Where Is Your Candidate On The Separation Wall?

[DrFunkenstein]

Lieberman, an Orthodox Jew, drew shouts of disagreement from many of the 300 or so people attending the Arab American Institute leadership conference in this Detroit suburb when he attempted to defend the security fence under construction by the Israeli government in the West Bank as a temporary nuisance that would be removed once the Palestinian leadership makes "a 100 percent effort" to end terrorism.

By contrast, Kucinich drew cheers when he identified himself as the only candidate who had voted against both the Patriot Act and the resolution authorizing use of military force against Iraq. Kucinich explicitly called on Israel to "stop building walls and stop building new settlements," and Kerry, in an apparent reference to the wall, said, "We do not need another barrier to peace."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A43374-2003Oct17.html

Dean wasn't there, but he is on record:

When they have bothered to state them, the Administration's guiding principles in the Middle East are the right ones. Terrorism against Israel must end. A two-state solution is the only path to eventual peace, but Palestinian territory cannot have the capability of being used as a platform for attacking Israel. Some degree of separation between Israelis and Palestinians is probably necessary in light of the horrible bloodshed of the past two years. To be viable, the Palestinian Authority must become democratic and purged of corruption.

http://www.deanforamerica.com/site/PageServer?pagename=policy_speech_foreign_drake

Dean also agreed with Lieberman that any Palestinian state must be "demilitarized," in his own words.

I imagine that Clark also came out against the wall, since the article mentioned he got a favorable reception. Anyone else feel that this was a move by Lieberman to secure pro-Israel money and support?

----

Here's a Kerry quote that I think is appropriate and sets out his general vision for foreign policy:

We face a renewed choice...between those who think you can build walls to keep the world out, and those who want to tear down the barriers that separate "us" from "them."

...

I am here today to reject the narrow vision of those who would build walls to keep the world out, or who would prefer to strike out on our own instead of forging coalitions and step by step creating a new world of law and mutual security.

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

[Darranar]

1. Well, I'm a Kucinichite...

so you already seem to know. He's condemned the seperation wall.

[JohnKleeb]

2. We are called Kucitizens Dar but who cares

lol. Good position by the congressman I must say.

[Darranar]

5. Kunicitizens?

That does have a certain ring to it.

And yes, his position is very admirable. If only more politicians adopted it...

[JohnKleeb]

6. Yea thats the technical name

Yea gotta love it.

[Classical_Liberal]

3. Dean's statement looks like an endorcement of "some degree separation"

not the wall. The two state solution itself represents some degree of serparation.

[JohnKleeb]

4. Kucinich wants two states too

Just so you know.

[Julien Sorel]

15. Leaves him just enough room to waffle.

Shocking, but then, what do you expect from a self-styled straight shooter.

[Tinoire]

7. Dean supports the Wall; calls it a fence like Sharon though

"One of the essential ingredients, interestingly in the Middle East is the fence. I was against the fence before I went to Israel, now I think it's critical, because it creates a fact on the ground, which means it's essentially along the border that Arafat and Barak almost agreed to and it also labels the settlements that will eventually have to be withdrawn when the army's decided are indefensable in order to get to a real peace settlement."
http://www.nationinstitute.org/radionation/

There was a discussion of that in this old DU thread: http://www.democraticunderground.com/discuss/duboard.php?az=show_topic&forum=108&topic_id=5282


On the I/P issue, which I see as the most critical foreign policy issue out there, Kucinich is the only one who has taken a consistent, substantiated, position that I can admire.

[legin]

11. link to Dean interview also

http://www.deanarchive.info/audio/audio.html

The I/P bit starts at 33:15 if I remember correctly.
(and I'm not happy with it)

[Darranar]

8. In case anyone's interested...

here is Kucinich's statement on the I/P conflict as a whole: http://www.kucinich.net/issues/issue_middleeast.htm

[laura888]

10. "a black hole of policy without purpose..."

...and conflict without resolution."

From your link - explaining what Kucinich thinks about current admin's actions (or lack thereof) on the I/P conflict.

I am definitely pro-Kucinich - I appreciate his being upfront.

What do the other candidates believe on this - I assume they are they doing the usual - all talk and no action (same as Clinton).

Please give us something beyond the usual.

[rucky]

9. Kerry deserves more sound bytes

That was a great quote! Kerry definately deserves more attention...as does Kuc, of course.

Anybody know where Clark stands? Does Clark know where Clark stands?

[loudnclear]

12. Sitting on the fence.

:) Couldn't resist!

[DrFunkenstein]

13. What Do Progressives Think Of This Statement?

"Without demanding unilateral concessions, the United States must mediate a series of confidence building steps which start down the road to peace.

Both parties must walk this path together - simultaneously. And the world can help them do it.

While maintaining our long term commitment to Israel's existence and security, the United States must work to keep both sides focused on the end game of peace. Extremists must not be allowed to control this process."

http://www.johnkerry.com/news/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

The road of parallel concessions is the one I hear forwarded by many Palestinian thinkers. It seems the one most likely to create the conditions of Mideast stability needed for a viable Palestinian state to come to fruition.

[JohnKleeb]

14. I give it 2

:thumbsup: :thumbsup: I like it Doc.

[Darranar]

16. Kerry pays lip service to both sides of the ME conflict...

look at what he said about Dean's evenhanded quote.

The Post also quoted another Democratic contender, Senator John F. Kerry, as saying: "It is either because he lacks the foreign policy experience or simply because he is wrong that governor Dean has proposed a radical shift in United States policy towards the Middle East. If the president were to make a remark such as this it would throw an already volatile region into even more turmoil."

http://www.islamonline.net/English/News/2003-09/09/article05.shtml

I believe he's also criticized Bush for not being pro-Israel enough.

[laura888]

17. Its sounds like more of the same...

Everyone and their mother has given a speech about how we should all just get along. I'm tired of seeing leaders shaking hands after yet another peace summit.

I want to know what Kerry thinks specifically - such as

1) Should Israel be allowed to build the wall?
2) If so, should they build it on Israel's land or Palestinian land?
Etc.

Without addressing specifics, its just blah blah blah.

[mrgorth]

18. I'd like Dean to be further left on israel...

but he probably can't be right now. He got killed in the press for the "tons of settlements" to tear down comment. I think Dean would play fair in the ME.