Obama: Israel must stop expanding settlements

[denem]

Source: Associated Press

WASHINGTON - President Barack Obama, meeting at the White House with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, said he told the prime minister that Israel must stop expanding Jewish settlements in the West Bank and capitalize on an "Historic opportunity" to restart Mideast peace talks.

Netanyahu said Israel wants to start peace negotiations with Palestinians immediately.

Earlier the Israeli prime minister had signaled he may resist the president's pressure to support Palestinian statehood as the two leaders tried on Monday to tackle an array of Mideast issues.

A senior aide to Netanyahu, national security adviser Uzi Arad, suggested the Israeli leader might not yield to pressure from Obama for a two-state solution to the Middle East conflict. He also seemed to hint that Israel might consider military action against Iran when he said there was a "sense of urgency" in Israel over the Iranian nuclear threat.

Read more: http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/30793187/

---

In other news Israel announced commencement of a new settlement in Maskiot, the day Netanyahu left for the United States.
http://www.voanews.com/english/2009-05-18-voa26.cfm

[Arrowhead2k1]

1. Obama's right, but I don't trust that Netanyahu.

He's just itching to bomb bomb bomb, bomb bomb Iran.

[denem]

2. Under every peace accord since Oslo

Israel has been obliged to stop expanding settlements. They never have. Ever.

[RaleighNCDUer]

5. Actually they did, briefly,

but the PM who stopped them got shot.

The radicals are driving the agenda there.

[tom_paine]

13. Yep, funny how those "lone gunman" materialize whenever the Bushies need them.

And don't kid yourself. Israel is a Bushie State, and they have their own "Lee Harvey Oswald" patsy to prove it.

Rabin = Kennedy, Kennedy, King

Hindsight is most certainly 20-20.

[BeGoodDoGood]

19. When Yitzak Rabin died..........

Sanity died in Israel.

Walt

[azurnoir]

25. abu Mazan is a "radical" ? n/t

[Winterblues]

33. If he shot someone then I would say so...

Normal people don't assassinate people..

[azurnoir]

40. Do you know who abu Mazan is? n/t

[Winterblues]

51. No I don't.

The post was about people being assassinated so I assumed this guy was the person being described.

[azurnoir]

52. Sorry it is Mahmoud Abbas, nickmane n/t

[RaleighNCDUer]

50. Does he have the controlling votes in the Knesset?

Understand, I'm not using the word 'radical' in the left/right sense so much as the 'outside the mainstream' sense, and the agenda in Israel is not being driven by the majority who want peace, but by the militant minority who who believe only in power, who completely reject a two-state solution.

Abu Mazan, important as he is, is not driving the agenda.

[Tesha]

31. Got shot by Right Wingers. That's an important fact. (NT)

[fascisthunter]

54. seems to be a consistant fact globally and universally

right wingers seem to be more prone to violent acts.

[NuttyFluffers]

45. i believe the word you're looking for is "reactionary."

reactionary |rēˈak sh əˌnerē|
adjective
(of a person or a set of views) opposing political or social liberalization or reform.

people who are willing to kill to maintain the status quo or make it even more strict and confining. tends to tag RWers more accurately, especially in non-LW states.

[No Elephants]

46. And the corrporatist and RWers are driving it here. Sux,.

[and-justice-for-all]

37. Yeah, I do not like him either...nt

[La Lioness Priyanka]

3. i support our president in this statement

[Wizard777]

9. He has the right idea. Now he just has to get Israel to accept that.

[MessiahRp]

4. Out of raw curiosity... say we decided to stop supporting Israel

Say we denounced how they treat Palestinians and say out loud that they have been too aggressive in trying to provoke war with Hamas and Iran. If we told Israel we would not support them militarily anymore, how much of a different attitude would the rest of the Middle East have towards us, and also, how much would that force the nutcase neo-cons in Israel to back the fuck up on all of their threats to their enemies?

Us giving Israel unconditional support allows them to take things too far and provoke much of the hatred and violence that they incur.

What do you think?

Rp

[Chulanowa]

6. It would vastly improve our standing with the Arab and South Asian states

especially if we actually did cut support.

I'm not sure that the nutcase neo-cons would care much. After all, the definition of insanity is doing the same thing over and over and expecting different results each time.

[MessiahRp]

7. Yeah but I think they do a lot of their saber rattling knowing we'll back them up in a military

situation... if we backed off I wonder exactly how much further they would want to provoke countries like Iran when the Russians would stand with Iran strongly since that is their source of oil.

Rp

[Mosby]

11. The US has never "backed up" Israel militarily

And probably never will. Further, Israel does not need the help of the US military.

[MessiahRp]

12. You're missing the point...

I didn't say they rolled troops in for them (although they have for our other slave masters, the Saudis) but just dropping our name as their strongest backer implies military support. Not unlike how European countries in the past have made sure people knew we were strong allies to imply military support.

Just saying 'America is our strong ally' implies a lot.

Sometimes it's not the force you show but the force you imply that presents the greatest challenge to your enemies.

Rp

[teknomanzer]

14. Maybe not with troops...

but we have with dollars. Without US aid Isreal would not be what they are now.

[safeinOhio]

18. The world put trade restriction

on Iran to change their behavior. That along with resending aid would work in a New York minute.

[western mass]

20. ha ha ha ha ha ha ha....

ha ha ha ha ha ha ha...

ooookay, then. I guess Isreal can give back the $ billions in military aid we give them every year.

http://www.alternativenews.org/english/1915-the-us-to-raise-military-aid-to-israel.html

[fascisthunter]

22. It Would Help Us Pay Off Our Colossal Debt

[DerekJ]

28. 1973.

[Chulanowa]

29. Thank you for noting that

We'll give the Israelis aid when they're on the ropes, and we'll give the Israelis aid when the Arabs are on the ropes.

Must be nice to be the country that Americans believe will make Jesus come back

[Zhade]

35. Uh, you're kidding, right? How about all that money we give them to spend on weapons?

NT!

[No Elephants]

47. So what if they care? Caring what nutcases think is a sure path to insanity. And when you start

behaving in accordance with what you think nutcases may think, you know you have arrived.

(This is not for you, Chulanowa, but for those who either truly worry about what nutcases may think-or only pretend to worry.)

[rateyes]

17. Works for me.

[Wizard777]

8. There go the Peace talks.

[Mosby]

10. Peace talks with whom?

Palestinians End Talks In Cairo Without Deal

CAIRO (Reuters) - Rival Palestinian factions ended talks in the Egyptian capital Monday without bridging internal rifts that have undermined prospects for peace negotiations with Israel, participants said.

Egypt's intelligence chief Omar Suleiman, who has mediated for nearly a year now without visible success, had expressed frustration at the continuing impasse, they added.

"He told negotiators the world was not going to wait forever for them to unite and that as long as the Palestinians did not end their differences, the Palestinian cause and the peace process could be hampered," a Palestinian official told Reuters.

http://www.nytimes.com/reuters/2009/05/18/world/international-uk-palestinians-egypt-unity.html?_r=1

[azurnoir]

15. Ahah so its the "there is no partner for peace" excuse

which is exactly what I thought but unfortunately for the occupation supporters here Fatah is still intact.

[fascisthunter]

23. I Wonder if Those Occupation Supporters

would feel different if Palestinians illegally occupied parts of Israel with miliatry aid from the US and bulldozed their homes?

[Mosby]

32. If Israel negotiates only with Abbas

You really think that the majority of Palestinians will accept the results as legitimate and binding? In the last election a plurality of Palestinians voted for Hamas, who have repeatedly stated that they will not recognize Israel or enter into negotiations that lead to a permanent settlement. The Israelis have no choice but to wait for the Palestinians to unify politically in order for the negotiations to have legitimacy.

[Zhade]

36. You're being disingenuous here.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2006/jun/21/israel1

Hamas has made a major political climbdown by agreeing to sections of a document that recognise Israel's right to exist and a negotiated two-state solution, according to Palestinian leaders.
In a bitter struggle for power, Hamas is bowing to an ultimatum from the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, to endorse the document drawn up by Palestinian security prisoners in Israeli jails, or face a national referendum on the issue that could see the Islamist group stripped of power if it loses.

But final agreement on the paper, designed to end international sanctions against the Hamas government that have crippled the Palestinian economy, has been slowed by wrangling over a national unity administration and the question of who speaks for the Palestinians.

Yasser Abed Rabbo, a member of the Palestine Liberation Organisation's executive committee and a lead negotiator on the prisoners' document, said Hamas had agreed to sections which call for a negotiated and final agreement with Israel to establish a Palestinian state on the territories occupied in 1967, including East Jerusalem.

It's ignorant -- or dishonest -- to say that Hamas has refused to recognize Israel. They have, only it was dependant on the very reasonable precondition that Israel return stolen land.

[Mosby]

53. Hamas has indicated that they would be willing

to negotiate a 10 year truce with Israel. That approach however is not consistent with past agreements both sides have signed. Essentially Hamas wants to start the process over from point zero, which is not going to happen, nor should it.

Latest statement from Hamas:

"The Palestinian Islamic movement Hamas will not accept a two-state solution as a means to end the conflict with Israel, the movement's Damascus-based politburo chief Khaled Meshal said Saturday.

Meshal said that Hamas rejects the two-state solution but could still be part of a national unity government if a Palestinian state is established based on 1967 borders.

Meshal told the New York Times last week that Hamas has agreed with the rival Fatah movement to a state based on 1967 borders, including East Jerusalem, the dismantling of settlements and a right of return for Palestinians. He said such a deal could be the basis for a long-lasting ceasefire. Some analysts saw the remarks as an indirect recognition of Israel."

http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1084227.html

[azurnoir]

39. I think Obama would disagree

but any port in a storm

[Mosby]

55. Hamas doesn't seem to be cooperating

Hamas has condemned the rival Fatah party for swearing in a government that stars almost all the same figures as the one which took control of the West Bank in 2007.

In an exclusive interview with Press TV on Wednesday, Hamas movement spokesman Mushier al-Masri said the appointment of the new cabinet -- led by Salam Fayyad and comprised of all his old ministers except two -- amounted to a "coup against democracy" and a move that put the kibosh on the Egyptian-mediated reconciliation talks.

He said that Hamas acknowledges the new Ramallah-based authorities -- hand-picked by acting Palestinian Authority chief Mahmoud Abbas -- as lacking legitimacy and the move as "unconstitutional".

The new government, he said, has not been approved by the Palestinian Legislative Council.


http://www.presstv.ir/detail.aspx?id=95341§ionid=351020202

[azurnoir]

57. Can you show me where Obama or HRC has stated

that Hamas must be included?

[rateyes]

16. They should not only quit expanding them, but start tearing them down.

[western mass]

21. Talk is cheap, Mr. President.

Now let's see you do something about it.

[cali]

27. talk is hardly cheap in diplomatic situations

but cliche ridden mini rants on DU certainly are.

[IndianaGreen]

41. Isn't your comment hypocritical when you already know that a new settlement will be build?

You are the one that started that thread:

http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=view_all&address=124x275212

[western mass]

44. the very definition of "talk is cheap"

has been the Isreali "Peace Process". I use quotes to describe the stage comedy wherein American presidents (Democratic and Republican) voice repukes and stern warnings while doing absolutely nothing, certainly not withdolding the billions in aid $ we give them every year, as Isreal goes on not giving a crap.

[shadowknows69]

24. Or?????

Why don't we ever seem to threaten Israel with military force or at least economic force, like we do with pretty much every other country East of Poland?

[azurnoir]

26. Ask Congress

Ask Pelosi or Harmon or Berkley or...........

[proteus_lives]

30. I agree, Israel should do this.

But they will need concrete evidence that Pa/Hamas is at least reducing volence and attacks.

[Zhade]

34. Absolutely. How can an agreement be reached when the Israeli government keeps stealing land?

NT!

[and-justice-for-all]

38. I would have said it more like this...

Stop illegally Annexing land that does not belong to you!..nt

I would also split that country right down the middle and give neither one control of Jerusalem, let UN peace keepers secure it.

[Vidar]

42. Gutsy for Obama.

[SOS]

43. Carter in 1978: Israel must stop expanding settlements

This time, for sure.

[harun]

58. Yah, we have certainly heard that one before.

[No Elephants]

48. Any teeth in that directive?

[cali]

49. we'll see.

he's going to have to actually do something pretty drastic to get Netanyahu to comply

[Douglas Carpenter]

56. that is a good first step. But without major dismantiling of settlements the two-state solution is

not a viable possibility and a viable and contiguous Palestinians state is simply impossible:

There are approximately 450,000 Israeli settlers in the West Bank, (*now closer to 500,000) including East Jerusalem. According to B'tselem: The Israeli Information Center for Human Rights, " the built-up area of the settlements in the West Bank covers 1.7 percent of the West Bank, the settlements control 41.9 percent of the entire West Bank".* http://www.btselem.org/English/Maps/Index.asp

As appears from the map, while the built-up area of the settlements in the West Bank covers 1.7 percent of the West Bank, the settlements control 41.9 percent of the entire West Bank.

full PDF map: http://www.btselem.org/Download/Settlements_Map_Eng.pdf


http://www.ft.com/cms/s/728a69d4-12b1-11dc-a475-000b5df10621,Authorised=false.html?_i_location=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.ft.com%2Fcms%2Fs%2F0%2F728a69d4-12b1-11dc-a475-000b5df10621.html%3Fnclick_check%3D1&_i_referer=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.democraticunderground.com%2Fdiscuss%2Fdu

==========================
==========================

LAND GRAB:

Israel’s Settlement Policy in the West Bank

link to full report:

http://www.btselem.org/Download/200205_Land_Grab_Eng.doc

Introduction

In December 2001, a long article appeared in Ha’aretz under the headline “Five Minutes from Kfar Saba – A Look at the Ari’el Region.” The article reviewed the real estate situation in a number of “communities” adjacent to the Trans-Samaria Highway in the vicinity of Ari’el. The article included the information that most of the land on which these “communities” were established are “state-owned land,” and that “despite the security problems and the depressed state of the real estate market, the situation in these locales is not as bad as might be expected.”

The perspective from which this article was written (the real estate market) and the terminology it employs largely reflect the process of the assimilation of the settlements into the State of Israel. As a result of this process, these settlements have become just another region of the State of Israel, where houses and apartments are constructed and offered to the general public according to free-market principles of supply and demand.

This deliberate and systematic process of assimilation obscures a number of fundamental truths about the settlements: the “communities” mentioned in the article are not part of the State of Israel, but are settlements established in the West Bank − an area that has been occupied territory since 1967. The fundamental truth is that the movement of Israeli citizens to houses and apartments offered by the real estate markets in these “communities” constitutes a violation of the Fourth Geneva Convention. The fundamental truth is that the “state-owned” land mentioned in the article was seized from Palestinian residents by illegal and unfair proceedings. The fundamental truth is that the settlements have been a continuing source of violations of the human rights of the Palestinians, among them the right to freedom of movement, property, self-determination, and improvement in their standard of living. The fundamental truth is that the growth of these settlements is fueled not only by neutral forces of supply and demand, but primarily by a sophisticated governmental system designed to encourage Israeli citizens to live in the settlements. In essence, the process of assimilation blurs the fact that the settlement enterprise in the Occupied Territories has created a system of legally sanctioned separation based on discrimination that has, perhaps, no parallel anywhere in the world since the dismantling of the Apartheid regime in South Africa.

As part of the mechanism used to obscure these fundamental truths, the State of Israel makes a determined effort to conceal information relating to the settlements. In order to prepare this report, B’Tselem was obliged to engage in a protracted and exhaustive struggle with the Civil Administration to obtain maps marking the municipal boundaries of the settlements. This information, which is readily available in the case of local authorities within Israel, was eventually partially provided almost one year after the initial request, and only after B’Tselem threatened legal action.
The peace process between Israel and the Palestinians did not lead to the evacuation of even one settlement, and the settlements even grew substantially in area and population during this period. While at the end of 1993 (at the time of the signing of the Declaration of Principles) the population of the settlements in the West Bank (including settlements in East Jerusalem) totaled some 247,000, by the end of 2001 this figure had risen to 375,000.

The agreements signed between Israel and the Palestinian Authority entailed the transfer of certain powers to the PA; these powers apply in dozens of disconnected enclaves containing the majority of the Palestinian population. Since 2000, these enclaves, referred to as Areas A and B, have accounted for approximately forty percent of the area of the West Bank. Control of the remaining areas, including the roads providing transit between the enclaves, as well as points of departure from the West Bank, remains with Israel.

This report, which is the continuation of several reports published by B’Tselem in recent years, examines a number of aspects relating to Israeli policy toward the settlements in the West Bank and to the results of this policy in terms of human rights and international law. The report also relates to settlements in East Jerusalem that Israel established and officially annexed into Israel. Under international law, these areas are occupied territory whose status is the same as the rest of the West Bank.

This report does not relate to the settlements in the Gaza Strip. Though similar in many ways to their counterparts in the West Bank, the Gaza Strip settlements differ in several respects. For example, the legal framework in the Gaza Strip differs from that applying in the West Bank in various fields, including land laws; these differences are due to the different laws that were in effect in these areas prior to 1967.

This report comprises eight chapters.

• Chapter One presents a number of basic concepts on the principal plans implemented by the Israeli governments, the bureaucratic process of establishing new settlements, and the types of settlements.
• Chapter Two examines the status of the settlements and settlers according to international law and briefly surveys the violations of Palestinian human rights resulting from the establishment of the settlements.
• Chapter Three discusses the bureaucratic and legal apparatus used by Israel to seize control of land in the West Bank for the establishment and expansion of settlements. The chief component of this apparatus, and the main focus of the chapter, is the process of declaring and registering land as “state land.”
• Chapter Four reviews the changes in Israeli law that were adopted to annex the settlements into the State of Israel by turning them civilian enclaves within the occupied territory. This chapter also examines the structure of local government in the settlements in the context of municipal boundaries.
• Chapter Five examines the economic incentives Israel provides to settlers and settlements to encourage Israelis to move to the West Bank and to encourage those already living in the region to remain there.
• Chapter Six analyzes the planning mechanism in the West Bank applied by the Civil Administration, which is responsible for issuing building permits both in the settlements and in Palestinian communities. This mechanism plays a decisive role in the establishment and expansion of the settlements, and in limiting the development of Palestinian communities.
• Chapter Seven analyzes the map of the West Bank attached to this report. This analysis examines the layout of the settlements by area, noting some of the negative ramifications the settlements have on the human rights of the Palestinian population.
• Chapter Eight focuses in depth on the Ari’el settlement and the ramifications of its establishment on the adjacent Palestinian communities. This chapter also discusses the expected consequences of Ari’el’s expansion according to the current outline plan. "

link to full report:

http://www.btselem.org/Download/200205_Land_Grab_Eng.doc

===============================
===============================

A Segregated Road in an Already Divided Land

"Measure it yourself, he said. “The Palestinian road is 16 meters wide,” or 52 feet, he added. “The Israeli theory of a contiguous Palestinian state is 16 meters wide.”"

link to full article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/11/world/middleeast/11road.html?pagewanted=1&_r=6&ei=5070&en=22948d4799a34065&ex=1187496000&emc=eta1

snip:"Micaela Schweitzer-Bluhm, a spokeswoman for the American Consulate in Jerusalem, repeated American policy that Palestinians should be allowed to travel more easily through the West Bank “consistent with the need to maintain security.” Asked if this road predetermines final status, she said, “The U.S. government has encouraged the parties to avoid any actions that would predetermine permanent status,” but said she was not authorized to comment more specifically.

Mr. Tufakji said he had become cynical about the way Israel builds for the future it defines, no matter what it promises Washington. He sees a West Bank divided into three parts by Israeli settlement blocs, the most important of which are Maale Adumim and E1, around the capital that both peoples claim as their own. “Israel is building the infrastructure to keep E1, to surround Jerusalem,” he said. “They are working to have an area of minimum Palestinians and maximum Israelis.”"


link to full article:

http://www.nytimes.com/2007/08/11/world/middleeast/11road.html?pagewanted=1&_r=6&ei=5070&en=22948d4799a34065&ex=1187496000&emc=eta1