Barack Obama urges Mid-East leaders to take opportunity (chance that may not come again soon)

[Turborama]

Source: BBC

US President Barack Obama has urged Israeli and Palestinian leaders not to let the chance of a permanent peace deal "slip away".

"This moment of opportunity may not soon come again," he said, pledging US support for the new negotiations. Mr Obama spoke the day before a new round of direct talks between Israeli PM Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas was due to begin.

=snip=

'Partners in peace'

Mr Obama spoke at the White House on Wednesday evening after meetings with Mr Netanyahu, Mr Abbas, Jordan's King Abdullah II and Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak.

His remarks came on the eve of the first direct negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian leaders in 20 months, which he said were "intended to resolve all final status issues".

No link yet.

---

Video at the link.

Obama warns Middle East leaders 'chance may not come again soon'

Direct dialogue begins between leaders in Washington as Barack Obama heralds 'moment of opportunity' to clear way for two-state solution

Chris McGreal in Washington
The Guardian, Thursday September 2 2010

The Israeli and Palestinian leaders, Binyamin Netanyahu and Mahmoud Abbas, begin direct talks in Washington today after Barack Obama launched his initiative to forge a Middle East peace agreement within a year, which he described as a "moment of opportunity that may not soon come again".

The US president said that he recognised the task would be difficult after so many failed efforts, and that passions and mistrust ran deep. But he said that the occupation and accompanying conflict were unsustainable.

"The purpose of the talks is clear. These will be direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians. These negotiations are intended to resolve all final status issues. The goal is a settlement negotiated between the parties that ends the occupation which began in 1967, and results in the emergence of an independent democratic and viable Palestinian state living side by side in peace and security with a Jewish state of Israel and its other neighbours," he said. "We are under no illusions. Passions run deep. Each side has legitimate and enduring interests. Years of mistrust will not disappear overnight ... After all, there's a reason that the two state solution has eluded previous generations. This is extraordinarily complex and extraordinarily difficult. But we know that the status quo is unsustainable."

The president said that it was in the national interests of all involved, including the US, that the conflict be brought to a peaceful conclusion. But he warned that the US could not impose a solution or want it more than did the parties themselves. Obama also called on Arab states to back the process, saying that they claimed to want to see an independent Palestine, but did little to support it – his statement implying that the Arab states should move toward recognising Israel.

Full article: http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/sep/02/middle-east-peace-talks-israel-palestine


Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin
Netanyahu, President Barack Obama, Palestinian President Mahmoud
Abbas and Jordan's King Abdullah II walk to East Room of the White
House before making statements on the Middle East peace negotiations
in Washington. Photograph: Charles Dharapak/AP

[Safetykitten]

1. "This moment of opportunity may not soon come again," Interesting use of words there,a theme kinda

[ProgressiveEconomist]

7. Is Obama saying Palestinian elections are trending toward Hamas?

What are the odds that Abbas's successor will be easier for Israel to deal with, rather than much harder?

[Demeter]

2. Delusions of Nobel-ism

want peace in the Middle East? Stop sending ANYTHING to the Saudis and the Israelis and the Egyptians. Especially war matériel.

Let them throw rocks at each other.

And leave Iran alone.

[Chicago dyke]

10. peace isn't likely unless

the palestinians get a fair treatment as well as all the other stuff you mention. the US could lead the world in the effort to pressure israel to do that, if it really wanted to.

and color me annoyed with the language. so campaign-y. it's always possible for leaders to agree to peace, they just pretend like it's not, which is mostly bullshit. "timing" has nothing to do with anything and is just a way of creating a sense of 'urgency.'

[sabrina 1]

3. I remember when Bush took control of the presidency and one of

the first announcements he made was that he was not going to bother interfering between Israel and Palestine. He was dropping all plans to try to negotiate peace between them. Clinton had worked hard trying to get a peace agreement and I have wondered since then if he had had a couple of more years, could he have done it.

I am glad Obama has decided to try again. And I hope all of them will grow up and take this opportunity because the world is getting pretty tired of what is going on over there.

[Turborama]

6. I just heard something interesting on Al Jazeera English about Hamas losing its popularity

Apparently, Hamas were voted in because Fatah were seen as corrupt but Hamas are losing popularity now because of their apparent corruption. This is what a reporter on the ground just said and I'm paraphrasing.

[sabrina 1]

11. It's a shame that the ordinary people are just pawns in all of this.

The sad thing is that when situations are as volatile as this one, those who rise to the top are often the most extreme elements of society. And ordinary people who feel threatened look to them for protection.

I think if a peace agreement, by some miracle, succeeds, over time that will change as people then become more concerned about maintaining the peace.

In the N. Ireland Ireland situation people looked to the IRA for protection, but as peace seemed to finally be a real possibility, support for violence diminshed. And many of the leaders of the IRA turned to politics to resolve the issues.

The question is, had there not been those who were unwilling to accept oppressive situations would there ever been any attention paid to the plight of the oppressed.

We eg, call our 'terrorists' heroes, like George Washington and Benjamin Franklin. Had America lost the revolution, all those who were a part of it would have gone down in history the way Benedict Arnold has.

But human beings never learn. Taking people's land and reducing them to second class citizens in their own countries has and will always produce those who will resist.

Netanyahu has said he is very committed to peace. This is a beginning and I hope it succeeds.

[boppers]

4. Netanyahu is dead.

Israeli's kill anybody who tries to make peace.

I don't know why.

[sabrina 1]

5. Do you really think that? I hadn't thought Netanyahu was viewed

as someone who is actually pushing hard for peace. I think he was probably persuaded that the U.S. and the rest of the world have run out of patience with this situation. Israel has lost support around the globe since its invasion of Lebanon, Gaza and then the murders of peace makers on the Flotilla.

I was under the impression that Netanyahy is a hardliner so not really a target of the extreme right. But I could be wrong. Maybe he really does want peace at this point.

[boppers]

13. A link:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Yigal_Amir

[sabrina 1]

14. Yes, I remember that assassination.

If there are many others in Israel like Amir then I suppose they view anyone who engages even in talk of resolving the issues there, as a traitor. I hope he was not representative of a large segment of the population. Doesn't seem to be so far.

[totodeinhere]

16. No he is not dead because he is just going through the motions and when it comes right

down to it he will not make peace.

[Historic NY]

8. That picture is unusual in itself that Obama was able to get them all together.

[OhioChick]

9. K&R n/t

[Xolodno]

12. Think the geo politics of the mid-east have changed...

Israel shares common enemy with Saudi Arabia and much of the rest of the Arab World, that being Iran. However, the Palestinian issue keeps them both from significant cooperation. Before, Iran wasn't much of an issue, but with them going nuclear..it changes things.

Then you have Israel's flops of military activities which have made supporting them a liability, even Turkey which was supportive is now backtracking, what if Jordan and Egypt were to do the same?

Does Bibi want to go down in history as the guy who destroyed the Palestinian peace process, ended friendships with its immediate neighbors, brought cooperation with the USA down to an all time low and assured at least a couple of decades of terror bombings? Perhaps even pushing Sunni nations to the side of at least giving tacit support to Iran such as Syria has (thus a gloom example of what could happen)? All just so they could have the borders they want despite living in a constant state of war?

Or does he want to be the guy that goes down in history who brought peace between the two sides, cooperated with its neighbors and stopped another Persian Empire in the Middle East? If this option is chosen, think it would be ironic that a Middle East nation going nuclear is what finally brings them together.

[bemildred]

15. Another empty photo-op. nt