What are Kerry's positions on Israel/Palestein?

[themann1086]

I have a school project due the last day of school, and I'm supposed to summarize the Kerry position. It appears both Bush and Kerry are avoiding this topic like the plague, so if someone could point me in the right direction, that would be great. And who knows, it might even convince me even more to vote against Bush ;-)

[physioex]

1. Unfortunately, very little...

I don't have a link for a story. But what I have heard in interviews is not much. Lobbies such as AIPAC are too powerful at this time in history....

[in_cog_ni_to]

2. Here's some info from his campaign site.

“Americans’ security depends on helping the people of the Middle East see and act on a legitimate vision of peace.”
John Kerry believes that history and our own best interests demand that the United States maintain a steady policy of friendship and support for Israel. As the only true democracy in the Middle East, Israel is our most important ally, and a critical partner in the quest for peace and security in this troubled region. America’s longstanding commitment to Israel’s independence and survival must never waver.

Forging a stable and lasting peace in the Middle East is vital to American national security, to the security of Israel and other countries in the region, and to the aspirations of the Palestinian people for a viable Palestinian state. It is also an essential part of winning the war on terror. Ignoring or downplaying the conflict, as the Bush Administration did for far too long, is a dangerous game.

From his many trips to the region, John Kerry knows that a majority of Israelis and Palestinians want peace and that Israelis expect there will be a Palestinian state. Energetic American leadership is essential to helping them achieve that peace because the United States is the one country with the ability to work with all the parties to facilitate a necessary and meaningful dialogue. John Kerry sees the Bush Administration's road map - albeit long overdue - as an acceptable approach for reinvigorating the peace process. But it will only be viable if U.S. engagement in this process is active, constant, and at the highest levels. The United States cannot walk away or lessen its commitment to this process when violence erupts and the going gets rough. Failure to remain actively engaged will lead to further difficulties down the road and set the prospects for peace farther back. John Kerry believes we must work actively to encourage an end to the violence and to help the parties take the steps outlined by the road map - which both Israelis and Palestinians find difficult. And we must be realistic about what they can and cannot accomplish.

While no country can dictate the terms of peace, those opposed to peace can destroy its prospects. Israelis and Palestinians committed to peace cannot let that happen yet again. Progress toward peace cannot be made against a backdrop of terrorism and violence; they are not legitimate tools to achieve political goals.

Prime Minister Qureia must take serious, demonstrable steps to stop the bombings against Israelis and to rein in militant Palestinian groups bent on destroying the peace process. In Kerry’s view, it is critical that our European and Arab allies support this effort aggressively. If Prime Minister Qureia is committed to this course of action, the United States and its allies should provide technical assistance and training to the Palestinian security forces to strengthen their capacity to root out terrorist groups. The United States must also work with both Israelis and Palestinians to create acceptable and verifiable security benchmarks that the Palestinian Authority can reasonably achieve. While Israel must never give up its right to protect its citizens, the Israeli government must be prepared to respond with steps to alleviate hardships on the Palestinian people. The United States must work with Israel to identify and implement these confidence building measures.

As meaningful steps are taken to fight terrorism, Prime Minister Sharon and Prime Minister Qureia must move forward simultaneously with determination, perseverance, and demonstrated commitment on the road to peace. The United States must support their efforts - keep them focused on the end game of two states; Israel and Palestine, living side by aside in peace and security - and help them take the necessary steps to build enough confidence and trust in each other to get there. Kerry believes that a challenge of this magnitude and importance can only be met by successful and engaged Presidential leadership - leadership that he will provide as President.

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/foreignpolicy/

[kalian]

3. He's very pro-Israel....

which ticks me off tremendously.

[IndianaGreen]

8. Being "pro-Israel" is like being "pro-American"

Nothing but a pretext to justify the subjugation and murder of other peoples in the name of GAWD while ignoring the demands for justice and peace that Judaism, Christianity, and Islam makes on its believers.

Religion and patriotism have been subverted with irrational intolerance!

[kalian]

9. Couldn't agree more IG

:toast:

[Nicholas_J]

18. Kerry has made some very clear statements

That any negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians should have absolutely NO preconditions applied to them and that one side should noe be favored over the other in terms of reaching a settlement.

[JohnLocke]

12. ...Thankfully.

[lastknowngood]

4. Ethnic cleansing is fine with Kerry, he sees no votes or money

in supporting the Palestinians.

[Randomthought]

5. JK's position is on his web site

http://www.johnkerry.com/issues/foreignpolicy/


scroll down to "Working for Peace in the Middle East and Security for Israel '

[themann1086]

6. *sigh*

great. another president who sees Israel as a "democracy" even though the millions of palestinians have no voting, legal, or other civil rights...

[JohnLocke]

13. Wrong on all counts.

Palestinians have voting, legal, and civil rights.

[no name no slogan]

14. Yup. Just like blacks in the South did in 1946. (n/t)

[themann1086]

16. then who...

are their representatives in government? why is the Mossad allowed to continually imprison, assassinate, and torture "suspected" palestinians (sound familiar?)? The Palestinians, as I understand it, have only the Palestinian Authority as any sort of "government," as it is. Last I had heard, they had no ability to vote. Furthermore, whenever civilians (BOTH sides) are killed, how come there is no criminal investigation, only "massive retaliation;" that's their own phrase for it, though the Nazis patented it. History has such a way of coming back to bite people in the butt...

[IndianaGreen]

7. Sharon = Bush = Kerry

Meet the Press (NBC News) - Sunday, April 18, 2004

MR. RUSSERT: On Thursday, President Bush broke with the tradition and policy of six predecessors when he said that Israel can keep part of the land seized in the 1967 Middle East War and asserted the Palestinian refugees cannot go back to their particular homes. Do you support President Bush?

SEN. KERRY: Yes.

MR. RUSSERT: Completely?

SEN. KERRY: Yes.

http://www.msnbc.msn.com/id/4772030

[savistocate]

10. why why why~~~???

perplexed - bewildered - nonplussed...distraught even.

[DrFunkenstein]

11. Multilateral Concessions Toward A Stable Palestinian Nation

Israel's security will be best assured over the long term if real and lasting peace can be brought to the Middle East. I know from my own trips to Israel that the majority of the Israeli people understand and expect that one day there will be a Palestinian state.

Their frustration is that they do not see a committed partner in peace on the Palestinian side. Palestinians must stop the violence - this is the fundamental building block of the peace process. The Palestinian leadership must be reformed, not only for the future of the Palestinian people but also for the sake of peace. I believe Israel would respond to this new partner after all, Israel has already indicated its willingness to freeze settlements and to move toward the establishment of a Palestinian state as part of a comprehensive peace process.

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/pressroom/speeches/spc_2003_0123.html

[dkf]

15. I'd like to know what differences you can find.

They look awfully similar on the issue to me.

[DrFunkenstein]

19. Multilateral Concessions Vs. Unilateral Concessions

Bush supports a plan that demands that Palestinians cease hostilities before Israel has to come to the table. Kerry recognizes that this utopian notion will never occur, and that pressure needs to be put on both sides without halting the process every time there is a flare up. He understands (rightfully) that Israel is a strategic partner, but that it is in the best interest of Israel that a viable Palestinian state be created. His diplomatic stance will probably offend purists for either side in the U.S., but it is the most likely to see any real progress.

[Hippo_Tron]

17. Here's my plan for Israel...

Sharon and Arafat both need to be simultaneously punched in the face. Maybe Kerry will adopt my strategy when he's in the white house.

[Bombtrack]

20. He believes Israel has the right to exist. Sorry anti-Zionists

He's not a fucking moronic horde-thinking indymedia anti-globalist USA/Israel scapegoater. Sorry I sound hostile and pissed off, but those of us DUers who still are unafraid to support the TRADITIONAL DEMOCRATIC VALUE of believing in Israel can get a bit frustrated by the new ignorantly anti-Zionist, effectively anti-semetic chic of the European left and American far-left fringe, can get very frustrated here.

Does that make us OR KERRY Likudnik's and apoligists for everything Sharon does? ABSOLUTELY FUCKING NOT. But that is my point. It's not one or the other. There is a realist middle ground future plan, represented in Israel best by many Labour and Shuini party leaders, that seeks to get out of the West Bank, get a Pallestinian state moving, BUT REALIZE THAT TERRORISM IS NEVER justified.

[no name no slogan]

21. Nice strawman....

But believe it or not, most people on the left also feel Israel has a right to exist, within its boundaries before the 1967 war. Most of us also believe that the Palestinians are entitled to a sovereign state of their own, consisting of the West Bank and Gaza Strip.

However, that will NEVER happen if Israel AND the US continue down the same failed path we've taken for almost 40 years.

Whether its Likud or Labour, NEITHER PARTY in Israel has been willing to recognize a sovereign Palestinian state, made up of the Gaza Strip, East Jerusalem and a CONTIGUOUS West Bank. IOW, no "checkpoints", "settlements", "safety walls" or "corridors" that in any way violate the contiguity of the West Bank.

Until Israel is ready to recognize UN 242, and begin withdrawing to its pre-1967 borders COMPLETELY, this situation won't be settled. The Palestinians have made good faith efforts in the past, only to be shot down by the greed of Israeli politicians. THAT is the reason for the "resistance".

When your opponent has his boot on your neck, you will do ANYTHING to break free. Does that justify killing anybody? ABSOLUTELY NOT. But once we recognize that both sides have committed evil, we may get that much closer to peace.

[DrFunkenstein]

22. Personally, I Am Left Of Kerry But Hardly Anti-Semitic or Pro-Terrorism

I believe that Kerry's position is the best position we are going to get from a national-level Democrat (even Howard Dean was to the right of Kerry on the issue).

For me, our strategic relationship to Israel (in weapons systems and guaranteed loans) is actually a detriment to our national security. And, without absolving Palestinian terrorist tactics, Israel is guilty of some pretty cold-blooded human rights violations on a large scale. I'm not looking for moral equivalents, but American politicians - including Kerry - can do more to apply pressure on the Israelis to effectively negotiate.

That said, I return to my first point, that Kerry is the best we're going to get. At this point, Kerry means Clinton for all intents and purposes.

[mrgorth]

24. Not sure you're right about that hoss

He had about the same position if I remember. He made some flubs that sounded too leftist but also had an AIPAC guy working with him. The funniest shit ever was people calling Dean, husband to Judith Steinberg and father of children being raised jewish, anti-semetic.

[IndianaGreen]

23. Israel's armament industry has made a tidy profit out of the Iraq war

while American blood is being shed on a war in which the Israel Lobby in America played a significant role in selling to the public.

The spies who pushed for war

Julian Borger reports on the shadow rightwing intelligence network set up in Washington to second-guess the CIA and deliver a justification for toppling Saddam Hussein by force

Thursday July 17, 2003
The Guardian

The OSP was an open and largely unfiltered conduit to the White House not only for the Iraqi opposition. It also forged close ties to a parallel, ad hoc intelligence operation inside Ariel Sharon's office in Israel specifically to bypass Mossad and provide the Bush administration with more alarmist reports on Saddam's Iraq than Mossad was prepared to authorise.

"None of the Israelis who came were cleared into the Pentagon through normal channels," said one source familiar with the visits. Instead, they were waved in on Mr Feith's authority without having to fill in the usual forms.

The exchange of information continued a long-standing relationship Mr Feith and other Washington neo-conservatives had with Israel's Likud party.

In 1996, he and Richard Perle - now an influential Pentagon figure - served as advisers to the then Likud leader, Binyamin Netanyahu. In a policy paper they wrote, entitled A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm, the two advisers said that Saddam would have to be destroyed, and Syria, Lebanon, Saudi Arabia, and Iran would have to be overthrown or destabilised, for Israel to be truly safe.

http://www.guardian.co.uk/Iraq/Story/0,2763,999737,00.html

For Israel Lobby Group, War Is Topic A, Quietly
At Meeting, Jerusalem's Contributions Are Highlighted
By Dana Milbank
Washington Post Staff Writer
Tuesday, April 1, 2003; Page A25

As delegates to the AIPAC meeting were heading to town, the group put a headline on its Web site proclaiming: "Israeli Weapons Utilized By Coalition Forces Against Iraq." The item featured a photograph of a drone with the caption saying the "Israeli-made Hunter Unmanned Aerial Vehicle" is being used "by U.S. soldiers in Iraq."

At an AIPAC session on Sunday night, Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom proclaimed in a speech praising Secretary of State Colin L. Powell: "We have followed with great admiration your efforts to mobilize the international community to disarm Iraq and bring democracy and peace to the region, to the Middle East and to the rest of the world. Just imagine, Mr. Secretary, how much easier it would have been if Israel had been a member of the Security Council."

A parade of top Bush administration officials -- Powell, national security adviser Condoleezza Rice, political director Kenneth Mehlman, Undersecretary of State John R. Bolton and Assistant Secretary of State William Burns -- appeared before the AIPAC audience. The officials won sustained cheers for their jabs at European opponents of war in Iraq, and their tough remarks aimed at two perennial foes of Israel, Syria and Iran.

The AIPAC meeting -- attended by about 5,000 people, including half the Senate and a third of the House -- was planned long before it became clear it would coincide with hostilities in Iraq. And organizers tried to play down the emphasis on Iraq, dedicating only one of its 12 "forums" during the conference to the war. "This is not about Iraq," said AIPAC spokesman Josh Block. "This is about going to Congress and lobbying for the Israeli aid package."

http://www.washingtonpost.com/ac2/wp-dyn/A63578-2003Mar31