words, the Palestinians are acting rationally in dragging their feet coming to an agreement. And the Israelis are acting rationally in doing something to hurry them along.
I just read a declassified paper on lecture "points" that are to be used to sell the long war on terrorism, and it too uses "time" as a major issue in fighting what they refer to as "violent Muslim extremism". What was truly alarming about this paper was how simplistic it was and how it completely placed the blame for hostilities in the Muslim court, COMPLETELY IGNORING our role in exploiting, alienating, and enraging the Muslim communities. If any of you are interested in the kind of mindset that is driving the "long war", I suggest you read this "see spot run" bit of literary pablum. If these are the "talking points" that our Joint Staff is using to rationalize this so called "war", than we are in deep shit indeed.
Alarming too is the central role that these asses have placed on Iraq in "selling" their "long war on terrorism", and the scenarios they lay out as "results" of an "early withdrawal". These assholes DESTROY the only truly secular country in the region by waging a war based on BALD FACED LIES. They then, through unbeleavable corruption, malfeasance, criminality, and ineptitude, allow a decay of Iraqi infrastructure and security that virtually GUARANTEES a breakdown of societal civility and function, opening the door for the emergence of a theocratic Shiite power structure. Then the lying sleazy bastards use the chaos as an excuse for a continued military campaign.
You can it paper here...
Reader Comments (26) - post a comment