News

Obama’s visit will produce no meaningful talks, mainstream voices say

Here is a roundup of mainly-mainstream voices’ responding to Obama’s diplomacy yesterday.  

Last night Chuck Todd on NBC Nightly News emphasized the fact that Obama had now completely abandoned his opposition to settlements, and wants Abbas to enter negotiations without any freeze on the illegal Israeli activity. (Transcript at bottom of post; even George W. Bush took a stronger position.) The New York Times shares this emphasis, and says that Abbas might fold: 

visiting the Israeli-occupied West Bank, Mr. Obama urged the Palestinians to return to the bargaining table even if Israel did not meet their condition of halting construction of Jewish settlements in Palestinian territories — a demand he, too, made at the start of his first term, but which had only a temporary, partial impact.

….By not renewing his demand that Israel halt settlement construction to get a new round of talks started, Mr. Obama was, in effect, conceding that years of careful study about how to nudge the peace process forward had failed to produce tangible results..

For his part, Mr. Abbas reiterated the Palestinian demand that Israel stop settlement construction. But he did not explicitly cite that as a precondition for entering into face-to-face talks with Mr. Netanyahu. Such talks have been quiescent since 2010.

“It is the duty of the Israeli government to at least halt the activity, so we can speak of the issues,” Mr. Abbas said in Arabic, speaking through an interpreter. “The issue of settlements is clear: we never gave up our vision, whether now or previously.”

There are signs that Mr. Abbas may be ready to return to negotiations with the Israelis. A draft copy of his talking points for the session with Mr. Obama, obtained by The New York Times, suggested that he was prepared to soften his long-held demand that Mr. Netanyahu publicly halt all building of settlements in favor of private assurances.

John Judis at the New Republic says Obama’s moral push for a two-state solution in his speech to Israeli youth will have little effect. And Judis warns about the Iran markers laid down:

Obama did not publicly alter the position on Iran that he took during the campaign. He favored “strong and principled diplomacy” but said that “America will do what it must to prevent a nuclear-armed Iran.” He joked about Netanyahu’s penchant for drawing “red lines,” but did not say what America’s would be. Still, the damage to American flexibility may have already been done. As was evident during his second speech, Obama has already gotten himself into a situation where if diplomacy stalls completely, and he doesn’t attack, Israel and its supporters will be justified in accusing him of betraying his word.

Obama reiterated in his speech that if Iran does acquire a nuclear weapon, it cannot be “contained” the way the Soviet Union or China was during the Cold War. That’s a questionable point to begin with, but to buttress it, he added another questionable point.  Israel, he said, is “faced with the prospect of a nuclear-armed Iranian government that has called for Israel’s destruction.” In other words, containment can’t work because Iran is already committed to gaining nuclear weapons and using them to destroy Israel.

Mitchell Plitnick says that Obama will do nothing serious for any possible resolution of the conflict, it’s pointless, he’s moving on:

So, Obama goes to Israel and speaks to Israelis as if he was the president of AIPAC, rather than the United States. He speaks of the unshakeable bond between the US and Israel. He says it is based on common interests (though he doesn’t really get into much detail about what those might be) and shared values. He speaks of the need for peace and acquiesces to the terms that Israel must be a Jewish state without qualifying in the slightest that it should not continue to treat its non-Jewish citizens as unequal. He tries to restore the battered and broken framework of the Oslo Process. He lauds the Iron Dome system, whose effectiveness is increasingly being questioned, and he pledges more money for it, while sequestering US defense workers out of their jobs.

The President reaffirms US support for Israel, and does not qualify that, either. He ignores the existing and growing apartheid system, and refrains from reminding the ever-democratic Israeli people that they are holding millions of Arabs without basic human and civil rights. No matter what, the US will continue to support Israel, and he glides over the fact that this is not due to any great love for Israel, but because of the influence of the Israel Lobby.

In spite of such restraints, Obama spoke his mind, at several points, about the state of Israeli democracy, and the injustice of the settlements. But these words paled in comparison to Obama’s lack of resolve to do anything meaningful about them. He warned Israelis of their country’s growing international isolation, but offered no ideas as to what the US might do to help with that. He called for two states, but offered no path towards that goal. The implication is that America won’t do anything, anymore.  Indeed, his decision to speak to Israeli students instead of the Knesset translates that message for us: I know your government is disinterested in peace, so until you, the people, divert it from that course, there’s nothing I can or will do for Israel.

J Street, which can justly claim to be influencing the president, is celebrating the speech:

“President Obama’s speech is the most powerful moment the region has seen in many years. He laid out a courageous vision for the future and called on ordinary people to push their political leaders to make it happen,” said J Street President Jeremy Ben-Ami.

“This speech encapsulated everything our organization believes and was founded to achieve. We pledge to work as hard as we can, with all our resources, to mobilize support in the United States to help make the president’s inspiring vision a reality,” he said.

MJ Rosenberg is also positive about the visit. At the Washington Spectator, he says that peace talks will ensue. Though there’s this:

Maybe it was his view of the separation wall from his helicopter or maybe the fact that he was away from the Israelis but the face [Obama] presented at President Mahmoud Abbas’ welcoming ceremony was utterly different. He looked miserable. Was it because he just didn’t want to be there or because he is ashamed that his administration has decided to parrot the Israeli line on pretty much everything? No matter the reason, he seemed sad and his words were halting.

He didn’t offer the Palestinians much of anything though, other than the stricken look on his face. Yet, there were signs that the times are changing. He repeatedly referred to a Palestinian state, using the strongest formulation for that concept, “State of Palestine.” (Of course, he knows that his administration stood with Israel against any UN recognition of such an entity last year.) Nonetheless, his references to Palestinian statehood were utterly unambiguous and clear.

And, in words that must have shook Netanyahu, Obama referred to “the moral force of nonviolence” to resist the occupation.

Rosenberg was enthused by Obama’s pleas for “justice” for Palestinians during his big speech yesterday to Israelis, and his off the cuff comments about meeting Palestinian youth and seeing they are like his children. I was thrilled by that part; it was the most emotional portion of that speech. It was Obama finally delivering the Cairo speech, Palestinian conditions are “intolerable,” to Israelis (and we all know that Arabs don’t count; it’s only when Israelis are included that the discourse can move forward):

But the Palestinian people’s right to self-determination, their right to justice, must also be recognized.  (Applause.) 

Put yourself in their shoes.  Look at the world through their eyes.  It is not fair that a Palestinian child cannot grow up in a state of their own.  (Applause.)  Living their entire lives with the presence of a foreign army that controls the movements not just of those young people but their parents, their grandparents, every single day.  It’s not just when settler violence against Palestinians goes unpunished.  (Applause.)  It’s not right to prevent Palestinians from farming their lands; or restricting a student’s ability to move around the West Bank; or displace Palestinian families from their homes.  (Applause.)  Neither occupation nor expulsion is the answer.  (Applause.)  Just as Israelis built a state in their homeland, Palestinians have a right to be a free people in their own land.  (Applause.)

I’m going off script here for a second, but before I came here, I met with a group of young Palestinians from the age of 15 to 22.  And talking to them, they weren’t that different from my daughters.  They weren’t that different from your daughters or sons.  I honestly believe that if any Israeli parent sat down with those kids, they’d say, I want these kids to succeed; I want them to prosper.  (Applause.)  I want them to have opportunities just like my kids do.  I believe that’s what Israeli parents would want for these kids if they had a chance to listen to them and talk to them.  (Applause.)  I believe that.

Daniel Levy, at Foreign Policy, acknowledges the frank Zionism of the speech. Then says you’re not “serious” if you think that meaningful talks will ensue:

Obama’s speech may have abandoned objectivity and made for uneasy listening for any Palestinian or even neutral observer, but he nonetheless made a powerful case to his mainstream, Zionist audience. It is a case Israelis seldom hear, even from their own supposedly liberal politicians..

Great speech, but what next? The visit has offered nothing new on the programmatic side, no plan for going forward. My hunch is that Obama knows that putting Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas back in a room together will achieve nothing, and that he is in no great hurry or places no great faith in those talks. Obama will also be very aware that while Netanyahu repeated his two-state message in their press conference, he nonetheless did not incorporate that language or anything approximating it in the coalition guidelines and agreements for his new government. Less than half of Netanyahu’s cabinet is on record supporting a two-state deal, and many coalition ministers, deputy ministers, and Knesset members openly advocate the annexation of the West Bank. Obama presumably also knows that making one speech and then hoping that the Israeli public will do the rest of the work is not serious.

If Obama does decide to prioritize a peace deal during his second term, and that is a big if, an admittedly optimistic take could look like this: Secretary of State John Kerry might shuttle between the parties to discuss the parameters and even convene direct or trilateral talks. He will also court support from Arab states like Saudi Arabia and Egypt. Obama in his Ramallah press conference with Abbas seemed to rule out a focus on incremental steps for their own sake (he might be tempted by the idea of a Palestinian state with interim borders, but on that too Netanyahu’s best offer will fall short of providing an opening). Progress will be elusive; Netanyahu will offer little.

Here are Obama’s words on settlements during his press conference with Abbas yesterday. During questioning:

 Now, one of the challenges I know has been continued settlement activity in the West Bank area.  And I’ve been clear with Prime Minister Netanyahu and other Israeli leadership that it has been the United States’ policy, not just for my administration but for all proceeding administrations, that we do not consider continued settlement activity to be constructive, to be appropriate, to be something that can advance the cause of peace.  So I don’t think there’s any confusion in terms of what our position is. 

I will say, with respect to Israel, that the politics there are complex and I recognize that that’s not an issue that’s going to be solved immediately.  It’s not going to be solved overnight.
On the other hand, what I shared with President Abbas and I will share with the Palestinian people is that if the expectation is, is that we can only have direct negotiations when everything is settled ahead of time, then there’s no point for negotiations…

With respect to whether there’s a requirement for a freeze or moratorium, I want to repeat what I just said earlier, which is if the only way to even begin the conversations is that we get everything right at the outset, or at least each party is constantly negotiating about what’s required to get into talks in the first place, then we’re never going to get to the broader issue, which is how do you actually structure a state of Palestine that is a sovereign, contiguous, and provide the Palestinian people dignity, and how do you provide Israel confidence about its security — which are the core issues.

The core issue right now is, how do we get sovereignty for the Palestinian people, and how do we assure security for the Israeli people?  And that’s the essence of this negotiation.  And that’s not to say settlements are not important.  It is to say that if we solve those two problems, the settlement problem will be solved. 

So I don’t want to put the cart before the horse.  I want to make sure that we are getting to the core issues and the substance, understanding that both sides should be doing what they can to build confidence, to rebuild a sense of trust.  And that’s where, hopefully, the U.S. government can be helpful.

41 Comments
Most Voted
Newest Oldest
Inline Feedbacks
View all comments

Totally agree Phil.

Some comments on what Obama did and what I think the impact will be.

First, let me share a perspective on the “Obama Zionist Submission Tour” as likely perceived from the broader ME region and from the 95%+ of the world that supports Palestinians:
– Obama is Uncle Tom for the Zionists
– Obama is an extreme contortionist capable of extreme twisting to pretzel himself deep in the a** of extreme Zionists

With that global context, what will the impact of the “Obama Zionist Submission Tour” have on peace for the region and justice for the Palestinians? To achieve peace, the following fundamentals must exist as necessary conditions for success:

1) The colonial power must be willing to, or must be convinced to, give up all the illegally occupied land. THIS IS THE MOST CRITICAL ELEMENT.
2) The peace negotiations must take place in an environment where both parties see a hope for an acceptable outcome.
3) The conquered people must trust the mediator.

On 1), Israel will NEVER give up any occupied land of Palestine. nutanyahoo’s new government is more extreme with benett saying to Obama no one can occupy one’s own land!! Peres told Obama that the new coalition will make it very difficult for nutanyahoo to negotiate towards peace. So Obama’s talk of jewish greatness and being a gift to the world over centuries and that regardless to what the criminal zionist regime does, USA will always back it, all this leads to further zionist extremism. It is clear to the criminal zionist regime that there are no consequences to its actions….. never ever will there be any. So, not only is peace with the Palestinians now much farther than ever, Obama has given the green light to the zionist regime to attack Iran. Obama will come to regret this obvious a**-kissing blunder.

Great peace move, Mr. President! Way to go. Well done.

On 2), Obama also gave the green light to the criminal zionist regime to continue its settlements and expansion into more Palestinian land, rendering the 2SS more impossible than ever before. In his zionist contortionist pretzel act, he missed the golden opportunity to say you cannot negotiate over the remaining 22% of the pizza while you are speedily devouring that 22% at ever increasing rates. Not only that, but he even chided the Palestinians for not accepting to start negotiations while their 22% on which to negotiate is being gobbled up with no consequences.

A truly missed peace opportunity, Mr. President! Way to go. Well done.

On 3), his extreme zionist position, love, enchantment, and sellout to the other side removes any doubt (if any doubt still existed) that Obama and USA are honest and fair and impartial brokers. They clearly are not and will NEVER be.

Again, great peace move Mr. President! Way to go. Well done.

So, where do Palestinians go from here? What should we do? What hope is left? What justice can be salvaged? What fairness can be expected?

My EXTREMELY FAINT hope if any is left after seeing this despicable grovelling spectacle is that Obama MAY have a strategy here…. First, ensure to the Israeli citizens that they are secure and strong and powerful so they can afford to withdraw from the OCCUPIED State of Palestine, and Second, if they don’t move within 3 months, then put forward his own detailed peace agreement with a CLEAR TIMETABLE accompanied by REAL PRESSURE on Israel to force it to happen.

I just hope that the olive branch that has been extended by the Palestinians since Oslo does not drop to the ground soon. But then again, when there is no hope……………. Otherwise, it’s 1SS. Come to think of it, 1SS should be the Palestinian strategy after all. Why should we care fighting hard for a 2SS when the criminal zionist regime is adamantly against it?? We’ll play along. Let the 1SS unfold and take hold!

What is worse, obama’s nonsense or the people that believe his rhetoric? Even a guy like Rosenberg seems fooled.

What Obama basically said was was that he supported a ‘independent palestinian state’. This is what US have said for atleast 40 years! In fact hes rhetoric is even worse since he didnt said that this state should be according to pre-1967 war borders, something previous american presidents have explicitly said.

If the palestinian authority didnt were so tightly tied to Israel and US interests they would have been going to International Court to end this farce by this time.

[Obama’s] off the cuff comments about meeting Palestinian youth and seeing they are like his children.

Wow! Palestinians are people, just like you and me. What an extraordinary realisation!

Every time the POTUS or Dept. of State says things like ” we do not consider continued settlement activity to be constructive, to be appropriate, to be something that can advance the cause of peace. So I don’t think there’s any confusion in terms of what our position is. ”

Well, OBVIOUSLY there IS confusion. This statement is a lie. There are no consequences for the aggressive illegal settlement activities! Nothing, Nada!

In fact there are non-profit tax exempt organizations in the USA receiving tax deductible funds from donors to support the Israeli settlements.

This is like a parent scolding their kid who goes out to steal cars and gives them the gas money on the way out the door.

The US continues to completely discredit itself in the world stage.

HaYovel is one of many groups in the United States using tax-exempt donations to help Jews establish permanence in the Israeli-occupied territories — effectively obstructing the creation of a Palestinian state, widely seen as a necessary condition for Middle East peace.

http://www.nytimes.com/2010/07/06/world/middleeast/06settle.html?pagewanted=all&_r=0

RE: “Obama has already gotten himself into a situation where if diplomacy stalls completely, and he doesn’t attack, Israel and its supporters will be justified in accusing him of betraying his word.” ~ Judis

FROM: Tikkun/Network of Spiritual Progressives
Sent: Monday, March 04, 2013 5:57 PM
To: dickerson
Subject: Don’t Let AIPAC Push the U.S. Into War with Iran!!!

[EXCERPTS] Don’t let AIPAC push the U.S. into war with Iran!! Tikkun and NSP are teaming up with Peace Action West to stop this war before it starts!!!
The run-up to war doesn’t happen overnight. It’s made up of small steps to slowly build acceptance for the idea of military action.
A group of senators have introduced just such a bill that urges US military and other support if Israel attacks Iran. . .
. . . It is very difficult for senators to say no to pressure to support this bill if they aren’t hearing from the other side. Your senators need to hear from you right now. And Peace Action West has set up the mechanism to get your message to them right away. . .
● Tell your senators to oppose this backdoor to war with Iran. – http://www.capwiz.com/peaceactionwest/issues/alert/?alertid=62464786&type=CO
. . . In ‘Tikkun’ magazine we’ve explained in detail why an assault on Iran is destructive to Israel’s best interests, and destructive to the best interests of the U.S. and global peace. With your help, we bought a full page ad against a first strike on Iran, and we would like to do that again, this time in the ‘Washington Post’.
If you wish to sign and donate to such an ad, please click here. – https://salsa.democracyinaction.org/o/525/p/salsa/donation/common/public/?donate_page_KEY=8382 If you have trouble donating on line, send us a check made out to Tikkun and sent to Tikkun/No War on Iran, 2342 Shattuck Ave, #1200, Berkeley, Ca. 94704. . . .