Brace yourself: The U.S. embassy in Israel still isn't moving

National Review ^ | 6-27-06 | Jim Geraghty

[Honestfreedom]

Pat Moynihan once said that he was not going to promise to move the embassy any more since his party was just lying when they promised that.

[kabar]

The US Embassy is not moving until the status of Jerusalem is resolved. Only two countries have their embassies in Jerusalem, i.e., Costa Rica and El Salvador. That's the political reality and Congress and GWB know it.

[SJackson]

If you'd like to be on this middle east/political ping list, please FR mail me.

Articles on Israel can also be found by clicking on the Topic or Keyword Israel.

..................

It's only been 58 years since Israel declared Jerusalem as it's capital. A move would risk ratifying the creation of the State of Israel.

As I learned on another thread, when it comes to Israel Presidents lie, it's the American way.

[SJackson]

The US Embassy is not moving until the status of Jerusalem is resolved. Only two countries have their embassies in Jerusalem, i.e., Costa Rica and El Salvador. That's the political reality and Congress and GWB know it.

Yes, you've noted that. Nothing permanent about the 1949 truce lines after all, or the existance of the State of Israel for that matter.

[Astronaut]

The status of Jerusalem is resolved. It is Israel's capital. It is not the capital of some terrorist "Palestine" and never will be. End of story. The weasels in the State Dept. want to believe otherwise, however.

[Sabramerican]

Israel's Best Friend Ever can't move the Embassy to West Jerusalem as promised, the Arabs will be mad at us.

All of Karen Hughes' hard work to have them fall in love with us would be in vain.

How does the US Government justify discriminating between West Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.

[Thorin]

>>>>>>>It's only been 58 years since Israel declared Jerusalem as it's capital. A move would risk ratifying the creation of the State of Israel.

Nonsense. The United States obviously recognizes the State of Israel, which we have subsidized to the tune of tens of billions of dollars and have already saved once, by Nixon's airlift of military supplies during the Yom Kippur War.

We would gain absolutely nothing by moving the Embassy to Jerusalem, which is why no President of either party has moved it.

[Alberta's Child]

As a general rule, I don't think the U.S. will ever locate an embassy in a foreign city whose sovereign status is in dispute. The executive branch over the last 10 years hasn't been issuing these repeated postponements for security reasons. It's been doing this because the Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995 effectively mandated something that cannot possibly be done.

I predict that presidential candidates will be making the same stupid promises about "moving the U.S. embassy to Jerusalem" during the 2040 presidential campaign.

[SJackson]

Israel's Best Friend Ever can't move the Embassy to West Jerusalem as promised, the Arabs will be mad at us...How does the US Government justify discriminating between West Jerusalem and Tel Aviv.

Because, like the rest of Israel, the Arabs claim they own the land. Israel is an illegitimate State after all.

Something for the gringos in the Southwest to think about. Aztlan here we come.

[jpl]

It is rather puzzling as to why Bush continues to make this promise that he clearly has no intention of keeping.

[SJackson]

As a general rule, I don't think the U.S. will ever locate an embassy in a foreign city whose sovereign status is in dispute.

Then why do we have an Embassy in Tel Aviv. It's status is in dispute every bit as much as the Embassy site.

[seanmerc]

Hey Astronaut, why are you insulting weasels like that?

[SJackson]

It is rather puzzling as to why Bush continues to make this promise that he clearly has no intention of keeping.

That question is far more interesting than the actual move. Sign the waiver, fine Clinton did it too. But not after running on a platform to move the Embassy immediately on taking office. Twice.

[SJackson]

We would gain absolutely nothing by moving the Embassy to Jerusalem, which is why no President of either party has moved it.

So why do they lie about it?

[kabar]

The status of Jerusalem is resolved. It is Israel's capital. It is not the capital of some terrorist "Palestine" and never will be. End of story. The weasels in the State Dept. want to believe otherwise, however.

It is the President of the United States who makes that decision. The State Department implements the decision. If you look at where countries have their Embassies and Consulates in Israel, you will notice that almost all of the them have their embassies elsewhere. There is a reason for that. The US is not the odd man out.

Congress and presidential candidates try to pander to AIPAC rather than state the truth. Both parties are guilty. The status of Jerusalem has not been resolved.

[Alberta's Child]

You don't have any political factions in Israel calling for a negotiated partition of Tel Aviv, do you?

[SJackson]

You don't have any political factions in Israel calling for a negotiated partition of Tel Aviv, do you?

No. You don't have any political factions in Israel (or outside of the Arab world, and they aren't talking negotiations) calling for a negotiated partition of West Jerusalem, do you?

You don't have any political factions in Israel (or anywhere, the Arabs want Israel) calling for the internationalization of Jerusalem under the UN, do you?

[SJackson]

Actually GWB panders to the Evangelicals, not AIPAC.

I take it you think Jerusalem should be internationalized under UN auspices?

[Alberta's Child]

My apologies -- I must have missed something. When did Congress pass the West Jerusalem Embassy Act?