There are still nine weeks to go before Barack Obama takes his oath of office to become the 44th President of the United States, but already expectations are running high that he will dive headlong into negotiating a final settlement of the poisonous Arab-Israeli dispute.
Whether Mr Obama will actually declare his commitment to negotiating a final Middle East peace deal in his inauguration address, and whether New York Senator Hillary Clinton, in her capacity as the new Secretary of State, will attempt to emulate her husband's Sisyphus-like effort to persuade the Israelis and Palestinians to sign a peace deal, are issues that still need to be thrashed out.
What is clear is that Mr Obama is determined to ensure the tone of his presidency is very different to that of the Bush Administration.
In his interview with America's 60 Minutes last weekend, Mr Obama stated that one of his first acts will be to close Guantánamo Bay, though precisely what he plans to do with the 250 or so inmates who, by their own admission, are hard-core al-Qaeda activists, is another matter.
There have already been reports of former inmates taking part in attacks on coalition forces after their release, and Mr Obama's credibility would be seriously undermined if any of those released ended up killing Americans.
Making such bold gestures are fraught with risk, which is why Mr Obama will need all the experience he can get - former Democratic presidential nominee John Kerry is another candidate for the State Department job - to tackle the treacherous currents of world affairs, especially if Mr Obama immediately commits his presidency to resurrecting a key policy initiative of his Democratic predecessor at the White House, the Middle East peace process.
When you look at the modern landscape of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with its imposing concrete security barrier separating two deeply entrenched and hostile communities, it is hard to think that it is only eight years since Bill Clinton nearly pulled off the impossible in persuading the warring factions to sign a peace deal at Camp David in 2000.
That deal, which would have returned to Palestinian control more than 90 per cent of the land captured by Israel during the 1967 Six Day War, was rejected as unacceptable by Yasser Arafat, the then Palestinian leader, thereby initiating the murderous cycle of violence that has defined relations between Israel and the Palestinians ever since.
Mr Clinton expended an enormous amount of energy and political capital on trying to reach a deal, starting with the signing of the Oslo Accords at the White House in 1993 and ending at Camp David at his presidency's end.
The whole process fell into abeyance during the Bush presidency, not least because the latter was loth to expend his energy on the unattainable.
With the Democrats returning to power in Washington, and so many ghosts of the Clinton Administration emerging from the wilderness to take up posts in the new administration, there is a general expectation that Mr Obama will try to pick up where Mr Clinton left off, as part of a wider campaign to tackle the roots of the war on terror.
It was for this reason that David Miliband, the Foreign Secretary, undertook his diplomatic mission this week to Syria, Lebanon and Israel, which was widely seen as a "pathfinder" tour to explore just how realistic the prospects are for reviving the Middle East peace process.
Only on Thursday, the International Atomic Energy Agency (IAEA) in Vienna said the Syrian site bombed by Israel last year had features resembling those of a nuclear reactor, the clearest suggestion yet that Damascus had embarked on an illicit nuclear weapons programme, hardly the act of a country intent on making peace.
Then there is al-Qaeda, which has posted an audio message denouncing Mr Obama as a "house negro" doing the bidding of his white masters. Not even the trailer-trash white supremacists who threatened to kill Mr Obama during the presidential campaign went that far.
And then there is the perennial problem of Iran, which is viscerally opposed to any deal that recognises Israel's right to exist, and where the IAEA says scientists are steadily increasing stockpiles of uranium while having "no communication whatsoever" with the IAEA's nuclear inspectors as to their true intentions.
Mr Clinton, it should be remembered, bears much of the blame for the emergence of al-Qaeda and the development of Iran's nuclear programme.
Al-Qaeda developed its capability to conduct acts of mass terrorism on his watch, while Iran made significant strides in the development of its nuclear programmes.
But Mr Clinton failed to take effective action against either of these emerging threats because of his preoccupation with securing a Middle East peace deal.
Consequently, the international environment in which Mr Obama will find himself operating will be very different from that of 2000, and, unlike his Democratic predecessor in the White House, he will no longer be able to ignore the threats posed by al-Qaeda and Iran, however much he might want to achieve a historic peace deal.
Otherwise, the only change Mr Obama is likely to achieve is change for the worse.
Posted by Adrian Gilbert on November 21, 2008 4:00 PM Dude 90% of Jews living in Israel are Ashkenazi Jews, they have no ties to the biblical lands whatever. The Sephardic Jews are those with ties to the land there. The Ashkenazim hail from Southern Russia the Steps as they are called, and have absolutely no ties to that piece of land.
Hey Con, you are really going after the low-hanging fruit on this one. Take on a tougher topic pls. I wonder what elderberry smells like on a woman.
May your donkey have an STD and your woman smell of elderberry.
Obama will do what the central bankers tell him to do.
palestinians my brothers, yes you white devils. i no give you any more my curry in engiland you colonialist devils or maybe go to mosque where we say Islam is great, yes! and you all white devils! You no understand Allah, white devils, Palestinians do! yes!
Posted by Giuseppe on November 21, 2008 6:08 PM Just got back in and saw the entry made by Centre-right and the reply plus insult from Giuseppe. My brother works in Iran on a peripetetic contract. We know first-hand about the life of Tehran Jews. There's 24,778 at the last count - 12 weeks ago actually, to the day. Over 9,000 have applied for exit-only visas. That's not exit & re-entry visas but the one-way ones. The Ministry of the Interior has not issued one in 8 months - guess why. I think you are pro-islamist and an anti-semite. You reveal yourself through your words.
Guiseppe, you didn't read Robbie's comment! He said "Israeli" Jewry, not "Tehran" Jewry. The 30,000 Jews in Tehran are safe there because they're NOT in Israel. It's ISRAELI Jewry that Robbie says they want to extinguish, presumably because they are in that part of Palestine, in which Israel has established itself. He's not a moron! It's you who has missed the point! If the Jews in Israel all lived in the Diaspora, such as these 30,000 Jews in Tehran are doing, then they would all be safe. Why? Because they are not in Palestine! I've said before that Jews in Israel must leave, especially if they have young children. I'm glad to see that 43% of 20-35 year olds in Israel are considering leaving the country, according to a recent survey there. Sensible people! Looking after their young children!
Robbie: “Do they extinguish Israeli Jewry in a summary manner, or do they continue to foster "..the harrying and cruel torture of the filthy unbeliever". The first "solution", liquidation, is the eventual goal. They wish for it to happen one day. The question is whether to extract the maximum first.” I thin that Robbie hits the spot with this and I note Giuseppe doesn't come within miles of it. Decisions, decisions!" Posted by Centre-right on November 21, 2008 5:11 PM If Robbie is so spot on, how come 30,000 Jews prefer to live in Tehran rather than accept Israel’s bribes to leave for Israel? What a moron.
Con, as always, makes up facts. CAMP DAVID failed because, as said Clintons Chief of Staff, Israel offered nothing to Arafat. Nothing new there!! Check this website out it comes from Israel. So according to Con, it must be right http://electronicintifada.net/v2/article9181.sht ml
In my humble opinion, the Israeli-Palestinian conflict will long outlive any Obama administration. The Palestinians are unwitting, but useful, dupes of the other Arab, and some of the other predominantly Islamic, states. The repressive governments of these unfortunate satrapies point to that conflict, intone “Lo, the poor Palestinians” to convince their own citizens of the superiority of their situation by contrast. In fact, if Israel had not been created by a guilt-ridden Europe and become the lightning rod for all Arab injustices whether real or imagined, the cesspool that is the Middle East might well be even more violent and unstable than it is now.
Posted by Robbie on November 21, 2008 11:55 AM "Please do not underestimate the utter visceral hatred that works the imagination of the Third Caliphate followers who effectively run Iran. Within their own reality, they face an analytical quandary. Do they extinguish Israeli Jewry in a summary manner, or do they continue to foster "..the harrying and cruel torture of the filthy unbeliever". The first "solution", liquidation, is the eventual goal. They wish for it to happen one day. The question is whether to extract the maximum first. ------------------------------------ I thin that Robbie hits the spot with this and I note Giuseppe doesn't come within miles of it. Decisions, decisions!"
Its called imperial conditioning by creating havoc and then enjoying the results by using extreme force over a down-trodden minority....the Palestinians. Walls will only provide a false sense of security because the world can see that Israel is denying itself a peaceful future. If only they could observe themselves.....its not a pretty spectacle.
The definition of madness lies in continuing to do what you've always done and expecting a different result. I disagree with Mr. Coughlin that the roots of the war on terror (sic) lie in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Once upon a time, perhaps, but not now. Perhaps it is time for an American president to try something different. Perhaps it is time for an American president to acknowledge that the United States' government is powerless in the search for a lasting solution to his conflict. Perhaps it is time for an American president to acknowledge that the United States' government has been used as a dupe by both sides in the conflict as it suited them to do so. By acknowledging these things, an American president might lay the groundwork for withdrawal from 'the Middle East peace process' altogether - and, thereby, let the parties in conflict seek another dupe from whom to wring concessions and financial support.
Yawn! The man who was going to "change" everything is surrounding himself with Clintonistas. So much for "change". Expect Clinton presidency 2 without (I hope) the stained blue dress. All who voted in the Messiah prepare to be shown to be the starry eyed dupes that you are. BO will have as much success as our former philanderer-in-chief as far as solving the "Middle East"crisis.
Posted by Giuseppe on November 21, 2008 1:43 PM They do not like sane and rational minds my friend because they have not ascended beyond the level of the five senses... You are quite correct in your assumption, backed up with solid evidence sir, but you have challenged their "Know it all mentality", they cannot do anything other than attack you...
Posted by John Cowan on November 21, 2008 3:26 PM John it is you who is deluded, you suck into the propaganda. Russia is fully and totally controlled by the Inner city banking cartel, as is Iran, China the US Britain and the EU. Allow yourself to fall off the wall and break the egg... Remember all the Kings horses and all the kings men cannot ever put you back in the bubble of limitation again...
The enthusiasts of Greater Israel are on the way out! There are the Israeli devotees of Greater Israel, aka the settlers, who are staging a rally this weekend against the Israel Defence Force (IDF) because the Israeli Supreme Court has ordered that they be removed from Palestinian territory around Hebron. As the President of Israel has said, "There is going to be civil war." The Evangelical devotees of Greater Israel lost in the last US election. Obama doesn't have to take any notice of them in their support of the settlers and the expansion of Israel. This is big stuff, in my opinion! The Israeli government throwing settlers off their stolen land by Supreme Court order, and the settlers fighting back like the Irgun, the Hagganah etc. Civil war! And the Evangelical Greater Israelites won't be influencing things at all. Those of us, who question Israel's right to exist on the land they already have, will be delighted that the settlers have been kicked out by their own people. Perhaps, Arab pressure is beginning to succeed after so many decades!
I remember people descrtibing Israel as being the size of Wales. That's not very big when you consider the size of the Arab lands and neither is Israel's Jewish population. Take away American support and you can be sure there will be a Muslim invasion. The answer is very simple: we give the Israeli Jews Wales (or better still let them settle in the less populated parts of Britain as a whole) in return for their assistance with rebuilding our economy. That would be a win-win situation as according to many people, we British are ourselves Israelites, descended from the 'lost tribes' from the north of Israel. Aided an abetted by the Israelis, we could turn Britain, even its moorlands, into a paradise. The Muslims could have back the Holy Land, which compared with Wales is desert.
extraordinary as soon as israel is mentioned, the camel corp comes out of the woodwork, and startwaving the history of the region at us, as regards fighting for your country if it is conquered by an alien force i suggest ==europe peter =starts fighting here in uk as his friends the moslems will be ruling the islamic republic of britain in a few generations or sooner , but israel will be a country or will go down in an atomic holocaust taking a huge number of moslems with them, they will never submit to sharia slavery as in history, which im sorry to say britain might by our, sheer inertia and our race relation laws, which the moslems use but do not obey as us idiots do, wake up we pour millions in the west bank of european money while the rich arab oil country only give to al quada and hamas, nothing to the ordinary palestinian, who has to look to europe for hand out , when the arabs learn to love their own people , peace may have a chance
Barak Hussein Obama Emanuel Rahm Which one will influence the strategy most ? An muslim father and a zionist father. Now Sons of Uncle Sam . It just shows the futility of : - WAR and dying for 'your country' - 'Democracy'
Until the Islamists , aided and financed by Russia via Iran , are removed , there can be no peace. This is Russia v USA Not Palestinians v Israel Why delude yourselves any further ?
Guiseppe - thanks for the links and information. Pretty damning. I am not suprised that you have provoked the ire of a couple of apparently blood thirsty right wing posters! It is interesting to see how they twist positions. Highlighting completely unsubstantiated allegations and lies (i.e. war propoganda) is now apparently equivalent to complaining that Iran is misunderstood.
I thought the Middle East was being sorted out by Saint Blair.
Israel is an "artificial" country. It was founded by stealing the land that had belonged to Palestinian Arabs for 2000 years. President Truman of the US, in supporting the establishment of Israel, said that he had many more jewish voters than he had Arab and I feel that that mindset still exists in the White House. I am old enough to remember the attacks carried out by Jewish terror groups like Irgun, The Stern gang and Hagganah. Many British soldiers and civilians were murdered by these people. One could say that the state of Israel was founded on terror and by terrorists so they should not complain that they are now in turn suffering from terror attacks. If my country had been forcibly taken from me by one set of foreigners to be given to another set of foreigners I too would fight.
Yes, Guiseppe, what you are insisting is true is unimportant to me! Isn't it wonderful? You insist that Con and other correspondents get it right every time, basing their reports on hard evidence, yet all you can say about Con is that he is "probably in the pay an intelligence service". "Probably" is NOT the hard evidence you expect from Con, Guiseppi, so don't use it yourself! Then, you contradict yourself by saying that he's probably in the pay of "a lack of an intelligence service". How can he be paid by an organisation that doesn't exist? Your use of the word "liar" is not wise. It provokes disgust in the minds of readers, so that the author of the allegation, you, ends up disliked more than the person you accuse. There were many incorrect allegations against Iraq by many people. Why single out the media and Con in particular when government agencies all over the world believed the same things about Iraq and about WMDs? As far as false allegations about Iran are concerned, you are in no position to speak like this. It is far too early to know how incorrect you are in your allegations. When we look back in retrospect, we may all find that much of what Con and others have reported from that shadowy society was, in fact, correct. Reserve judgment, Guiseppi, on Iran! Wait!
To Simon Peter: What it proves, although not important to you, is that Coughlin is a conduit for false allegations against Iran as he was for Iraq. He is a liar and probably in the pay of an Intelligence (or lack of it) service.
I am in sympathy with Robbie's response to Giuseppe! Giuseppe is very concerned to tell us that Con Coughlin and others are reporting inaccurately about Iran and what it's doing. He says it is IMPORTANT. To repeat Robbie's question to Giuseppe, "Is your point that Iran is misunderstood?" Well now, doesn't that make me feel sad and indignant on behalf of Iran! Frankly, I see nothing in what Giuseppe has written as being IMPORTANT. Iran is a closed society, a secretive society, a society defying the United Nations of the world and a society whose leader declares the elimination of a UN country from off the face of the earth. Yet, Giuseppe tells us that Iran is being misunderstood because it is being accused of smuggling arms into Iraq, when there is no definite evidence that it is doing this. Guiseppe, I couldn't care less whether Iran is getting an undeservedly bad press from Con and others over weapons to Iraq. Nor do I care if Con got it wrong about stolen enriched uranium from Natanz or wherever. A closed society will always get a bad press in the sense of being mis-reported. That's Iran's total and complete responsibility. Do you think that the US went into Iraq because the media reported WMDs? If you do, you need to show some evidence for it, in just the same way as you expect the media always to have hard evidence of what this dark society is doing beyond its borders.
Breaking News: Shimon Peres Given Knighthood The symbolic honorary title, we are told, is accorded to people who have made distinguished accomplishments in various fields, ranging from world peace to scientific achievements. In the past few decades, however, the honorary knighthood was often bestowed on decidedly evil people who carry on their hands the blood of thousands, if not hundreds of thousands of innocent people. desertpeace.wordpress.com
Stop whining about Palestinian suffering Saqib Khan. We all know they are suffering, but that is incidental to the CAUSE of all of this: Muslims hate Israel and don't accept its existence. Not acceptable Khan, and if Palestiniains want to stop suffering they will have to stop hating. There is no such thing as "Zionism" you foul little man - while there is such a thing as Islamism and that is why Muslim countries should not get WMD: because they are unstable, volatile, and hostile. Israel has WMD and one of the largest armies in the world to defend itself. If they wanted to destroy Iran, they could. It would take a few hours to send a few nukes. Do you understand that Khan? They have the power, but have no intention of using it (unless they are threatened). Whereas past and recent history in the Muslim world suggests if Muslims have WMD, they WILL use them aggressively. Every day Khan, Israelis wake up surrounded by Muslim countries who hate them and want to destroy them and the barrier walls etc have been self defence for over 50 years. The Hamas charter continues the anti semitic hatred of the Grand Mufti who was good friends with Hitler. Both of them wanted to destroy the Jews. When will you people stop obsessing about your beloved victimhood and suffering, and practise a little self criticism - in this case, on the ORIGIN and CAUSE of the 60 year old conflict. Try being friends with the rest of the human race Khan, its a lot nicer and more evolved than tribal hostilities.
Posted by Simon Peter on November 21, 2008 11:21 AM That would be on top of the wealthy who have run like the wind. There is a message here for all Jewish people not living in the Inner Cities Israel, isolate Israel or the world is heading into World War III.
Posted by Giuseppe on November 21, 2008 12:30 PM Other than the denigration of Cochrane, is your point that Iran is misunderstood and that she is really a valuable of the world community?
Making Hillary Clinton Secretary of State is stupid. The woman is a proven liar. If this is going to be typical of President Obama's judgement, god help us.
Posted by simon coulter on November 21, 2008 11:12 AM Please do not underestimate the utter visceral hatred that works the imagination of the Third Caliphate followers who effectively run Iran. Within their own reality, they face an analytical quandary. Do they extinguish Israeli Jewry in a summary manner, or do they continue to foster "..the harrying and cruel torture of the filthy unbeliever". The first "solution", liquidation, is the eventual goal. They wish for it to happen one day. The question is whether to extract the maximum first. Decisions, decisions!
The only reason Obama will find peace "elusive" is because he's already a hostage to AIPAC - the all-powerful, fanatically pro-Israel lobby group for whom he had to demonstrate his public support during the early stages of his campaign. In Israel itself, there is a clear determination to ensure that the proposed two-state solution never materializes (q.v. new settlements aimed at creating "facts on the ground"). And of course, what this means is that when Palestinians decide to protest against such basic injustices and violations of international law, this would make them "terrorists seeking to destroy Israel" who cannot be negotiated with, etc. We've been here a few times before, after all. Not to mention the ever-shifting goalposts: First, if only Arafat would organize elections. Then it was Arafat himself that was the only obstacle to peace. Then it was Hamas' apparent lack of democratic mandate - before that very democratic mandate itself (secured through free and fair elections certified as such by international observers) became the problem.
Five reasons why there will never be a Palestinian state in the Middle East except Jordan. First, Hamas, Fatah, Hezbollah, Islamic Jihad and Abbas will settle for no less than the resettlement anywhere between the Jordan river and the Mediterranean of all who claim descent from anyone who claims to have lived in what is now Israel and Israel will not agree to this. Second, Israel controls 40% of the West Bank in settlements, military bases, roads, buffer zones, etc. Third, the Jewish population of the West Bank is growing faster than the Arab one and the Jewish population West of the Jordan including Gaza has constituted no less than 67% of the population of the area for many years and this proportion is set to rise. Fourth, Israel has European standards of wealth and getting more so whilst Palestinian society is in meltdown with 80% unemployment, mass emigration and pervasive violence and corruption destroys any security and civility that they might have had. Fifth, Israel has withdr awn three times and each time it has resulted in increased not decreased violence; from Lebanon in 1999 which strengthened Hezbollah, from the West bank in 2000 freeing Arafat to launch suicide attacks that killed 1000 Israelis and from Gaza in 2005 since when rockets have been fired every day, non stop. Israel will not leave the West Bank to be a potential rocket platform over Tel Aviv without a complete change in the mentality of its enemeies, which of course will never happen. I think it is all over. the whole Arab project to destroy Israel over the last 60 years, with four wars, countless lives lost and treasure wasted has been a collossal waste of time that has only caused Israel to grow from a few destitute refugees into a mighty nation. Its time to call the whole thing off.
Hi All. And still they think Obummer is a good chappie! So many times I have witnessed the idea of hope in a puppet, man is his own torturer, he places trust in shadows... Looking for the string that Theseus laid...Well I say you have to find your own, and it ain't in the five sense reality.. prepare to get what you always get. "PURE AND SIMPLE DISAPPOINTMENT"
I've just read on Haaretz daily newspaper that a poll conducted in Israel has found that 43% of 20-35 year olds are considering leaving Israel. That's almost half of this age group, many of whom will have children of the next generation leaving with them. This is probably an overestimate of those who will actually leave Israel if things remain about the same as they are now. However, any deterioration is going to emphasise the attitude that this poll results represents.
Two things strike me here - and both lead me to believe that the factions derive no benefit from the 'situation being resolved'. The Arab-Muslim goal is intractable: the elimination of Israel. The Israeli-Jewish one is now demographically impossible: to remain as a nation state essentially under the control of the Jews. Firstly, the Muslim Citizens of Israel are simply waiting for the natural product of their rapidly out-breeding the Jewish Citizens of Israel - at which point they will, via a pure democratic vote, make the state Islamic. Secondly, the hostile and powerful regional neighbours, Iran and Syria, are hell bent on weaponising nuclear material - not to attack and destroy Israel for this would be utterly Pyrrhic in a region where all must live and where sites sacred to several major Faiths abound - but to make themselves untouchable pariahs in the manner of North Korea. I don't believe the Israel:Palestine situation is going to go anywhere. The Muslims simply play for time - because that favours them absolutely - and they don't want a formal Settlement which would stay their hand once they achieve a majority in Israel.
JUDGE JUDY should get both parties to this territorial duspute and share the experience with the world in the public gallery. This is a war of lost causes....fighting like children over their toys. A tale of pure agony on a daily basis. The world is furious that this squabbling never ends and that Captain America allows Israel to invade Lebanon whenever required with the blessing on Tony Blair. How can Tony Blair be a peace envoy is a complete joke or Lord Levy our middle east envoy. JUDGE JUDY would put these characters in their place. The case is unreal because we all know what needs to be done but everyone is afraid of the Zionists....and the American-Jewish lobby. Any counter-claim by the Arabs should be dismissed because they are their own worst enemy.
Obarmy has as much chance of achieving anything in the Middle East as Conboy has of understanding anything. Mad Zionists will determine American policy, because the armaments industry demands it. Israel will continue to invade its neighbours and steal land. The media will be bombarded with Zionist squawkers. Eventually, the World will tire of Israel's lunacy and the diaspora, which has already begun, will accelerate. To those who are friends of Israel, be a real friend and tell some truth.Lies won't last for ever.And neither will Israel.
Its like those Biblical Movies of the 50's and 60's. Its a never ending saga. And even after 8 years of Obama, we can predict that we'll still be posting about that elusive peace in the Middle East. Its an impossibility, and everybody knows why. The situation will go on for another 50 years and we'll still be nowhere near coming to a resolution. Unless...
I think that BD Mathers' comment is worth revisiting, so I'll do it! As he says, the US is very heavily in debt, $11 trillion, so that it cannot continue to protect Israel indefinitely. Some say that we are witnessing the end of the American empire. If so, Israel's protection will, at the least, be diminished over time. If I had children living in Israel, I would do a "reverse aliyah" and get out. I would bring my children up amongst the diaspora Jews, and not risk their lives and their future to a strip of land at the eastern end of the Mediterranean. BD Mathers says, bravely in my opinion, that Israel should not be in existence anyhow. Of course, this is a matter of opinion, but there are many ME governments and many Islamic people who take this view. This view, namely that Israel should not be where it is, will continue throughout ALL negotiations, whether Obama-inspired or not. Couple this with Sebastian's quote of Joseph, a Muslim converted to Christianity, that this is a religious war, not for land, then there is, surely, no hope whatsoever for negotiated peace. The politicians must, of course, seek peace and be seen to be doing so. But, in the end, it won't work, and politicians on both sides will just be soooo much more angry when hostilities have to take place. I do believe that war is the continuation of politics by other means. And I reckon that only war-politics, rather than peace-politics, is going to solve the Middle East problem. Israel will continue to worry about its survival on into the future, and it has every reason to do so. Meanwhile, get the young children out and bring them into the safety of the nations, who host the Diaspora.
To Mr Saqib Khan. If all the land "illegally" occupied by Israel was returned, it would return to Egypt and Jordan: its previous occupiers. But neither of them want it. Both of those states have problems enough with islamist so called "Palestinians" and have been, if anything, harsher and less compromising in their dealings with them than Israel has. (The Egyptians threatened to break the legs of Gazans trying again to breach the barrier Cairo had repaired and re-erected between Gaza and adjacent Egyptian territory.) They want no more of the same; and who can blame them? Besides, I would've thought that problems in Pakistan were sufficient for you to worry about. They show that an islamic government can make its own complete mess with or without a "Zionist State" next door. Mr Khan, you spread your fine mind far too thinly. Pakistan needs you entirely. I feel it's your vocation to go there.
90% Arafat was offered for a Palestinian state in the year 2000 - 90% of the land that once belonged to Jordan and Egypt. If that had been accepted there woul now have been a viable Palestinian state - but oh no, just like in 1947, the Arabs (They were Arabs in those days, not "Palestinians as the Jews were called Palestinians!!) want all or nothing at all. It seems like they have chosen nothing at all, so what are they complaining about?
Peace in the Middle East can be achieved if UN resolutions: 194 resolves that the Palestinian refugees wishing to return to their homeland and allowed to live in and peace and dignity. 242 - return of all illegally occupied land by the Zionist state, termination of all claims or state of belligerency and respect and acknowledge sovereignty, territorial integrity and political independence of every state in the area. Israel to withdraw its forces from land claimed in 1967 war. 446 - determines that Israeli settlements are a 'serious obstruction' to peace; and the settlements in the occupied territories are declared illegal and dismantled. 497- decides that Israel's annexation of Syria's Golan and demands that Israel rescinds its decision forthwith. Why should the USA be the judge, jury & litigant to decide who should have nuclear technology, atomic bombs and live in peace in the world or not? The premise that if Iran succeeds in obtaining nuclear technology will then manufacture nuclear weapons to wipe off Israel is an absurd assumption and reflects double standards. Why did they allow Israel to become a nuclear power without even raising a finger? This partiality is not going to work always. I believe that Iran will become wiser and responsible if it becomes a nuclear power and will keep its mouth shut once it became nuclear: it has become a matter of pride for them. How can Iran be a threat to Israel’s existence when Israel is the eight most powerful military power in the world. Israel has been a threat to its neighbours and behaved as warmonger, a bullyboy and proxy state of USA to destabilize the Middle East and the Gulf region and this fact can not be denied. Israel does not want ‘peace’ because it threatens its existence. It must have an excuse in the names of Yassar Arafat, Hamas and Hezbollah, Iran or even a Mr Donkey to deny peace to the innocent people of Palestine. Now, Israel’s demographics present the central challenge to the Zionist dream and its survival. If the Israelis do not appear to be standing united, its’ ageing process takes the toll. It is worth remembering that there are more than 1.5 million Palestinian-Israeli citizens of Israel - 25 percent of Israel’s 5.2 million Jews. The Palestinian-Israelis are in addition to the 4.2 million Palestinians who live in the Gaza Strip and the West Bank. Outside Palestine, 2.6 millions are registered in refugee camps in Jordan, Lebanon, and Syria, plus 1.5 million scattered worldwide. If and when Palestine becomes an independent state, the homeless Palestinians and refugees living abroad will en-masse immigrate to their mother-land. This would pose a very serious problem to the Jewish state and threaten its democracy. It is ok for the Zionist state to have 200 nuclear bombs, nuclear missiles and most advanced WMDS to wipe out the entire Middle East in few hours and it is not ok for Iran or an Arab state to defend itself against Israel threat. Israel has defies international laws and shows two fingers for the world opinion and is doing a lot of things against the Palestinians that Hitler did to them during 11WWR. Israel refuses to sign the Non-Proliferation Treaty and bars international weapons inspections. It has seized the sovereign territory of other nations by military force, which it continues to occupy in defiance of UN resolutions. It has defied 69 UN resolutions and has been protected in more than 20 of these cases by a US veto on the Security Council. It has built ugly barrier walls, stop medicine and food supplies to the Palestinians. Every day Palestinian children wake up to the misery of oppression that is all around them: the building of illegal settlements, ugly barrier walls, restricti on and blocking of their movements, destroying their houses, and suffering humiliation of 3 million people is enough to make them intolerant towards Israel. President elect Barack Obama must be fair and honest if he wished to bring lasting peace in the region.
muggeridge Since when any palestinian wanted peace? They wanted the whole of Israel and nothing else,and I suspect still do despite their so called desire to find a two state solution. Arafat stached millions of dollars in private numbered accounts while his subjects were living in shanty sheds multiplying always preferring guns to pens. He let them down badly. As far Hamas, they will self-destruct someday. he excuse you give for the 2000 proposal is stuff and nonsense. There is solution to the problem-making Jordan as Palestinian State. Palestininas and Arabs fought wars against Israel and were soundly beaten. They can function only as suicide bombing cowards. If they had any brains they should have worked out the 2000 solution. I echo Abba Eban words ' Palestinians never missed an opportunity to miss an opportunity'
Yasser Arafat refused the 2000 Camp David plan because it included many restrictive conditions. Israel wants control of all airspace airports and water. Hamas now represents the interests of the Palestinians in Gaza because American road-maps always lead nowhere. President Bush Dick Cheney and Condi Rice were never serious about an equitable peace treaty; nor is Israel when they have what they want....war on terror with access to the American military. Hillary Clinton is part of the American-Jewish lobby so there will never be a Palestinian State. War is peace.
Israel is our friend; Iran is our enemy. If you don't believe that, you are on the side of Islamic terror and religious intolerance. With good will from both sides, the Palestine question could be resolved immediately. Perhaps Obama can find a way to change the rules of the game. I like what Netanyahu said about dealing with economic issues first - I do not believe in a divided Jerusalem, I believe in a united one.
Obama was and still is financed by the Jewish lobby in the US and then he decides to appoint Rahm as his COS. Mr Rahm is a staunch Zionist. Will there be peace in the middle east under Obama. Of course not. America's ability to police the world's hot spots and prop up Israel is disintegrating before our very eyes. Its national debt now stands at around $11 trillion and financed by countries like China and Japan. That will not continue indefinitely and when the funding dries up the US will have no choice but to pullback in true romanic style leaving Israel to fend for itself. Israel was never mean't to exist. It should exist but in the natural course of events it shouldn't. It is a falsity. A creation from nothing. An imposition on the natural order of things. The seeds of its own destruction were planted when it was first created following the second world war. Of course they will fight to maintain their integrity and it is right that they should but they a stark choice. Negotiate or fight for its survival. America will not always be there for them in the long run.
Yet another article of outright lies, half-truths and omissions by “neo” Con Coughlin, Britain’s answer to Judith Miller.
The Camp David deal did not offer to return 90% of the land taken from the Palestinians. The 90% was in fact 90% of the land up for discussion, Israel having already excluded some from the negotiations. The real figure was more like 60%. Any reasonable assessment of the of the deal offered to the Palestinians would conclude that it was in fact unacceptable, offering as it did a 'state' broken into four parts, with Israel retaining control of all communication between them, as well as control of borders, air space, and all water resources. If Mr Obama is to get anywhere with the Middle East then he would do well to start with the factual history of the region and ignore the wealth of disgusting pro-Israeli propaganda such as yours.
Israel has increased its population a little recently but Palestine has increased its population by a third in just a few years.With that level of increase there will never be enough resources for Palestine. They are both scrapping over the same bits of land/resources. Its no good divvying up the resources unless demand is restrained. Palestine needs to pay attention to its birth rate. It is one of the highest in the world.
Stating their preference for the appalling Malcolm X and lumping Obama with Powell and Rice as "house Negroes" shows the sort of lunatics the West has to deal with in the Islamic World. The bright, happy, confident morning seems just as far away.
Unfortunately for America, they have yet to pass through the socialist experiment, which we have endured for eleven years. They will find the hard way, as we have, that bleeding-heart politics is misguided and inordinately expensive. The Palestinian 'problem' is like intractable unemployment; the real cause is not what it seems. The Clinton plan, which allowed a 90% return of Palestinian land, showed with emphatic clarity that Arafat had a different agenda - as indeed does much of the Arab world. There is no interest in securing territorial integrity for Palestine - that would blow their cover. What they want is the elimination of Israel. There are many reasons for this absurd mindset, but principle among them are a few core issues. The ruling cliques of the other Middle-Eastern nations know that Israel's democracy mocks them daily. Deep down, they know that Judaism pre-dates their own 'beliefs' by a few thousand years, is a gentler religion, a fairer religion and more in keeping with modern values. Finally, they know that, in general, the Israelis are more intelligent, better educated, more capable militarily, more astute economically and altogether more civilised than any of them. That's why the Palestinian question will remain unresolved and the Israelis should keep their powder dry.
Con Coughlin's article has offered clues, to once again demonstrate the dangerous and delicate nature of Middle East diplomacy. But, if any person has far more experience for politics of the region, that'll be Hillary Clinton. Now, make it the Clintons. Clinton's election mantra has been "Buy two for the price of one." No where is this concept more valuable than in the Middle East politics. No head of state came so close to pulling off a major Middle East peace treaty than Mr. Clinton ever did; until Arafat backed out at the last minute. The deal breakers in the Arafat-Barak agreement that never came through for implementation were: 1. The return of Palestinian refugees who fled their homes in the four wars since the establishment of Israeli state. There is a conservative estimate of 7 million of them. That seems unsustainbale for an Israel's Jewish population of 6 million grappling with inland, native Arab population of about 1 million. 2. The status of East Jerusalem. The rival claims were never resolved. But, just put off. But, except for these two, key issues, Israel and Palestinians were close to reaching an agreement which Arafat ripped apart. The challenge Israel faced in accepting and implementing the above 2 delicate obstacles were enunciated in my commentary under The Telegraph View's "Israel's dance of death," (10:30 AM). The major obastcle to a comprehensive Middle Treaty now is Hamas. A moderate, more pragmatic Palestinian government is already running the West Bank. And, Middle East has been relatively more quiet than usual. Nobody knows if Hamas is serious with its truce ideas. But, so far, violations have been relatively modest. It's this kind of goodwill gestures that can convince Israel that peaceful co-exixtence with its Arab-Muslim neighbors is in everybody's interest and achievable. Another part of the missing link yet to be replaced, is who'll lead the Israeli government after the general election scheduled for early next year, after Foreign minister Tzipi Livni couldn't form a new government? Because of lack of support from coalition partner: Shas Party that wants East Jerusalem non-negotiable along with generous largesse for its welfare programs. But, Livni wants access for all people as far as East Jerusalem is concerned. It's this kind of politics of pragmatism from Livni--a committed ultranationalist, yet amenable to realistic sensibilities--that could lead to a comprehensive Middle East peace settlement. If Ehud Barak wins, as opposed to Livni's Kadima Party, a similar Middle East policy could be in place. Former Prime minister Benjamin Netanyahu--far more a hard-liner--might pursue a far-more conservative foreign policy that sees redemption in land and pacifist incrementalism--that scarely places trust on non-Jewish entities in the region. Either way, if peace is to emerge, the current state of less belligerency will advance it. It's inconsistent asking for peaceful co-existence and having no day pass without violence or acts of violence. Meanwhile al-Qaeda as a major force in the Middle East or overall politics in the Sub Asian continent down the road, also, remains in doubt because the US and allies have systematically been taking down the infrastructures of violent religionism through evolving Neo-Surge strategy by peeling away tribal leaders and anti-Taliban forces; as some leaders have been captured or taken out recently by the US-led coalition. But, above all, the incoming Obama administration already has a considerable reservoir of good will in the Middle East. Some contents of Iran President Mahmoud Amedinejad's letter to President-elect Barack Obama were leaked to the media yesterday. It's like a letter to a brother--sincere, diplomatic and businesslike; calling for new kind of US-Iranian relations. An improved US-Iran ties will positively affect the peace process. Igonikon Jack, USA
Talk about change? Listen, if several months ago someone had said that the Obama administration would be chocked full of Clinton administration retreads and have a national security team featuring the woman who advocated bombing Iran to smithereens in the event it launched a nuclear attack on Israel, few would have believed it. But that’s what seems to be in the offing. Some "change we can believe in!!!"
Omar Khadr is not a hard core al Qaeda activist.
Mr Obama's first significant appointment was Emanuel Rahm as his Chief of Staff. Mr Rahm is a Zionist, a former volunteer in the Israeli army, and the son of an Irgun terrorist. I doubt if we are likely to see much progress on this front.
I think this sums it up perfectly: Masab, the son of a Hamas MP who is also the most popular figure in that extremist Islamic organization, a young man who assisted his father for years in his political activities, has become a rank-and-file Christian. "I'm now called Joseph," he says. He warns: "You Jews (Israelis) should be aware: You will never, but never have peace with Hamas. Islam, as the ideology that guides them, will not allow them to achieve a peace agreement with the Jews. They believe that tradition says that the Prophet Mohammed fought against the Jews and that therefore they must continue to fight them to the death." So this is, after all, a religious war with "land" as the pretext. Obama, though a sincere Christian and whose largely unbelieving father was no more than a token muslim by birth, is too liable to be called "apostate" and an "enemy of islam", to have much leverage over that conflict. If US economic bribery can help, so be it. But a permanent and authentic resolution will happen when islam either wins, or is utterly defeated. This is not a fence-sitting matter. Would you, though, want life under Hamas? So whose side are YOU on?
NeoCon The murderous cycle of violence was started by A Sharon's visit to Jerusalem mosque. He is on a life support and so is Israel. US will have no more money for Israel soon and that will bring Israel to the negotiating table Mr Obama is a post racial president and calling him a house negro just demonstrates the lack of political understanding in al qaeda. Obama is the hope. YES WE CAN
Q: Why are American Middle East peace efforts like the Olympics and the World Cup? A: Because they are games that come around every few years. The game consists of the Americans and Israelis pretending to want peace, when in fact the Israelis have no intention of making the necessary concessions because their strategy is to win time to assimilate more and more of Palestine. Every time, the US, Israel and their media megaphones such as Con Coughlin use these stunts to bamboozle the public into thinking that the Arabs alone are to blame for failure. An example is Coughlin's statement that the Camp David plan failed because it 'was rejected as unacceptable by Yasser Arafat' - a disgracefully slanted rewriting of history. Arafat was indeed largely to blame, but so were the Israelis. Obama's election will change none of this.
================================= one of his first acts will be to close Guantánamo Bay, though precisely what he plans to do with the 250 or so inmates who, by their own admission, are hard-core al-Qaeda activists, is another matter. ================================== 'Hard core Al Qaeda activists'. Sure, that's why they have not yet been tried and convicted. Who told you that they 'admitted' to that? I guess their captors and the people who are paying you for this crappy article? =================================== Then there is al-Qaeda, which has posted an audio message denouncing Mr Obama as a "house negro" doing the bidding of his white masters. Not even the trailer-trash white supremacists who threatened to kill Mr Obama during the presidential campaign went that far. ================================ 'House Negro' - cute! I guess Obama will be really annoyed by that and pledge war against the mythical Al Quaeda? By the way, where is Bin Ladin these days and the 9-lived Al Zawhari who according to the CIA has been killed at least 3 times so far, but keeps being resusitated just in time to deliver excellent propaganda messages designed to keep the myth of Al Quaeda alive and the money pumping into the arms traders of the USA profiting greatly by the wars. Really, do you think that Obama and us are that stupid not to see beyond your paid piece of work?