Posted on 08/18/2005 4:21:25 PM PDT by Alouette
As Israel struggled Thursday to evacuate the Gush Katif settlements, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice said it must take further steps.
"Everyone empathizes with what the Israelis are facing," she said in an interview with The New York Times. But, she added, "It cannot be Gaza only."
Rice said this is "really quite a dramatic moment in the history of the Middle East," and praised Sharon for proving himself "enormously courageous."
According to the Times, Rice said that while the withdrawal would take several weeks, Israel must take further steps soon afterward, including loosening travel restrictions in the West Bank and withdrawing from more Palestinian cities.
She also said the Palestinian Authority must disarm Hamas. "That is their obligation under the road map," she said.
Rice's comments prompted Agriculture Minister Yisrael Katz, a disengagement opponent, to call on Sharon to hold an emergency cabinet discussion on the matter.
"Rice's comments prove there is no basis to the prime minister's statement that there will not be an additional disengagement," he said.
"To my dismay, the unilateral evacuation of settlements from Gaza and northern Samaria creates a dangerous precedent which endangers the legitimacy of Israeli settlement in Judea, Samaria, the Jordan Valley, the Golan Heights and neighborhoods in east Jerusalem," Katz said.
But a senior official in the Prime Minister's Office warned against blowing Rice's words "out of proportion."
The official said that whereas some would automatically want to interpret her words as evidence that the US would now begin pressuring Israel to begin a second stage of disengagement, this was not what she said.
He said Rice was interested in seeing the implementation of the security plan put together by her envoy, Lt.-Gen. William Ward, which called for Israel to transfer control of the West Bank cities to the PA, but which Israel halted because of security considerations.
The official said Israel would transfer the cities to the PA when the security situation on the ground would make such a step possible. Furthermore, he repeated the government's well-known position that Israel would move ahead with the road map when the Palestinians fulfilled their obligations under the plan, first and foremost the dismantling of the terrorist infrastructure.
Some officials in Jerusalem have warned in recent weeks that once disengagement was complete, the US would once again begin pressuring Israel to remove the unauthorized settlement outposts in the West Bank. The US backed off of this issue in recent months, so as not to create any additional domestic problems for Sharon as he was gearing up for disengagement.
While Rice said she expected Israel to take further steps immediately, Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom told the Kuwaiti newspaper Al-Rai Al-Aam that Gaza would serve as a "model," and if the PA dismantled the terrorist infrastructure and "peace and quiet reign in the region, we will be able to move forward and return to the road map."
But, he said in comments published Thursday, "If Gaza turns into a base for shooting missiles at Israel and increasing Palestinian attacks, it will be impossible to move on to another step and take a new risk."
During the interview with the paper, conducted in Shalom's office on Wednesday, he said Israel was now expecting Palestinian "actions," not excuses. He said Israel was focused on the day after disengagement, and waiting to see whether the PA would rise to the occasion and – when it gains control of Gaza – dismantle the terrorist infrastructure and govern responsibly.
Shalom said PA Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas's first order of business after disengagement should be to arrest Hamas activists. "Abbas should do this not to protect Israel, but to safeguard his own power," he said.
Shalom's interview with the Kuwaiti paper was one of four interviews he gave key Arabic media outlets over the last two days to signal to the Arab world that the disengagement momentum should be seized upon, and that Israel was serious about peace.
He told the Kuwaiti paper that Gaza would not become a "prison," and that negotiations with the Palestinians regarding border crossings and safe passage were ongoing.
Asked about the long-disrupted peace talks with Syria, and whether Israel would be willing to give up the settlements in the Golan Heights as it did in Gaza, Shalom said: "Every party can come to the negotiation table with the topics they want, and we have to talk about everything."
AP contributed to this report.
Why does Israel have to do anything
Israel has NEVER had a friendlier President than President Bush. He fully understands the importance of having such a strong ally in the heart of the mideast... however, many of you just go way overboard, at the first sign of your (perceived, in some cases, real) feeling that he's not supporting Israel, you become fair-weathered friends, and throw him under the bus.
How lame. How sad. Just MHO.
To appease Muslims.
There's a strong argument to be made about keeping land won during wars, and if the opportunity arises, use it as leverage in land-for-peace deals, if security can be ensured. But just outright expanding their land, via land-grabs? I just don't understand
No other American President forced Israel to allow the formation of an independent terrorist state in its midst.
G-d gave the land of Israel to his chosen people forever.
The land extends from the sea on the west to the west bank of the Euphrates.
George is now working for the Evil One just as willi clinton did.
The land of Israel belongs to G-d!
The L-rd gave it to Abraham and his children forever; the Chosen People.
Anyone who denys this is not a follower of the Christ, Y'shua
b'shem Y'shua
You know that's not going to happen. We couldn't attack Iran or Syria if we wanted to. The lying liberal media has done such a good job of distorting the Iraqi war effort that there's no way ANY President would have the stomach for it. Not now.
Condi for President, I've a little familiarity with her position on gun control. Know nothing about abortion, fiscal policy, immigration, a host of issues. Way too early to throw her out, but it takes no cajunes (your spelling) not to support a largely blank slate.
You can reference my posts, of if you prefer, simply explain GWB's excessive friendliness toward Israel vs Reagan or Nixon.
This was interesting information, thanks for posting it. When will Israel learn from all of this that the leaders of the Palestinians are and will be terrorists for decades. Sharon should have stayed heavy handed and told the US to back off until "we" meaning Israel saw these groups completely disband. I am not liking Bush's foreign policies towards this matter whatsoever.
HST would have just for old fashioned principles.
I hope that too. Within 12 months, max, it will be a slum.
Missed that. I look forward to your expansion on the topic of land Israel has taken outright, expansionism, land-grabs and all, as opposed to the land you acknowledge was taken during defensive wars.
BTW, don't forget the Sinai. It's that big chunk of desert south of Rafah. Can't miss it, it's about 70% of those lands taken outright, and returned, twice.
Egypt uses it to smuggle arms into Gaza.
Bush refused to negotiate with terrorist Arafat, a first. He got rid of Saddam, which helps all countries in the region, including the U.S. and Israel, and could help extend democracy throughout.
I just don't see how there was ANY other option other than a 2 state solution... I think that sooner or later, it's a reality. The Arab polulation in the occupied territories multiplies like rabbits... If they were allowed to vote, it would be the end of Israel as we know it. Who needs Gaza anyway, most of the land is useless desert, except for the land that the Israelis built up. I think this was inevitable, as long as they are provided guarantees that if they are attacked, they will be defended forcefully.
Bush's policy towards Israel puts the lie to his war against terror which is in effect his entire Presidency. It's hypocrisy which - if even if you don't care about Israel- makes American sacrifices in Iraq a waste.
What is it that you say makes Bush Israel's friend?
It's you who are lame. Bush above all. No matter what he does. He's not a deity. He's a simple politician who was trusted to keep his word.
"Well, then why don't they just give over ALL their land, THEN there will finally be peace in the middle east! /sarcasm off"
Then they will come to destroy the "Zionists" here in America. We will have to give up all the muslim parts of every city because they have a "right" to it of course.
"Well, then why don't they just give over ALL their land, THEN there will finally be peace in the middle east! /sarcasm off"
Then they will come to destroy the "Zionists" here in America. We will have to give up all the muslim parts of every city because they have a "right" to it of course.
"Well, then why don't they just give over ALL their land, THEN there will finally be peace in the middle east! /sarcasm off"
Then they will come to destroy the "Zionists" here in America. We will have to give up all the muslim parts of every city because they have a "right" to it of course.
Israel isn't GWB's responsibility.
I doubt Iran will go nuclear. And yes, the US will probably scream bloody murder at Israel as we did before. But GWB isn't betraying anyone, just following his conscience.
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.