The State Department “applauds” the Libyan transition council getting a UN seat– while insisting that opposing a Palestinian seat will not isolate the U.S. in the Arab world. On Friday a State Department spokesperson challenged a reporter who said that the US was isolating itself through this stance to produce “polling data” showing Arab opinion on the Palestinian question.
Even as the reporter pointed out: Saudi Arabia, Jordan and Turkey (yes Muslim, not Arab) have all been fervent in supporting the Palestinian bid.
That’s the news from Thursday and Friday’s press briefings at the State Department by spokesman Mark Toner, relevant sections are below. I gather the dogged questioner is Matt Lee of Associated Press. A great reporter. First Thursday, asking about the Palestinian statehood initiative:
QUESTION: I’m asking why you lack the creativity to use this as leverage to get them back to the negotiating table, instead of trying to fight a losing battle in which you’re going to be the only – you’re going to be isolated, the Israelis are going to be isolated, because if they go to the General Assembly, they’re going to win.
MR. TONER: Precisely because —
QUESTION: So why don’t —
MR. TONER: — because we think it’s —
QUESTION: Why isn’t there anyone in this Administration that has the brainpower, the creativity, to use this as a positive thing to build momentum instead of regarding it as completely a negative thing?
MR. TONER: Because it’s counterproductive.
Then here is Friday’s briefing:
Spokesman Mark Toner: And before beginning, I did want to note that the UN General Assembly, as many of you saw, has voted to give Libya’s seat in the world body, the UN, to the former rebels’ National Transitional Council. We certainly applaud this significant milestone in Libya’s remarkable transition.
And with that, I’ll take your questions.
QUESTION: Great. Why can’t the Palestinians even get a seat?…
QUESTION: Okay. So the Israelis have said that the threat – and I put that in quotes, because I don’t know if it’s a threat or if it’s just an advice – piece of advice as to the consequences – that if this does happen, that they could start annexing settlement blocs in the West Bank, that they could withhold millions and millions of dollars in tax money that they – tax revenue that they collect for the Palestinians. Is that counterproductive as well?
MR. TONER: Again, we’re getting ahead of ourselves. We’ve been clear on our position on settlements.
QUESTION: What’s more counterproductive, a symbolic gesture at the UN or actually choking off (inaudible) —
MR. TONER: I’m not going to grade what’s counterproductive —
QUESTION: — maybe so much (inaudible) —
MR. TONER: — what may be more counterproductive.
QUESTION: — actually makes a difference on the ground —
MR. TONER: And Matt – and Matt —
QUESTION: — and not about whether the Israelis’ feelings —
MR. TONER: Matt, our efforts remain focused on getting the sides back to the negotiating table. We’ve said all along neither side, or both sides, rather, should refrain from any action that impedes that progress. And that remains our position.
QUESTION: Can you answer the question why this Administration is so intent on squandering what little goodwill it might have in the Arab world?
MR. TONER: I disagree with the premise, so that’s my answer…
QUESTION: Mark, are you saying that you disagree with the fact that this position that you’ve taken is unpopular among Arab countries?
MR. TONER: Again, you’ll have to go out and produce your own polling data and ask these Arab countries themselves.
QUESTION: I’m asking you. You said you disagreed with the premise of my question. I’m asking you are you aware of the –
MR. TONER: You ask an extremely leading question. What I’m saying is –
QUESTION: — are you aware the Turkish Government, the (inaudible) Government, Jordanian Government, the Government of Saudi Arabia, for example?
MR. TONER: Matt –
QUESTION: Are you aware of their feelings about – their statements –
MR. TONER:
We can go around and around on this. All I can say is that our position remains that we want to see the parties back into direct negotiations. We’re going to remain focused on that goal. We believe it’s the right path to pursue, regardless of public opinion or opinion elsewhere. We believe it’s the right path to pursue because it’s going to result in two states living side by side in peace and security.
