 |
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded again Sunday to charges that he was responsible for failures in the peace process leveled against him by former President Bill Clinton in remarks reported exclusively on ...
Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu responded again Sunday to charges that he was responsible for failures in the peace process leveled against him by former President Bill Clinton in remarks reported exclusively on The Cable.
Netanyahu, who first responded to Clinton on Friday evening on ABC News, was again confronted with the former president's accusations on Sunday morning on NBC's Meet the Press. Host David Gregory drew Netanyahu's attention to this passage in our story:
Clinton affirmed that the United States should veto the Palestinian resolution at the U.N. Security Council for member-state status, because the Israelis need security guarantees before agreeing to the creation of a Palestinian state. But the Netanyahu government has moved away from the consensus for peace, making a final status agreement more difficult, Clinton said.
"That's what happened. Every American needs to know this. That's how we got to where we are," Clinton said. "The real cynics believe that the Netanyahu's government's continued call for negotiations over borders and such means that he's just not going to give up the West Bank."
You know, I regretfully and respectfully disagree with former President Clinton. He should know, more than anyone else, that in the peace conference he presided in at Camp David in 2000 with [Yasir] Arafat and former Prime Minister [Ehud] Barak, it was the Palestinian side who walked away from his own parameters. And in 2008, President Bush can tell you how the Palestinian side led by President Abbas walked away, just would not close in on another prime minister's suggestions.
In the two-and-a-half years since then, anybody conversant with the facts knows that I made these offers again and again, called for two states for two peoples, froze the settlements -- nobody did that, ever -- for nearly a year. They didn't come. They don't want to come. And they go around to the U.N. I disagree with that.
"No, we could arrive at an arrangement that takes care of Israel's security needs and gives the Palestinians a life of dignity for themselves," Netanyahu said. "But they have to have leaders who are prepared to do that. You know what? I hope they do, not just for our sake but for their sake too."
The Israeli newspaper Haaretz reported that Netanyahu was so mad about Clinton's remarks that, "he asked his aides to request that the White House issue a statement distancing itself from Clinton's statements."
The White House declined to say whether they had received a formal or informal complaint about Clinton's remarks from Netanyahu's staff. Asked for a response to Clinton's remarks by The Cable, White House spokesman Tommy Vietor sent along this statement, which just repeated the administrations standard talking points.
"President Obama expressed his views clearly Wednesday at the outset of his meeting with Prime Minister Netanyahu when he said that peace must be negotiated and cannot be imposed on the parties," Vietor said. "Actions at the United Nations will achieve neither statehood nor self-determination for the Palestinians. The Israelis and Palestinians must negotiate through these very difficult issues that have kept the parties apart for decades to achieve the ultimate goal of two states, side by side, living in peace and security."
GRANDEROHO4:28 PM ETSeptember 26, 2011The problem withThe problem with multilateralism is that is it has shown to be unpopular with voters, I really hope that Obama's position to go down that route(I know that some may argue that he isn't, I do) doesn't end up giving fuel to republicans to use it as a political issue.
I hope there are enough people on both sides that want to see this problem actually resolved and not enough that would just like to see screw this up. REPLY SCOTTGOOSE7:43 PM ETSeptember 26, 2011U.S. Disdain for U.N., Not Multilateralism @Granderoho:
While by and large quite happy with the concept of multilateralism and supportive of Obama's efforts to that effect, Americans who're even perfunctorily familiar with the U.N. are lukewarm at best about the institution. Over time, moreover, many have grown increasingly dismayed and disillusioned at the U.N.'s sluggishness in addressing problems and demonstrable inability to ameliorate them. Atop the laundry list of complaints sit the reality that a cash-strapped U.S. provides a preponderance of monies to an institution whose members abhor it and Israel even more, and is at best somewhat helpful; at worst, it's a counterproductive obstacle to effecting change.
That said, multilateralism is hardly a wedge issue, save for dyed-in-the-wool neo-conservatives whose reign is (likely, given the state of the union, permanently) over. But considering that the world is stacked against an Israel who's unwilling to take steps that hamper its national defense so long as the Palestinians remain divided and lack the infrastructure as well as the will to assume the mantle of statehood. This conflict will keep on chugging along, with the Palestinians' Phyrric victory of obtaining "non-member observer status" at the U.N. notwithstanding. REPLY MMCMILLAN11:26 PM ETSeptember 26, 2011SoA foreign leader (one that represents a racist apartheid state) demands that our president issue a statement against another US president?
The fun part of watching this is how the zionist war machine just can't help itself. The feeling of being the uebermensch, the chosen one is so strong that they feel entitled to ruling the world. After orchestrating wars based on lies that cost us $5.5 trillion and thousands of lives, after destroying our economy on Wall Street, after alienating America first from Europe and now from most of the world, the zionists still have the nerve to dictate our President what to do.
Last I checked, AIPAC's funding sources are drying up quickly with the ponzi scheme on Wall Street coming to an end. Bernanke is trying all he can but nothing appears to be working. They have destroyed the economy and we are going into a depression. Not even Glenn Beck will be able to save your war machine.