| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Vngelis
Guest
|
 Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:02 am Post subject: Barack Obama links Israel peace plan to 1967 borders deal |
 |
|
Barack Obama links Israel peace plan to 1967 borders deal
Uzi Mahnaimi in Tel Aviv and Sarah Baxter
Barack Obama is to pursue an ambitious peace plan in the Middle East
involving the recognition of Israel by the Arab world in exchange for
its withdrawal to pre-1967 borders, according to sources close to
America’s president-elect.
Obama intends to throw his support behind a 2002 Saudi peace
initiative endorsed by the Arab League and backed by Tzipi Livni, the
Israeli foreign minister and leader of the ruling Kadima party.
The proposal gives Israel an effective veto on the return of Arab
refugees expelled in 1948 while requiring it to restore the Golan
Heights to Syria and allow the Palestinians to establish a state
capital in east Jerusalem.
On a visit to the Middle East last July, the president-elect said
privately it would be “crazy” for Israel to refuse a deal that could
“give them peace with the Muslim world”, according to a senior Obama
adviser.
Related Links
* Clinton awaits recall to serve on world stage
* Palin’s failure set to reap her $7m book deal
The Arab peace plan received a boost last week when President Shimon
Peres, a Nobel peace laureate and leading Israeli dove, commended the
initiative at a Saudi-sponsored United Nations conference in New York.
Peres was loudly applauded for telling King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia,
who was behind the original initiative: “I wish that your voice will
become the prevailing voice of the whole region, of all people.”
A bipartisan group of senior foreign policy advisers urged Obama to
give the Arab plan top priority immediately after his election
victory. They included Lee Hamilton, the former co-chairman of the
Iraq Study Group, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Democrat former national
security adviser. Brzezinski will give an address tomorrow at Chatham
House, the international relations think tank, in London.
Brent Scowcroft, a Republican former national security adviser, joined
in the appeal. He said last week that the Middle East was the most
troublesome area in the world and that an early start to the
Palestinian peace process was “a way to psychologically change the
mood of the region”.
Advisers believe the diplomatic climate favours a deal as Arab League
countries are under pressure from radical Islamic movements and a
potentially nuclear Iran. Polls show that Palestinians and Israelis
are in a mood to compromise.
The advisers have told Obama he should lose no time in pursuing the
policy in the first six to 12 months in office while he enjoys maximum
goodwill.
Obama is also looking to break a diplomatic deadlock over Iran’s
pursuit of nuclear weapons technology. A possible way forward,
suggested last spring by Dennis Ross, a senior Obama adviser and
former Middle East envoy, would be to persuade Russia to join in tough
economic sanctions against Iran by offering to modify the US plan for
a “missile shield” in eastern Europe.
President Dmitry Medvedev signalled that Russia could cancel a tit-for-
tat deployment of missiles close to the Polish border if America gave
up its proposed missile defences in Poland and the Czech Republic.
Ross argued in a paper on How to Talk to Iran that “if the Iranian
threat goes away, so does the principal need to deploy these
[antimissile] forces. [Vladimir] Putin [the Russian prime minister]
has made this such a symbolic issue that this trade-off could be
portrayed as a great victory for him”.
Ross and Daniel Kurtzer, a former American ambassador to Israel,
accompanied Obama on a visit to Israel last July. They also travelled
to Ramallah, where Obama questioned Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian
leader, about the prospects for the Arab plan.
According to a Washington source Obama told Abbas: “The Israelis would
be crazy not to accept this initiative. It would give them peace with
the Muslim world from Indonesia to Morocco.”
Kurtzer submitted a paper to Obama on the question before this month’s
presidential elections. He argued that trying to reach bilateral peace
agreements between Israel and individual countries in the Middle East,
was a recipe for failure as the record of Bill Clinton and George W
Bush showed. In contrast, the broader Arab plan “had a lot of appeal”.
A leading Democratic expert on the Middle East said: “There’s not a
lot of meat on the bones yet, but it offers recognition of Israel
across the Arab world.”
Livni, the leader of Kadima, which favours the plan, is the front-
runner in Israeli elections due in February. Her rival, Benjamin
Netanyahu, the leader of Likud, is adamantly against withdrawing to
borders that predate the Six Day war in 1967.
Ehud Olmert, the prime minister, last week expressed his support for
Israel’s withdrawal from the West Bank Golan and east Jerusalem. |
|
| |
|
 Back to top |
Vngelis
Guest
|
| Posted: Mon Nov 17, 2008 11:30 pm Post subject: Re: Barack Obama links Israel peace plan to 1967 borders dea |
|
|
On Nov 17, 3:25 am, John Holmes <jhol...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
| Quote: | On Sun, 16 Nov 2008, Vngelis wrote:
Barack Obama links Israel peace plan to 1967 borders deal
Uzi Mahnaimi in Tel Aviv and Sarah Baxter
Barack Obama is to pursue an ambitious peace plan in the Middle East
involving the recognition of Israel by the Arab world in exchange for
its withdrawal to pre-1967 borders, according to sources close to
America’s president-elect.
Obama intends to throw his support behind a 2002 Saudi peace
initiative endorsed by the Arab League and backed by Tzipi Livni, the
Israeli foreign minister and leader of the ruling Kadima party.
The proposal gives Israel an effective veto on the return of Arab
refugees expelled in 1948 while requiring it to restore the Golan
Heights to Syria and allow the Palestinians to establish a state
capital in east Jerusalem.
On a visit to the Middle East last July, the president-elect said
privately it would be “crazy” for Israel to refuse a deal that could
“give them peace with the Muslim world”, according to a senior Obama
adviser.
This would give both Israel and the Arab states what they want. The
losers of course would be the Palestinians. I would not be surprised
if something like that goes through. If nothing else, this would end
illusions in "Arab Revolution." The Arab states never have truly been
allies of the Palestinians, none of them. Such a "peace" deal would
end such illusions. The Israelis in the past would not have accepted
such a deal, as they had delusions of being imperial rulers of the
Middle East themselves. Now after Lebanon etc. it is clearer to them
that they are too weak for this, nuclear weapons or no nuclear
weapons. So they would be liable to accept.
Syria has been willing to accept a deal like this for the last 20
years. And if Syria signs, Lebanon signs also. And Jordan and Egypt
already are at peace with Israel. Perhaps Iran would not sign such a
deal, but that means nothing, there are hundreds of miles between
Israel and Iran, and moreover the Iranians are Shiite and the
Palestinians are Sunni or Christian.
OTOH, the world economic crisis surely will have a dramatic impact on
all the countries of the Middle East -- not least Israel, which
probably is at least as deep into debt finance schemes that are
crashing as many European countries, and with less real resources to
back it up. Popular movements to revolution, based on the
impoverishment of the masses in genersl rather than the oppression of
the Palestinians in particular, are likely to blossom all over the
region, and the Palestinians could well be at the head of them, as the
most politically experienced population of the region.
-jh-
Related Links
* Clinton awaits recall to serve on world stage
* Palin’s failure set to reap her $7m book deal
The Arab peace plan received a boost last week when President Shimon
Peres, a Nobel peace laureate and leading Israeli dove, commended the
initiative at a Saudi-sponsored United Nations conference in New York.
Peres was loudly applauded for telling King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia,
who was behind the original initiative: “I wish that your voice will
become the prevailing voice of the whole region, of all people.”
A bipartisan group of senior foreign policy advisers urged Obama to
give the Arab plan top priority immediately after his election
victory. They included Lee Hamilton, the former co-chairman of the
Iraq Study Group, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Democrat former national
security adviser. Brzezinski will give an address tomorrow at Chatham
House, the international relations think tank, in London.
Brent Scowcroft, a Republican former national security adviser, joined
in the appeal. He said last week that the Middle East was the most
troublesome area in the world and that an early start to the
Palestinian peace process was “a way to psychologically change the
mood of the region”.
Advisers believe the diplomatic climate favours a deal as Arab League
countries are under pressure from radical Islamic movements and a
potentially nuclear Iran. Polls show that Palestinians and Israelis
are in a mood to compromise.
The advisers have told Obama he should lose no time in pursuing the
policy in the first six to 12 months in office while he enjoys maximum
goodwill.
Obama is also looking to break a diplomatic deadlock over Iran’s
pursuit of nuclear weapons technology. A possible way forward,
suggested last spring by Dennis Ross, a senior Obama adviser and
former Middle East envoy, would be to persuade Russia to join in tough
economic sanctions against Iran by offering to modify the US plan for
a “missile shield” in eastern Europe.
President Dmitry Medvedev signalled that Russia could cancel a tit-for-
tat deployment of missiles close to the Polish border if America gave
up its proposed missile defences in Poland and the Czech Republic.
Ross argued in a paper on How to Talk to Iran that “if the Iranian
threat goes away, so does the principal need to deploy these
[antimissile] forces. [Vladimir] Putin [the Russian prime minister]
has made this such a symbolic issue that this trade-off could be
portrayed as a great victory for him”.
Ross and Daniel Kurtzer, a former American ambassador to Israel,
accompanied Obama on a visit to Israel last July. They also travelled
to Ramallah, where Obama questioned Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian
leader, about the prospects for the Arab plan.
According to a Washington source Obama told Abbas: “The Israelis would
be crazy not to accept this initiative. It would give them peace with
the Muslim world from Indonesia to Morocco.”
Kurtzer submitted a paper to Obama on the question before this month’s
presidential elections. He argued that trying to reach bilateral peace
agreements between Israel and individual countries in the Middle East,
was a recipe for failure as the record of Bill Clinton and George W
Bush showed. In contrast, the broader Arab plan “had a lot of appeal”.
A leading Democratic expert on the Middle East said: “There’s not a
lot of meat on the bones yet, but it offers recognition of Israel
across the Arab world.”
Livni, the leader of Kadima, which favours the plan, is the front-
runner in Israeli elections due in February. Her rival, Benjamin
Netanyahu, the leader of Likud, is adamantly against withdrawing to
borders that predate the Six Day war in 1967.
Ehud Olmert, the prime minister, last week expressed his support for
Israel’s withdrawal from the West Bank Golan and east Jerusalem.
|
Until Israel no longer exists as a physical entity supported by the
Yanks the
ideals of the Arab Revolution may be betrayed but they will never be
put out.
Israel is attempting one more life saving measure. Not long ago we
were told
Hamas wouldn't survive in power, it has.
The collapse of America in Iraq may finally be the nail in the coffin
which
leads to unification of the Arab world. Its fate is tied with the
collapse of the
USA. The closer to collapse the greater the possibilities which open
up
for the unification of the Arab world. The Arab regimes position is
weakened
by Israels fate. They will lose the justification for their existence
or the threat
that the mad dog will be unleashed. People without fear lose their
hangups
quickly and when they start to move can move in many directions really
fast.
vngelis |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
Vngelis
Guest
|
| Posted: Tue Nov 18, 2008 10:06 pm Post subject: Re: Barack Obama links Israel peace plan to 1967 borders dea |
|
|
On Nov 18, 2:00 am, John Holmes <jhol...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
| Quote: | On Mon, 17 Nov 2008, Vngelis wrote:
On Nov 17, 3:25 am, John Holmes <jhol...@OCF.Berkeley.EDU> wrote:
On Sun, 16 Nov 2008, Vngelis wrote:
Barack Obama links Israel peace plan to 1967 borders deal
Uzi Mahnaimi in Tel Aviv and Sarah Baxter
Barack Obama is to pursue an ambitious peace plan in the Middle East
involving the recognition of Israel by the Arab world in exchange for
its withdrawal to pre-1967 borders, according to sources close to
America’s president-elect.
Obama intends to throw his support behind a 2002 Saudi peace
initiative endorsed by the Arab League and backed by Tzipi Livni, the
Israeli foreign minister and leader of the ruling Kadima party.
The proposal gives Israel an effective veto on the return of Arab
refugees expelled in 1948 while requiring it to restore the Golan
Heights to Syria and allow the Palestinians to establish a state
capital in east Jerusalem.
On a visit to the Middle East last July, the president-elect said
privately it would be “crazy” for Israel to refuse a deal that could
“give them peace with the Muslim world”, according to a senior Obama
adviser.
This would give both Israel and the Arab states what they want. The
losers of course would be the Palestinians. I would not be surprised
if something like that goes through. If nothing else, this would end
illusions in "Arab Revolution." The Arab states never have truly been
allies of the Palestinians, none of them. Such a "peace" deal would
end such illusions. The Israelis in the past would not have accepted
such a deal, as they had delusions of being imperial rulers of the
Middle East themselves. Now after Lebanon etc. it is clearer to them
that they are too weak for this, nuclear weapons or no nuclear
weapons. So they would be liable to accept.
Syria has been willing to accept a deal like this for the last 20
years. And if Syria signs, Lebanon signs also. And Jordan and Egypt
already are at peace with Israel. Perhaps Iran would not sign such a
deal, but that means nothing, there are hundreds of miles between
Israel and Iran, and moreover the Iranians are Shiite and the
Palestinians are Sunni or Christian.
OTOH, the world economic crisis surely will have a dramatic impact on
all the countries of the Middle East -- not least Israel, which
probably is at least as deep into debt finance schemes that are
crashing as many European countries, and with less real resources to
back it up. Popular movements to revolution, based on the
impoverishment of the masses in genersl rather than the oppression of
the Palestinians in particular, are likely to blossom all over the
region, and the Palestinians could well be at the head of them, as the
most politically experienced population of the region.
-jh-
Related Links
* Clinton awaits recall to serve on world stage
* Palin’s failure set to reap her $7m book deal
The Arab peace plan received a boost last week when President Shimon
Peres, a Nobel peace laureate and leading Israeli dove, commended the
initiative at a Saudi-sponsored United Nations conference in New York..
Peres was loudly applauded for telling King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia,
who was behind the original initiative: “I wish that your voice will
become the prevailing voice of the whole region, of all people.”
A bipartisan group of senior foreign policy advisers urged Obama to
give the Arab plan top priority immediately after his election
victory. They included Lee Hamilton, the former co-chairman of the
Iraq Study Group, and Zbigniew Brzezinski, a Democrat former national
security adviser. Brzezinski will give an address tomorrow at Chatham
House, the international relations think tank, in London.
Brent Scowcroft, a Republican former national security adviser, joined
in the appeal. He said last week that the Middle East was the most
troublesome area in the world and that an early start to the
Palestinian peace process was “a way to psychologically change the
mood of the region”.
Advisers believe the diplomatic climate favours a deal as Arab League
countries are under pressure from radical Islamic movements and a
potentially nuclear Iran. Polls show that Palestinians and Israelis
are in a mood to compromise.
The advisers have told Obama he should lose no time in pursuing the
policy in the first six to 12 months in office while he enjoys maximum
goodwill.
Obama is also looking to break a diplomatic deadlock over Iran’s
pursuit of nuclear weapons technology. A possible way forward,
suggested last spring by Dennis Ross, a senior Obama adviser and
former Middle East envoy, would be to persuade Russia to join in tough
economic sanctions against Iran by offering to modify the US plan for
a “missile shield” in eastern Europe.
President Dmitry Medvedev signalled that Russia could cancel a tit-for-
tat deployment of missiles close to the Polish border if America gave
up its proposed missile defences in Poland and the Czech Republic.
Ross argued in a paper on How to Talk to Iran that “if the Iranian
threat goes away, so does the principal need to deploy these
[antimissile] forces. [Vladimir] Putin [the Russian prime minister]
has made this such a symbolic issue that this trade-off could be
portrayed as a great victory for him”.
Ross and Daniel Kurtzer, a former American ambassador to Israel,
accompanied Obama on a visit to Israel last July. They also travelled
to Ramallah, where Obama questioned Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian
leader, about the prospects for the Arab plan.
According to a Washington source Obama told Abbas: “The Israelis would
be crazy not to accept this initiative. It would give them peace with
the Muslim world from Indonesia to Morocco.”
Kurtzer submitted a paper to Obama on the question before this month’s
presidential elections. He argued that trying to reach bilateral peace
agreements between Israel and individual countries in the Middle East,
was a recipe for failure as the record of Bill Clinton and George W
Bush showed. In contrast, the broader Arab plan “had a lot of appeal”.
A leading Democratic expert on the Middle East said: “There’s not a
lot of meat on the bones yet, but it offers recognition of Israel
across the Arab world.”
Livni, the leader of Kadima, which favours the plan, is the front-
runner in Israeli elections due in February. Her rival, Benjamin
Netanyahu, the leader of Likud, is adamantly against withdrawing to
borders that predate the Six Day war in 1967.
Ehud Olmert, the prime minister, last week expressed his support for
Israel’s withdrawal from the West Bank Golan and east Jerusalem.
Until Israel no longer exists as a physical entity supported by the
Yanks the
ideals of the Arab Revolution may be betrayed but they will never be
put out.
Israel is attempting one more life saving measure. Not long ago we
were told
Hamas wouldn't survive in power, it has.
The collapse of America in Iraq may finally be the nail in the coffin
which
leads to unification of the Arab world. Its fate is tied with the
collapse of the
USA. The closer to collapse the greater the possibilities which open
up
for the unification of the Arab world. The Arab regimes position is
weakened
by Israels fate. They will lose the justification for their existence
or the threat
that the mad dog will be unleashed. People without fear lose their
hangups
quickly and when they start to move can move in many directions really
fast.
vngelis
Gerry Healy's old idea of the "Arab Revolution." No such animal
exists. Pan-Arab sentiments never have amounted to much, they had
their historic highpoint as a tool for British imperialism vs. the
Turks, Lawrence of Arabia and all that.
The petty-bourgeois pan-Arabism of the '50s and '60s has dissipated,
the Baathist parties, their manifestation, are universally
discredited.
Might they be revived as a revolutionary movement develops in the Arab
world? Perhaps, but then again perhaps not. My guess would be not.
-jh-
|
It wasnt Healys. He took it from Pablo.
American occupation and Israel have also arrived at an impasse.
vngelis |
|
| |
|
| Back to top |
|
