Prime Miniser Ariel Sharon and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice ahead of their talks in Jerusalem on Sunday.
(AP)
Condoleezza Rice laying a wreath at the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum in Jerusalem on Sunday.
(Reuters)
Posted on 02/06/2005 12:53:43 PM PST by anotherview
Last Update: 06/02/2005 20:55
Rice urges Israel to avoid unilateral steps on J'lem
By Aluf Benn, Haaretz Correspondent Haaretz Staff and Agencies
Prime Miniser Ariel Sharon and U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice ahead of their talks in Jerusalem on Sunday.
Condoleezza Rice laying a wreath at the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum in Jerusalem on Sunday.
(AP)
(Reuters)
U.S. Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice on Sunday met with Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom and President Moshe Katsav, and urged them to maintain the status quo over Jerusalem, and avoid taking any unilateral steps on the disputed capital which could harm Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas. Israeli sources said Rice was referring to the government's decision from last summer to apply the absentee property law to tens of thousands of dunams (acres) of Palestinian property in East Jerusalem. Attorney General Menachem Mazuz last week instructed Finance Minister Benjamin Netanyahu to order an immediate halt to the application of the law. The sources said Rice may also have been referring to the decision to build the separation fence in Jerusalem, and to expand Jewish neighborhoods in the city.
Rice said Sunday that the disengagement plan is an historic opportunity, and that the future security of Palestinians and Israelis will be ensured only by two states exisiting side by side.
In an interview with TV Channel 2 Rice emphasized the importance of direct contact between Israeli and Palestinian negotiators, and minimum involvement of mediators such as the U.S.
When asked about the right of return for Palestinian refugees, the secretary of state said that while new demographic realities since 1967 must be taken into account, the parties must reach an agreement accommodating to the needs of them both.
Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom, who was the first Israeli official to meet with Rice on Sunday, told the secretary of state, "Israel will not relinquish its sovereignty over Jerusalem. The issue of Jerusalem will be left to the final status agreement, but we have to intention to harm the Palestinians."
Rice also said that Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's disengagement plan must be implemented without delay, and carried out according to its timetable. She told Shalom that Abu Mazen [Abbas] was elected through democratic elections and he needs as much help as possible to give a firm basis to his leadership. Shalom responded that "the pain of the settlers [to be evacuated under the plan] must be understood and empathy must be shown. These people do not know where they will live or where they will work.
Rice arrived in Israel in an optimistic mood Sunday afternoon, as she prepared for talks with Israeli and Palestinian officials two days before the first official Middle East summit since the death of Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat last November.
Her first stop was a visit to the Yad Vashem Holocaust museum in Jerusalem, where she laid a wreath inside the Hall of Remembrance.
She then met with Shalom, followed by Prime Minister Ariel Sharon. She is also due to meet President Moshe Katsav later Sunday.
Ahead of their meeting, Sharon said he was sure his talks with Rice would "contribute to the friendly relations between the two countries." Sharon said he also expected her visit to contribute to the peace process, "which we want to very much want to push forward in the region."
In response, Rice said U.S.-Israel relations were solid "because we share not just interests but values." She said her goal was to "try to advance the cause of peace and to overcome the scourge of terrorism."
Before meeting Shalom, Rice said, "we will ask of our partners and our friends in Israel that Israel continues to make the hard decisions that must be taken in order to promote peace and... the emergence of a democratic Palestinian state.
"This is a time of optimism because fundamental changes are underway in the Middle East as a whole," she added.
After their meeting, Shalom told Channel 2 television that he gave Rice Israel's demands of the Palestinians.
"If the Palestinians do not to everything to halt the smuggling of weapons through tunnels, close the tunnels, close the weapons workshops, gather up illegal weapons - we would simply be giving the violent groups time to regroup and then carry out terror attacks that could collapse the whole process," he said.
On Monday, Rice will travel to the West Bank city of Ramallah for talks with Abbas and Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qureia.
Tuesday's summit, hosted and initiated by Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak in the resort town of Sharm el-Sheikh, will be attended by Sharon, Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas and Jordan's King Abdullah.
Although the U.S. has said that the secretary of state will not attend the talks, her agenda is likely to include in part a review of the plans for the summit.
Rice has signaled she prefers to see Sharon and Abbas make progress as free of foreign mediation as possible.
"I hope we would all get into a mind-set that says if the parties are able to continue to move on their own, that's the very best outcome," Rice told reporters en route to Ankara, the stop before Israel.
Preparations for the Egypt summit are being finalized, but not before her arrival.
Israeli officials assessed that the secretary of state would commend both sides on their recent efforts.
Paul Patin, a spokesman of the U.S. Embassy in Tel Aviv, said Rice would bring up a wide range of issues, including Israel's commitment under the internationally backed road map peace plan to dismantle dozens of unauthorized West Bank settlement outposts and Israeli gestures to the Palestinians, such as the removal of Israeli checkpoints that disrupt Palestinian travel - gestures that would bolster confidence in the new Palestinian leadership.
"Outposts are something that they promised to remove years ago and we expect them to abide by their commitments," Patin said.
She is also expected to call on the Palestinians to do more to restore security and bring an end to violence.
For their part, the Americans are trying to play down Rice's absence from the Egyptian summit.
"It is not necessary to participate at the highest level in every gathering in order to be a major player and part of the solution," a State Department spokesman explained Saturday.
In Israel, police raised their level of operations in various regions around the country Sunday, in anticipation of Rice's arrival and the run-up to Tuesday's summit.
Police decided to bolster forces around the country and checkpoints were set up between the seam line and various Israeli cities. Police will conduct both regular and undercover patrols.
Sharon may invite Mubarak Israeli officials, meanwhile, said Sunday that Sharon may invite his Egyptian counterpart to visit Israel during Tuesday's summit, as relations between the former enemies continue to flourish.
The invitations "is quite likely," said an unnamed official. "We would very much like him to come."
In recent months relations have improved as Egypt took a larger role in mediating between Israel and the Palestinians. The last visit by an Egyptian leader to Israel was by Mubarak in 1995, when he came to the funeral of assassinated prime minister Yitzhak Rabin.
Does retoric come before speling in the dictionary ?
Lol how funny. Your blame reaction is quick indeed :-). I think that Alouette is paranoid. Maybe you are, too. And I think it has been going on long before this thread ever came to be. If you are intimidated by words - maybe you would do well to look at your level of paranoia?
I honestly think that you may be happier on some extremist site someplace. Does that "cause" you to become paranoid? How does that work?
I asked you a simple question. Since the US gives tremendous foreign aid to Europe why don’t we give them orders on how to conduct their affairs the way you believe the US should do to Israel because we give Israel much smaller sums. I need not detail the garbage we have put up with from France whose survival or territorial integrity was never at stake. After countless posts reiterating your mantra “I support the President” you still have not addressed this basic issue which you raised by saying that Israel is obligated to do as the US says because they take US aid.
I answered your question. Here it is again. Do not think that we would blindly defend Europe right now. Everything has changed since 9/11. The public has been much more engaged and is aware of the anti-Americanism coming from certain quarters of Europe. Don't, for a minute, think that we would play "saviour" to France or even Germany. NATO serves our purposes for the time being. As long as it does - we will support it.
But that does not change my opinion that if Israel thinks our relationship is not in Her interest - She is free to break it off. No one is "forcing" Israel to take our money or our support or our council.
I am not interested in your name calling or in your opinions of me or in your opinion of where I belong. Call me anything you like. I’ll let my words speak for me. Stick to the discussion if you have anything at all germane to say.
And I am not interested in your put downs or your ridicule. I have not seen any salient arguments made on this thread. I have already said that. If you have some penetrating new insight to offer - by all means let's hear them. So far - all you have said is the same thing over and over - just like I have. You think that you know better than President Bush and Secretary Rice and I think that President Bush and Secretary Rice know more than you. If you have anything else that is "germane" - please express it.
Finally I believe you have outed your real agenda here by your remarks about “poor Palestinian children.” You are a Palestinian sympathizer against Israel. That’s fine. Or not really. But don’t wrap yourself in the American flag when your agenda is Palestinian rights, and you are referring to the Israelis and their supporters as “the most ungodly and unspiritual people on the planet.”
Now I am convinced that you are paranoid:-) Can a human being not express sadness for the pain that Palestinian children suffer without you immediately accusing them of being against Israel? That is just ridiculous. In fact, that is tragic. Are you in favor of Palestinian children suffering?
Do you even know how the Palestinian children live? Are many starving? Do they go to school? Many children around the globe have the same or much lower standard of living. How about the ones starving to death? Where’s your overstated compassion for them?
Where have you been? I spoke out way before the Iraq war about the suffering there - the suffering in Zimbawe, in Sudan. I have spoken forcefully for Israel. I have spoken about the atrocities in Iran and in North Korea. Where have you been, dervish?
You show yourself quick to judge and quick to assume. Neither is a quality to be proud of.
As Alouette addressed, the implication of your statement is that the Israelis have brought them to this impasse and are heartless to not make peace to ameliorate their condition.
That is your paranoia speaking. There is no implication there at all. Why are you all so paranoid?
This thread has diminished my support for Israel, that is true. I had no idea how arrogant and ungrateful some of the Israelis are. That has been eye-opening. But I still support the existence of Israel. I also support the existence of a peaceful Palestinian State living side by side with Israel.
bttt
Please provide ID. I am glad you exhibit some signs of multinationalism in a pursuit older than the nation state.
I would answer in kind but I can't figure out how to put a picture in.
Nope still not answered.
The analogy is simple. Israel gets US aid not military personnel or a "savior." Unlike Europe, the US has never rescued Israel militarily. The analogy is money to NATO without strings and money to Israel with strings. Somehow you have thrown in the US will not act as "savior" to Europe. Well Israel has never asked nor required that. So irrelevant whether the US will save Europe again. Stick to the issue -- financial support.
Your blanket four word statement "NATO serves our purposes" doesn't make it so or add anything to the discussion. Prove it. I have a long post discussing the reverse conclusion. At least refute it.
This thread has diminished my support for Israel, that is true.
Once again you have made your pique at some posters in a forum, not US interests, the deciding factor in support for a US ally. What discernment. And where is the love of country in that? I somehow don't think you have the ear of the President so I'm not atremble.
As to the rest...yadayadayada. Who cares. Your mantra is repetitive as mantras are.
I am called "arrogant peasant" quite often - I don't know why, I've got no idea about agriculture.
NATO serves our purpose. As do coalitions of the willing. That requires no more to be said.
Once again you have made your pique at some posters in a forum, not US interests, the deciding factor in support for a US ally. What discernment. And where is the love of country in that? I somehow don't think you have the ear of the President so I'm not atremble
Yes, as I said - I had no idea how ungrateful and arrogant some Israelis are. That makes a difference to me. I find it odd that it wouldn't make a difference to you.
My interest is in what serves America. As long as Israel is a good friend and ally to America as long as American and Israeli interests coincide - I will support Israel. If Israel turns on us or slaps us in the face - that will change my view.
I used to feel differently about France than I do now. Same with Canada. The way that countries and citizens within those countries treat America, Americans and our President makes a difference to me. For it not to - would be strange.
I am less supportive of Israel now having met you and your nine or so commrades. That is the impact you have had on me.
You have not said anything new or valuable since your first posts. Have you nothing "germane" to add - or to you just get a kick out of insulting me?
Gallup/CNN/USA Today – May, 2003
“Do you favor or oppose the establishment of an independent Palestinian State?”
58% favor
22% oppose
Fox News Poll – June 17-18, 2003
74% of Americans said that the US should not take either side (Israel’s or the Palestinian’s) in the conflict.
German Marshall Fund of the US – June 10-25, 2003
“Should the US increase political pressure on Israel to withdraw from the Palestinians territories?”
40% -strongly agree
27% - agree somewhat
{{{Attitudes about a Palestinian state are not well formed and are highly responsive to context. When told that President Bush favors a Palestinian state overwhelming majorities support this position. However, without this context a slim majority or plurality is in favor, while opposition is low and many do not take a position. }}}
{{{When informed of President Bush's position on the issue, more than 3 in 4 support the US backing the establishment of a Palestinian state. PIPA's November 2001 poll asked: "President Bush has said that there ought to be a Palestinian state, provided that it recognizes the right of Israel to exist. Do you support or do you oppose this position?" An overwhelming majority (77%) supported the President's position, while only 13% opposed it…}}}
US public support for a Palestinain state
>>>A majority of Americans believes events in the Middle East and Israel are vitally important to the US, and an overwhelming majority sees the resolution of the Israel-Palestinian conflict as an important foreign policy goal…<<<
>>>A strong majority views Israel as a friend of the United States, but only a substantial minority views it as an ally, and Americans are divided over sending US troops to defend Israel in the event it is attacked. A majority of Americans has a positive view of Israel in general, but are divided about Prime Minister Ariel Sharon…<<<
>>>A plurality to solid majority takes an even-handed view of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, blaming both sides equally and expressing equal levels of sympathy, though a larger minority takes a more favorable view of Israel than of the Palestinians. A substantial majority feels neither side has made enough effort to seek peace, and a majority questions each side's fundamental commitment to peace…<<<
Yep, you got it!
Right you are!
"... both religions believe where the Bible says that Jerusalem (specifically the Temple Mount) is where G-d chose to dwell on earth. I also believe the same Bible refers to Jews as "chosen people"."
Right you are, anotherview!
You are exactly right, Alouette!
I hvae to say that all this talk about Jerusaleum is a bit ahead of where we are. At the moment there is barely a ceasefire. In the end there will be harder issues to deal with like Jerusaleum and Right of Return but any decision or compromise will be at least a decade off in my opinion.
"Why should we allow anyone, even an emissary from a friendly nation, question our right to our capital for three milennia? Secretary Rice made a mistake. We are pointing that out. That is all. It is not an attack on the Secretary of State but rather an expression to a friend that she needs to choose her words more carefully."
You're exactly right, anotherview!
I avoid "belief" like the plaque. But I can predict the weather based on the clouds I see in the sky -- so can most people, or so did most people used to be able to do, before the Weather Channel.
In one incident recounted last week by officers near the southern end of the coastal strip, troops patrolling at night came upon two black-masked Al Aqsa Martyrs' Brigade gunmen preparing to fire mortars toward a Jewish settlement.See? Denial of responsibility and continuance of evil. No change.The gunmen "cooperated well with us," said platoon leader Jamal Abu Ziad, 41. "We told them to move and they left." The commandos were not forced to unmask or produce identity papers. [Or arrested for attempted terrorism!] "You have to start smoothly with them," Abu Ziad said. "If they didn't listen, we would have arrested them."
If the relationship seems chummy, it is. Even as Abu Ziad was speaking, a 23-year-old who identified himself as an Al Aqsa fighter and gave only his nom de guerre, Abu Mahmoud, ambled over to talk with the troops. "These guys are just following orders," said Abu Mahmoud, seeming unintimidated. "The ball is in Israel's court."
The US is setting a mad dog loose in another's nieghborhood and if any question that we have more than our fair share of pikers speaking officially and unofficially saying "You don't love dogs! You're a dog abuser!"
When I was much younger and living in the U.S. there was a very good baseball player, a relief pitcher, who called himself "the mad Hungarian". Do you think other Hungarians were offended by this?Al Hrabosky...and he did indeed act a little unbalanced out on the mound...LOL
-Eric
This thread has diminished my support for Israel, that is true. I had no idea how arrogant and ungrateful some of the Israelis are. That has been eye-opening.It should not. We have people in America who are idiots too. Look how many saw Michael Moore's schlockumentary.
As I said earlier, the Bush Administration is firmly committed to the support of Israel. No one denies that. The purpose of the Road Map is to eventually secure peace in the region. It takes the middle ground between the Pali rejectionists who would push Israel into the sea, and the Kahanists who would march three million people across the Jordan River at gunpoint and blow up some of the holiest sites in Islam.
One point worth noting is that most of the representatives of that latter group in this forum do not live in Israel. They live in the United States. The extremist groups Kach and Kahane Chai are banned as terrorist groups there (though the bans are sporadically enforced).
In Israel, you will find that a majority of the people favor the road map or some equivalent. Recently in Cleveland, there was a story in the paper about a traveling group of Israeli students who visited with a local group. The locals were shocked that most of the Israeli students were outspokenly anti-settlement.
Most of them are sick of fighting, yet quite sensibly expect the Palestinians to be reasonable as well. That's the approach the Bush Administration has taken.
-Eric
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.