Advertisement

Archive for Monday, May 23, 2011

Obama: Israel’s 1967 borders reflect longstanding policy

May 23, 2011

Advertisement

— President Barack Obama defended his endorsement of Israel’s 1967 boundaries as the basis for a future Palestine, telling America’s pro-Israel lobby Sunday that his views reflected longstanding U.S. policy that needed to be stated clearly.

He also said the Jewish state will face growing isolation without “a credible peace process.”

Obama tried to alleviate concerns that his administration was veering in a pro-Palestinian direction, placing his Mideast policy speech Thursday in the context of Israel’s security. He told the American Israel Public Affairs Committee that those border lines must be subject to negotiated land swaps and said these principles reflected U.S. thinking dating to President Bill Clinton’s mediation efforts.

“If there’s a controversy, then it’s not based in substance,” Obama said in a well-received speech. “What I did on Thursday was to say publicly what has long been acknowledged privately. I have done so because we cannot afford to wait another decade, or another two decades, or another three decades, to achieve peace.”

The event was eagerly anticipated after Obama outlined his vision for the changing Middle East at the State Department on Thursday and then clashed in a White House meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu a day later.

The speech came ahead of a weeklong trip for the president to Europe, where he’ll tend to old friends in the Western alliance and look to secure their help with the political upheaval across the Arab world and the decade-long conflict in Afghanistan.

Netanyahu said in a statement after Obama’s remarks that he supported the president’s desire to advance peace and resolved to work with him to find ways to renew the negotiations. “Peace is a vital need for us all,” Netanyahu said.

The Israeli leader’s tone was far more reserved than last week, when he issued an impassioned rejection of the 1967 borders as “indefensible” and even appeared to publicly admonish Obama after their White House meeting.

Netanyahu was to address the pro-Israel lobby tonight and Congress on Tuesday.

Obama didn’t retreat from his remarks on what it would take to reach a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians. Repeating a large section of his Thursday speech, he said the result must come through negotiation, and said Israeli border security and protections from acts of terrorism must be ensured. An Israeli withdrawal from territory should be followed by Palestinians’ responsibility for security in a nonmilitarized state.

“By definition, it means that the parties themselves — Israelis and Palestinians — will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967,” Obama said. That was before Israel seized the West Bank, Gaza Strip and East Jerusalem, and a half-million Israelis settled on war-won lands.

“It is a well-known formula to all who have worked on this issue for a generation,” the president said. “It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last 44 years, including the new demographic realities on the ground and the needs of both sides.”

Obama’s emphasis on what is meant by “mutually agreed land swaps” reflected a part of the equation Netanyahu largely disregarded when he vociferously rejected the 1967 borders as a basis for peace.

Palestinians have expressed willingness to let Israel annex some of the largest settlements closest to the demarcation, as long as they are compensated with Israeli land equal in size and quality. In the last serious negotiations in 2008, the sides split over how much West Bank land Israel would keep in the trade.

Comments

LoveThsLife 2 years, 11 months ago

I think it's important to note that it is more beneficial for Israel to negotiate now, before Palestine goes to the UN and petitions to be recognized as a separate state. President Obama was trying to dissuade Palestinian leadership from going to the UN and to sit down and talk with Israel instead. By being so stubborn Israel hasn't done themselves any favors.

0

swan_diver 2 years, 11 months ago

Israel is a rump state run by vulgar criminals of the worst sort. Before it's over, its sordid historical path will be seen to have done far more damage to the welfare of world Jewry than good.

0

rockchalk1977 2 years, 11 months ago

Sen. Joseph Lieberman harshly criticized The Obama's speech on the Middle East, saying parts of it were “profoundly ill-advised” and “an unhelpful and surprising set of remarks about Israel and the Palestinians that will not advance the peace process and in fact is likely to set it back."

Obama's pressure on Israel will alienate American Jews, like Lieberman, who make up about 2 percent of population. Like lost sheep, about 80% of Jews voted for Obama in 2008. Obama would have risked losing a large share of Jewish support only if he believed it could be offset elsewhere. In 2008 Obama had an active outreach to America's Muslim community and the number of American Muslims is growing. A great concern is the mountain of cash an American president who turned against Israel might harvest from donors in oil-rich Muslim nations. Obama is not the first Democratic presidential candidate to pander for Muslim petrodollars.

Every single policy decision the Campaigner-In-Chief makes will revolve around his re-election effort in 2012.

0

just_another_bozo_on_this_bus 2 years, 11 months ago

The US shouldn't adopt a "pro-Palestinian" policy. But we also should move away from the wholly and strictly pro-Israeli policy that has dominated US foreign policy for the last 50 or so years, at a cost of many $billion to US taxpayers.

0

DeaconBlue 2 years, 11 months ago

heh heh, this guy is a train wreck. He is just making up stuff now. He reminds me of Bush.

I wonder when 'Right Between The Ears' starts using this goof for joke segments like they do Bush? Listened to the show last night and their Bush is an idiot routine was funny.

0

Commenting has been disabled for this item.