Mitchell expresses support for Palestinian unity government

[azurnoir]

US Middle East Envoy George Mitchell expressed support during for Egyptian efforts to forge a Palestinian national unity government, indicating that America could take a new tack on Fatah-Hamas reconciliation, during a conference call Thursday with Jewish leaders.

Though Mitchell said that Hamas would still need to adhere to the Quartet's demands that it half violence, recognize Israel and accept previous Palestinian-Israeli agreements in such a government, and that chances for that weren't good, the fact that the US would support a Palestinian structure aimed at incorporating and potentially co-opting Hamas rather than working to exclude it suggested the contours of a fresh approach by the Obama administration.

The State Department did not immediately respond to requests for clarification on its policy on a national unity government.

He also warned against relying to much on history and historical comparisons, noting that his work brokering the peace in North Ireland did not provide the best blueprint for resolving the Middle East conflict since the latter was not only different but tougher to solve.

It is a comparison that others have made, and seen as a sign that this US administration might be more willing to talk to Hamas than the previous one.

http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?cid=1233304832116&pagename=JPost%2FJPArticle%2FShowFull

[bemildred]

1. U.S. Mideast envoy: Settlements are not the only issue

WASHINGTON - The U.S. administration's special envoy to the region told the heads of several U.S. Jewish groups yesterday that while the issue of Israeli settlements comes up in every conversation with Arab leaders, "it is not the only issue."

George Mitchell, who is scheduled to depart this weekend for his second visit to the Middle East, also said the U.S. was committed both to Israel's security and to the establishment of a Palestinian state. He was speaking with the Jewish leaders by conference call. Call participants included Malcolm Hoenlein, the executive vice chairman of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations; UJC representative rabbi Steve Gutow, executive director of the Jewish Council for Public Affairs; Ira Forman, Executive Director of the National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC); representatives of J Street; Americans for Peace Now and others.

The U.S. envoy stressed that economic peace between Israel and the Palestinians, without diplomatic efforts, would not succeed, and said that diplomatic and economic efforts "must be parallel, not sequential. You can't have economic development when you're shutting the door in the face of any diplomatic development."

"We had 700 days of failure in Northern Ireland and one day of success. I cannot guarantee you a result, but I can guarantee you an effort," he said, adding, "We have a firm and unshakable commitment to the security of the State of Israel, and a commitment to seek a lasting peace based on a two-state solution."

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1065672.html

[aranthus]

21. He needs to tell this to the Arab side.

And he needs to tell the Israelis that even if settlements are not the only issue, that they are a legitimate issue.

[bemildred]

2. ZOA head expects increased anti-Semitism in U.S.

---

"I am worried that if Obama puts pressure on Israel to make concessions that Israel believes is not in its security interest, people will start saying Israel does not want peace," he said. "I believe that this pressure will happen - although I hope I'm wrong." Klein, who is currently in Israel with the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations, added that if "Obama starts acting unfriendly toward Israel, in the environment we have in the world today, this could - God forbid - encourage those who dislike Jews, for whatever reasons, to act on their dislike." Klein bases his concern about the new U.S. administration on Obama's record as Illinois senator - calling him the "most left-wing of all senators" - and some of Obama's former associates, "among them the most hostile critics of Israel" and outspoken anti-Semites.

Furthermore, the ZOA president said that Obama has appointed anti-Israel politicians to high positions within his administration. For instance, Washington's new Middle East envoy, George Mitchell, is "a real problem," according to Klein. The ZOA issued a statement last month opposing his appointment by Obama.

Klein also expressed concern about Hillary Clinton. Although the incoming secretary of state is widely seen as a close ally of the Jewish state, Klein believes that Clinton is "not as strongly pro-Israel as she's seen." He explained that despite many "wonderful speeches" as New York senator, "when it came down to actually doing anything about these issues - like linking aid to compliance - she always had an excuse why she can't do it." Also Vice President Joe Biden - who Klein said is a close personal friend and who considers himself "a Zionist" - does not pass the pro-Israel test. "His views on Israel are the views of the far-left," Klein said.

Klein added that considering his lack of confidence in the Israeli leadership, it is appropriate for American Jews to criticize Israeli politicians, since "this land was given to all Jews" and not just those who live in Israel.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1065706.html

[azurnoir]

3. Not in Israels "security interests"

the problem here is that I have seen almost any concession called not to be in the interest of Israels security up to and including a viable Palestinian state, Gaza is given as the usual example and I will admit I was quite slow in seeing that game and why Gaza was choked off economically from day one for what it is

[pelsar]

4. they really shouldnt try to kill israelis...

its started on the very day israel left gaza.....one might think that the leadership in gaza, might have tried NOT trying to kill israelis on an almost daily basis....then you might have a case that israel tried to "choke them"..but given the fact that the gazans shot rockets and mortars into israeli cities and settlements, over 6,000 and counting, it appears that living in peace with their neighbor was not in their plans....

and all that started on the very day israel left gaza...really dumb decision....really dumb and it was their decision, all by themselves.

and of course shooting up and attacking the border terminals and trucks where the supplies from israel was brought in was probably even stupider ...as if israelis should risk their lives to bring in supplies to the very society that is trying to kill them

[Violet_Crumble]

7. Newsflash: the Gazan population wasn't trying to kill Israelis...

'as if israelis should risk their lives to bring in supplies to the very society that is trying to kill them'

That's a totally incorrect comment that stereotypes Palestinians, pelsar. How would you like it if someone trotted out something similar about Israeli society and posted that Israeli society was trying to kill Palestinians? You wouldn't, so why do it about Palestinians?

[pelsar]

9. it is a generalization...no question about it....

at the sametime i dont know how one can describe a situation without generalizing..

the IDF uses "human shields"..when in fact its a few soldiers ignoring their orders, so do we stop saying "the IDF" (its made up of normal people too)....the settlers are threatening and terrorizing the Palestinians, when in fact its only a few out of the 100,000's. Most are just living their lives...yet we say 'the settlers".....

one can say its the hamasnikm...but even thats generalization..no doubt some of its members are simply members so that they can have a job and be on the right size of the politics so they can have some quiet in their lives.

so how does one infact describe the "antagonists...."

[Violet_Crumble]

10. The IDF, hamas, and the settlers are one thing...

...it is a bit difficult not to in those cases, but when it comes to either Israeli or Palestinian society, then it's much easier not to generalise. Neither society is out to kill the other, and while there's small segments of both populations that do wish the other dead, for most people that's not the case...

[pelsar]

11. point taken...but the generalizations remain....

i really dont think its possible to describe the situations without the generalizations.....obviously even within those small segments their remains a wide variety...but in the interest of conversation and discussion i''ll stick to my preferred description hamasnikim

but this whole situation is based on generalization since its impossible to separate the various groups.....and they also intertwine (used to be fatah by day, hamas by night in gaza.....)

[bemildred]

5. Seriously demented. Not a member of the reality based community.

Can't tell his friends from his enemies. My way or the highway, and oh yeah, I want the highway too.

[Vegasaurus]

6. The Palestinians have blown every possible opportunity

Every single one.

They could have made something for themselves dozens of times by now.

They had global support after Israel pulled out of Gaza, but they chose terrorism and war.

Gaza has choked itself.

[Violet_Crumble]

8. Yeah, why couldn't they thrive under that Israeli blockade? They clearly didn't try!!

Sheez, considering that Israel has gone out of its way to ensure that Gaza is more or less blocked off from most of the world and has no funds coming in, how the fuck do you expect them to have 'made something for themselves dozens of times by now'? Hey, let's set up a whole lot of boxes randomly up a supermarket aisle, stick a blindfold on you, and then when you stumble over the boxes, everyone can yell at you that you could have done it but you choked yrself and you chose to fail...

[Vegasaurus]

12. We're talking in 2005

when millions of dollars of greenhouses were left intact and three was an entire global support system in place.

Instead, the Palestinians (militants etc) destroyed the greenhouses and started shooting rockets the very first day.

They had such an opportunity to govern themselves and develop an economy.

But they chose terrorism, which was a stupid choice.

[Violet_Crumble]

13. They're some overly expensive greenhouses there!

So yr talking about a few splitseconds in time. So fucking what? You seem blissfully unaware that Israel had destroyed a lot of Gaza's infrastructure prior to that (eg lots of homes, the airport etc). Maybe you can try to explain how an economy can be developed when there was no time for one to be developed before Israel started blockading Gaza?

It's very clear that you hold the people of Gaza to very different standards than you do any other people who have been occupied by a foreign power...

[Vegasaurus]

14. Actually, I don't

My point it that the world was waiting with open pocketbooks, to help the Gazans.

The airport could easily be rebuilt, seaports opened, etc.

All they needed to do was show that building their society was more important than trying to destroy Israel.

But they chose terrorism, and it was a stupid choice.

[Violet_Crumble]

15. That's not what yr words come across as...

No, the world wasn't waiting with open pocketbooks and it's not just a snap of the fingers to rebuild a destroyed airport. You seem to think there weren't any obstacles in place to stop a viable economy arising. Of course there were major ones. The economy was definately better back in 2005 than it is now, btw, so as usual you don't make any real point at all.

[shira]

16. please buy a clue, Violet

When Israel pulled out of Gaza in 2005, only months later did the "Crossings Agreement" happen - which gave the PA autonomy over the Rafah crossing. There was NO naval blockade either.

Instead of trying to make SOMETHING out of the fact that Palestinians NOW had their own land free of settlements and occupation, violence only ESCALATED.

Your theory - and it was mine too at one time - that if only Israel makes the right decisions peace will happen - was proven to be an EPIC FAIL wrt Gaza.

Of course, being as blind as you are - that example means nothing to you. It's as if it never happened and you can ignore it, call on Israel to do the same - and if violence escalates from the Palestinian side, you can ignore that again too and blame Israel for that too.

[Vegasaurus]

17. Violet is unable to see truths

deliberate blindness?

[aranthus]

20. Well yes and no.

I have seen what you are talking about, so I know you're not wrong in saying that some Israelis push the security button too far and too hard. However, Israel does have legitimate security interests (so do the Palestinians, and the US), and it's important to keep that in mind. Peace is going to require the taking of risks. The Israelis are afraid to take risks without some assurance of reasonableness. Why give up control of the West Bank, if Hamas will take over, and then have the option of firing rockets on Tel Aviv instead of only Sderot and Ashkelon?

[ProgressiveMuslim]

18. Let's hope the Israeli gov't is also forced to adhere to the Quartet's demands

that it halt violence, recognize Palestine and accept previous agreements.

Not likely though.

[Scurrilous]

19. Obama's Mideast envoy talks Gaza with Israeli leaders

<snip>

"US President Barack Obama's Middle East envoy George Mitchell discussed the situation in Gaza with senior Israeli officials on Thursday on his second regional trip to try to advance stalled peace talks.

"We are going to discuss before the gathering of the donor states in Egypt the situation in Gaza," outgoing Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni told reporters before the talks with Mitchell at a Tel Aviv hotel.

"Israel believes that there is a need to help... humanitarian needs and to find a way to do so without strengthening Hamas, the terrorist organisation that runs Gaza," she said.

Mitchell said only that he was looking forward to the talks. He later met Benjamin Netanyahu, the hawk charged with forming Israel's new government, but neither said anything at the start or end of the encounter.

The former US senator's visit comes ahead of an international conference on reconstruction for the Gaza Strip in Egypt on Monday, due to be attended by US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton.

Mitchell was due to meet outgoing Prime Minister Ehud Olmert later in the day for closed-door talks.

On Friday, he was due to hold talks with Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak before heading to the occupied West Bank for meetings with Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas and prime minister Salam Fayyad on Friday.

Clinton is to visit Israel and the West Bank following the Gaza aid meeting in the Egyptian Red Sea resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh.

Obama has vowed to vigorously pursue Israeli-Palestinian peace talks, which were relaunched to much fanfare at a US conference in November 2007 but have made little progress since."

more