US MediationIsrael and Palestine
The US would like to believe it is fair and balanced and a fair broker for the conflict. Most of the rest of the world, and especially the Arab street, see things otherwise. Why? What do do we say and do to promote that view? Do we even recognise that we do it?
Thursday, October 30, 2003
Israel Set for Palestinian Talks: U.S. officials took a tougher stance [in keeping with tole as honest broker. ed.]
Excite News: "Sharon: Israel Set for Palestinian Talks | Oct 30, 10:07 PM (ET) | By GAVIN RABINOWITZ
JERUSALEM (AP) - Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Thursday he is ready to negotiate with the new Palestinian prime minister at any time, but U.S. officials took a tougher stance, saying the Palestinians first must dismantle terror organizations."
Excite News: "Sharon: Israel Set for Palestinian Talks | Oct 30, 10:07 PM (ET) | By GAVIN RABINOWITZ
JERUSALEM (AP) - Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said Thursday he is ready to negotiate with the new Palestinian prime minister at any time, but U.S. officials took a tougher stance, saying the Palestinians first must dismantle terror organizations."
Israel to use US-made remote-controlled D-9 bulldozer and Humvee
Excite News: "AP: Israel to Use Bulldozer Technology | Oct 30, 3:06 PM (ET) | By GAVIN RABINOWITZ
JERUSALEM (AP) - The giant Caterpillar bulldozer, used by the Israeli military to destroy Palestinian homes in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, now comes with a controversial new feature: remote control.
Israel says its remote-control technology will lower risks to soldiers. But Palestinians fear it will lead to more frequent raids using the machines and make the three-year conflict even bloodier.
The remote-controlled D-9 bulldozer and a remote-control version of the Humvee, equipped with machine guns, were developed by the Israeli army and the Technion Institute of Technology. Both machines are U.S.-made, with Israeli modifications. They are expected to go into service in the next few weeks."
Excite News: "AP: Israel to Use Bulldozer Technology | Oct 30, 3:06 PM (ET) | By GAVIN RABINOWITZ
JERUSALEM (AP) - The giant Caterpillar bulldozer, used by the Israeli military to destroy Palestinian homes in the West Bank and Gaza Strip, now comes with a controversial new feature: remote control.
Israel says its remote-control technology will lower risks to soldiers. But Palestinians fear it will lead to more frequent raids using the machines and make the three-year conflict even bloodier.
The remote-controlled D-9 bulldozer and a remote-control version of the Humvee, equipped with machine guns, were developed by the Israeli army and the Technion Institute of Technology. Both machines are U.S.-made, with Israeli modifications. They are expected to go into service in the next few weeks."
Friday, October 24, 2003
U.S.: Israel should sticks to commitment to stop settlement activity [ ... but does the tail wag the dog? ed.]
Haaretz Article: "U.S.: Israel should sticks to commitment to stop settlement activity | By Nadav Shragai, Haaretz Correspondent and the News Agencies | Thursday, October 23, 2003
The Housing Ministry issued Thursday a tender for the construction of more than 300 new apartments iin two West Bank settlements.
...
"At the same time that Sharon embraces the road map in words, the government in effect has not stopped violating it," the Peace Now spokesman said Thursday.
The United States State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said in Washington, "We have made our policy clear, which is that, under the road map, Israel has made a commitment to stop settlement activity. Sticking to that commitment is important."
...
"We call on the United States to intervene to stop the Israeli government continuing settlement activities and walls," Erekat [Chief Palestinian negotiator] said in reaction to the tenders. "Settlements and walls are the No. 1 obstacle to peace."
But a senior Israeli official said: "All legal tenders within existing communities are not included in the 'road map,' according to our interpretation and our understanding."
[The Roadmap: "Progress will require and depend upon the good faith efforts of the parties, and their compliance with each of the obligations outlined below"--"Settlements *GOI immediately dismantles settlement outposts erected since March 2001 *Consistent with the Mitchell Report, GOI freezes all settlement activity (including natural growth of settlements)." Seems clear enough. ed.]
Haaretz Article: "U.S.: Israel should sticks to commitment to stop settlement activity | By Nadav Shragai, Haaretz Correspondent and the News Agencies | Thursday, October 23, 2003
The Housing Ministry issued Thursday a tender for the construction of more than 300 new apartments iin two West Bank settlements.
...
"At the same time that Sharon embraces the road map in words, the government in effect has not stopped violating it," the Peace Now spokesman said Thursday.
The United States State Department spokesman Adam Ereli said in Washington, "We have made our policy clear, which is that, under the road map, Israel has made a commitment to stop settlement activity. Sticking to that commitment is important."
...
"We call on the United States to intervene to stop the Israeli government continuing settlement activities and walls," Erekat [Chief Palestinian negotiator] said in reaction to the tenders. "Settlements and walls are the No. 1 obstacle to peace."
But a senior Israeli official said: "All legal tenders within existing communities are not included in the 'road map,' according to our interpretation and our understanding."
[The Roadmap: "Progress will require and depend upon the good faith efforts of the parties, and their compliance with each of the obligations outlined below"--"Settlements *GOI immediately dismantles settlement outposts erected since March 2001 *Consistent with the Mitchell Report, GOI freezes all settlement activity (including natural growth of settlements)." Seems clear enough. ed.]
Tuesday, October 21, 2003
Bush administration withdraws for consultations on the peace initiative: no date set for return
Israelis Hit Gaza With 5 Assaults; 11 Dead, 90 Hurt: October 21, 2003
"The Bush administration has withdrawn for consultations its special envoy for the peace initiative, John S. Wolf, and set no date for his return. The State Department warned Americans on Monday to avoid travel to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza."
Israelis Hit Gaza With 5 Assaults; 11 Dead, 90 Hurt: October 21, 2003
"The Bush administration has withdrawn for consultations its special envoy for the peace initiative, John S. Wolf, and set no date for his return. The State Department warned Americans on Monday to avoid travel to Israel, the West Bank and Gaza."
Friday, October 17, 2003
Bomb attack highlights pivotal role of US in region: [Americans to become targets?]
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Bomb attack highlights pivotal role of US in region: "Three killed by blast were with cultural attache on his way to interview scholarship candidates in Gaza | Chris McGreal in Jerusalem | Thursday October 16, 2003 | The Guardian
In the back streets of Gaza's refugee camps they have little doubt about why they believe Ariel Sharon has a free hand to bulldoze their homes, rocket their neighbourhoods, and cage the West Bank behind a vast 'security fence'.
It is because America lets him to do so.
Within the Palestinian political class, a distinction is drawn between Americans. There are those seen as the real villains of the piece - the neoconservatives in the US security and military establishment, and a Congress in the pocket of the pro-Israel lobby. And there are those, led by Colin Powell, the secretary of state, who are acknowledged to take a more sceptical view of Israel's prime minister.
But the result is the same.
The sheer scale of American influence, its dual and contradictory role as the principal mediator in the conflict while at the same time remaining Israel's strongest ally, make the US an obvious target for the more extreme Palestinian factions. But also a daunting one.
...
Prof Sandler said the attack was all the more mystifying because American monitors on the ground often worked in the Palestinians' favour.
"They monitor settlement activity, they meet Palestinian officials and give them status. The Palestinian Authority will pay the highest political price for this," he said.
That may have been precisely the objective.
...
And when President Bush told Mr Abbas to renounce the intifada, he did so, angering many Palestinians who believed he had undermined the legitimacy of their struggle against occupation.
In return, say the Palestinians, they got little from the Americans, particularly when Mr Abbas engineered a ceasefire and looked to the US to stop Israel wrecking it.
Some more militant factions began to consider whether dealing with the Americans amounted to collaboration because, the logic went, doing the US's bidding appeared only to serve Israel's interests.
There was fresh anger at the US yesterday. It may be a coincidence, but the attack came hours after Washington vetoed a UN security council resolution condemning Israel for constructing a "security fence" through the West Bank that effectively annexes some Palestinian territory and cages tens of thousands of people.
Shortly before, the US had defended Israel's weekend raid on Rafah refugee camp in southern Gaza in which eight people died and 120 homes were bulldozed or shelled, ostensibly in search of tunnels believed to be used to smuggle weapons from Egypt
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | Bomb attack highlights pivotal role of US in region: "Three killed by blast were with cultural attache on his way to interview scholarship candidates in Gaza | Chris McGreal in Jerusalem | Thursday October 16, 2003 | The Guardian
In the back streets of Gaza's refugee camps they have little doubt about why they believe Ariel Sharon has a free hand to bulldoze their homes, rocket their neighbourhoods, and cage the West Bank behind a vast 'security fence'.
It is because America lets him to do so.
Within the Palestinian political class, a distinction is drawn between Americans. There are those seen as the real villains of the piece - the neoconservatives in the US security and military establishment, and a Congress in the pocket of the pro-Israel lobby. And there are those, led by Colin Powell, the secretary of state, who are acknowledged to take a more sceptical view of Israel's prime minister.
But the result is the same.
The sheer scale of American influence, its dual and contradictory role as the principal mediator in the conflict while at the same time remaining Israel's strongest ally, make the US an obvious target for the more extreme Palestinian factions. But also a daunting one.
...
Prof Sandler said the attack was all the more mystifying because American monitors on the ground often worked in the Palestinians' favour.
"They monitor settlement activity, they meet Palestinian officials and give them status. The Palestinian Authority will pay the highest political price for this," he said.
That may have been precisely the objective.
...
And when President Bush told Mr Abbas to renounce the intifada, he did so, angering many Palestinians who believed he had undermined the legitimacy of their struggle against occupation.
In return, say the Palestinians, they got little from the Americans, particularly when Mr Abbas engineered a ceasefire and looked to the US to stop Israel wrecking it.
Some more militant factions began to consider whether dealing with the Americans amounted to collaboration because, the logic went, doing the US's bidding appeared only to serve Israel's interests.
There was fresh anger at the US yesterday. It may be a coincidence, but the attack came hours after Washington vetoed a UN security council resolution condemning Israel for constructing a "security fence" through the West Bank that effectively annexes some Palestinian territory and cages tens of thousands of people.
Shortly before, the US had defended Israel's weekend raid on Rafah refugee camp in southern Gaza in which eight people died and 120 homes were bulldozed or shelled, ostensibly in search of tunnels believed to be used to smuggle weapons from Egypt
Sharon Firm on West Bank Barrier Despite U.S. Threats
Excite - News: "Sharon Firm on West Bank Barrier Despite U.S. Threats | Oct 17, 3:02 am ET
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said in remarks published on Friday that Israel would complete a controversial West Bank barrier despite the risk of U.S. cuts in $9 billion in loan guarantees approved by Congress.
'I myself might tell the Americans that although we won't be happy about it, if you decide to remove money, then do it. We need to build a fence in places where we know it is integral for Israel's security,' Sharon said in a Jerusalem Post interview.
Israel's key ally Washington has voiced misgivings about the barrier, stretches of fence and concrete barricades that mostly run along the boundary between the West Bank and Israel but also loop in places to encircle Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.
The United States has said it will deduct part of the cost of the barriers from loan guarantees important to Israel's struggling economy, but has not yet decided how large the deduction will be.
It has said it will also cut the loan guarantees to show U.S. displeasure with Israel's continuing building of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza."
Excite - News: "Sharon Firm on West Bank Barrier Despite U.S. Threats | Oct 17, 3:02 am ET
JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon said in remarks published on Friday that Israel would complete a controversial West Bank barrier despite the risk of U.S. cuts in $9 billion in loan guarantees approved by Congress.
'I myself might tell the Americans that although we won't be happy about it, if you decide to remove money, then do it. We need to build a fence in places where we know it is integral for Israel's security,' Sharon said in a Jerusalem Post interview.
Israel's key ally Washington has voiced misgivings about the barrier, stretches of fence and concrete barricades that mostly run along the boundary between the West Bank and Israel but also loop in places to encircle Jewish settlements in the occupied Palestinian territories.
The United States has said it will deduct part of the cost of the barriers from loan guarantees important to Israel's struggling economy, but has not yet decided how large the deduction will be.
It has said it will also cut the loan guarantees to show U.S. displeasure with Israel's continuing building of Jewish settlements in the West Bank and Gaza."
Thursday, October 16, 2003
Sharon Acts Tough, Sensing U.S. Assent
Sharon Acts Tough, Sensing U.S. Assent: "October 12, 2003
DIPLOMATIC MEMO | By STEVEN R. WEISMAN
...
The United States has stated publicly that it opposes Israel's expansion of Jewish settlements on the West Bank and construction of parts of a barrier to separate Jewish settlers from nearby Palestinian communities. But Israel proclaims its determination to go ahead with both actions.
A week ago, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said the Bush administration was having "intense discussions" with Israel about these issues and weighing such options as a reduction in loan guarantees enacted earlier this year by Congress. But there is no sign that such a step is in the offing.
Arab, European and United Nations diplomats who have been drawn into the peace efforts through drafting a peace plan known as the road map say they fear that Mr. Sharon has assumed that, for whatever reason, Mr. Bush is not in a position to ask for a halt to Israeli actions.
Indeed, they say they doubt that Mr. Bush will re-engage in the peace efforts before the American election next year, out of fear that whatever he does will draw criticism, especially among the conservative Christian and Jewish supporters of Israel who form a part of his political base.
"The word you hear a lot of is 'disengaged,' " said a diplomat involved in the peace plan. "Sharon figured out long ago that all he has to do is the absolute minimum to keep Bush off his back and at his side. If the United States is disengaged, that's exactly what Sharon wants.
Sharon Acts Tough, Sensing U.S. Assent: "October 12, 2003
DIPLOMATIC MEMO | By STEVEN R. WEISMAN
...
The United States has stated publicly that it opposes Israel's expansion of Jewish settlements on the West Bank and construction of parts of a barrier to separate Jewish settlers from nearby Palestinian communities. But Israel proclaims its determination to go ahead with both actions.
A week ago, Secretary of State Colin L. Powell said the Bush administration was having "intense discussions" with Israel about these issues and weighing such options as a reduction in loan guarantees enacted earlier this year by Congress. But there is no sign that such a step is in the offing.
Arab, European and United Nations diplomats who have been drawn into the peace efforts through drafting a peace plan known as the road map say they fear that Mr. Sharon has assumed that, for whatever reason, Mr. Bush is not in a position to ask for a halt to Israeli actions.
Indeed, they say they doubt that Mr. Bush will re-engage in the peace efforts before the American election next year, out of fear that whatever he does will draw criticism, especially among the conservative Christian and Jewish supporters of Israel who form a part of his political base.
"The word you hear a lot of is 'disengaged,' " said a diplomat involved in the peace plan. "Sharon figured out long ago that all he has to do is the absolute minimum to keep Bush off his back and at his side. If the United States is disengaged, that's exactly what Sharon wants.
President Bush as 'incensed', 'really steamed', over Sharon's outburst likening Israel to Czechoslovakia
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | David Hirst on the Mid East crisis: "After Kuwait, they faltered. Now they must sort it out
Bush and Blair acknowledge the centrality of the Mid East crisis | David Hirst in Beirut | Monday October 15, 2001 | The Guardian
Tony Blair says that both he and George Bush are 'completely seized of the need to push forward' the Middle East peace process, because the Arab-Israeli conflict helps 'terrorists who seek to utilise prevailing feelings of frustration and despair in the Arab and Islamic world to justify terrorist activities'. Meanwhile, the Bush administration is reportedly preparing to pressure Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon to accept a viable Palestinian state including a shared Jerusalem. Officials describe President Bush as 'incensed', 'really steamed', over Sharon's outburst likening Israel to Czechoslovakia in 1938, and warning him not to 'appease the Arabs'.
All this comes close to recognition, by the two leaders of the war against terror, of the centrality of the Palestinian question in this crisis, the need to address it with greater urgency, seriousness and impartiality than ever before and the likelihood that this means a decisive showdown with Sharon and the most extreme government in Israel's history.
...
... Zalman Shoval, former Israeli ambassador to the US, wrote last week that he saw no connection between fundamentalist terror and "Israeli occupation"; it all stemmed from extremist Islam's hatred of anything to do with democracy, freedom, or human rights. It is the same mind-set that caused mayor Rudolph Giuliani to reject the $10m donation to New York city from the Saudi tycoon Prince Walid bin Talal.
...
It has to be said that any Bush-Blair recognition of the obvious will create the unfortunate impression that terrorism does pay. The pan-Arab newspaper al-Quds al-Arabi was sarcastic about it: "It is nice of Blair to declare that the Palestinians have a right to live on their land, to achieve justice and an opportunity to prosper as equal partners to Israel, but did we have to wait for the loss of over 5,000 innocent American lives and billions of dollars to hear such words from the prime minister of the country that had the largest role in the tragedy of the Palestinian people?"
...
Will they be? Two things might compel them to be. One is the gravity of the crisis. The other is Ariel Sharon. He is so extreme, so seemingly indifferent to the larger interests of Israel's US benefactor, so recklessly apt to prove that his country, far from being the western strategic asset it thought itself to be, is the most burdensome of liabilities. If the US and Britain are really serious, there is bound to be the kind of battle which successive US administrations, fearing the Zionist lobby's extraordinary influence, have shied away from in the past.
Guardian Unlimited | Special reports | David Hirst on the Mid East crisis: "After Kuwait, they faltered. Now they must sort it out
Bush and Blair acknowledge the centrality of the Mid East crisis | David Hirst in Beirut | Monday October 15, 2001 | The Guardian
Tony Blair says that both he and George Bush are 'completely seized of the need to push forward' the Middle East peace process, because the Arab-Israeli conflict helps 'terrorists who seek to utilise prevailing feelings of frustration and despair in the Arab and Islamic world to justify terrorist activities'. Meanwhile, the Bush administration is reportedly preparing to pressure Israeli prime minister Ariel Sharon to accept a viable Palestinian state including a shared Jerusalem. Officials describe President Bush as 'incensed', 'really steamed', over Sharon's outburst likening Israel to Czechoslovakia in 1938, and warning him not to 'appease the Arabs'.
All this comes close to recognition, by the two leaders of the war against terror, of the centrality of the Palestinian question in this crisis, the need to address it with greater urgency, seriousness and impartiality than ever before and the likelihood that this means a decisive showdown with Sharon and the most extreme government in Israel's history.
...
... Zalman Shoval, former Israeli ambassador to the US, wrote last week that he saw no connection between fundamentalist terror and "Israeli occupation"; it all stemmed from extremist Islam's hatred of anything to do with democracy, freedom, or human rights. It is the same mind-set that caused mayor Rudolph Giuliani to reject the $10m donation to New York city from the Saudi tycoon Prince Walid bin Talal.
...
It has to be said that any Bush-Blair recognition of the obvious will create the unfortunate impression that terrorism does pay. The pan-Arab newspaper al-Quds al-Arabi was sarcastic about it: "It is nice of Blair to declare that the Palestinians have a right to live on their land, to achieve justice and an opportunity to prosper as equal partners to Israel, but did we have to wait for the loss of over 5,000 innocent American lives and billions of dollars to hear such words from the prime minister of the country that had the largest role in the tragedy of the Palestinian people?"
...
Will they be? Two things might compel them to be. One is the gravity of the crisis. The other is Ariel Sharon. He is so extreme, so seemingly indifferent to the larger interests of Israel's US benefactor, so recklessly apt to prove that his country, far from being the western strategic asset it thought itself to be, is the most burdensome of liabilities. If the US and Britain are really serious, there is bound to be the kind of battle which successive US administrations, fearing the Zionist lobby's extraordinary influence, have shied away from in the past.
Thursday, October 02, 2003
U.S. to refrain from public criticism of new fence decision
Haaretz Article: "U.S. to refrain from public criticism of new fence decision By Haaretz Service and Agencies Thursday, October 02, 2003
The United States chose Wednesday not to criticize in public Israel's decision to build the next stage of a vast barrier in the West Bank, saying it would continue to discuss the issue with senior Israeli officials.
The statement came in resonse to cabinet approval earlier Wednesday of the route of the central section of the separation fence between Israel and the West Bank, which includes the controversial
Ariel salient.
The proposal for the fence was approved by an 18-4 majority, with one abstention. Ministers Natan Sharansky, Avigdor Lieberman, Benny Elon and Meir Sheetrit all voted against the plan.
Washington opposes the fence project and has warned that it may deduct costs of any construction of the fence that deviates from the 1967 Green Line from the already-approved loan guarantees totaling some $9 billion.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the U.S. position is 'unchanged', but he did not explicitly criticize the decision to proceed with the fence.
...
Britain on Wednesday warned Israel ... "We recognize Israel's desire to take security measures against the threat of terrorism. Any fence built should be on the Green Line or in Israeli territory. "
Haaretz Article: "U.S. to refrain from public criticism of new fence decision By Haaretz Service and Agencies Thursday, October 02, 2003
The United States chose Wednesday not to criticize in public Israel's decision to build the next stage of a vast barrier in the West Bank, saying it would continue to discuss the issue with senior Israeli officials.
The statement came in resonse to cabinet approval earlier Wednesday of the route of the central section of the separation fence between Israel and the West Bank, which includes the controversial
Ariel salient.
The proposal for the fence was approved by an 18-4 majority, with one abstention. Ministers Natan Sharansky, Avigdor Lieberman, Benny Elon and Meir Sheetrit all voted against the plan.
Washington opposes the fence project and has warned that it may deduct costs of any construction of the fence that deviates from the 1967 Green Line from the already-approved loan guarantees totaling some $9 billion.
State Department spokesman Richard Boucher said the U.S. position is 'unchanged', but he did not explicitly criticize the decision to proceed with the fence.
...
Britain on Wednesday warned Israel ... "We recognize Israel's desire to take security measures against the threat of terrorism. Any fence built should be on the Green Line or in Israeli territory. "
