Posted on 11/24/2010 12:49:14 PM PST by Cinnamon Girl
As Israel waits for a letter clarifying America's guarantees in exchange for a proposed building ban for Jewish residents of Judea and Samaria, a diplomatic source has come forward saying that no such letter is on its way. United States Secretary of State Hillary Clinton misled Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu, and contrary to reports, the U.S. does not guarantee an end to the freeze, the source said.
The source, a senior diplomat with inside knowledge of Netanyahu's recent meetings in Washington, said Clinton made commitments when talking to Netanyahu, but later slipped out of them by claiming that she had not been speaking on behalf of U.S. President Obama – who, she said in the end, did not give his approval.
When Netanyahu called the State Department to clarify America's position, officials expressed surprise at his surprise, the source continued. While Clinton made promises, Netanyahu knew from the beginning that Obama has the final word, they allegedly said.
Clinton had told Netanyahu that the proposed construction freeze would last for three months, and that it would end regardless of whether or not there was progress in talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. After that, she said, America would not push for a third building freeze.
However, according to the diplomat, U.S. leaders have since said that the building ban for Jews in Judea and Samaria would only end if Israel and the PA reached an agreement on the borders of a proposed PA state.
Several other American promises have been called into question as well.
(Excerpt) Read more at israelnationalnews.com ...
This regime’s promises are the hope of fools..
Thanks. You are right, Southhack. It needed to be said.
ping
Bibi dare not put the security of his nation in the hands of anyone in this administration.
It's pretty embarrassing wathching the Sec. of State put her foot in her mouth and having her boss contradicting what she says in Israel? Usually the Sec. of State parrots the policies of her/his President during negotiations. Netanyahu must be thinking what in blazes is going on here? The USA's foreign policy under Obama is analogous of/to the old Abbott and Costello "Who's on First Routine."
It’s hard to believe Hillary didn’t know what she was doing.
The story of promising 20 Jets and vetoes at the UN and to never again ask for a freeze in return for 90 day freeze never made sense. We would not and should not offer that kind of deal. I don’t know how it got started or what kind of game is being played here but this could be Netanyahu playing President Obama. The timing of the news story came around right when Obama was distracted by the election loss and his trips to India and Europe. Sec. Clinton shows up but the SoS office is in no place to publicly deny media reports about what was on offer.
I am beginning to suspect that this who story was cooked up by Netanyahu’s team. To what end, I don’t know.. but there is that old saying about the Israelis and Palestinians don’t neogtiate with each other, they negotiate with us. If Israel is asking for $3 billion in planes and diplomatic cover for a 90 freeze, Clinton and Obama have some idea of what it is going to cost to close an Israeli-Palestinian deal.
Interesting take, it is possible the SoS set this up to embarrass the President. It’s not like he can fire her and win a second term, the main reason she is in his admin as SoS is to quell the internal rebellion among democrats who are ticked off at the way the party gave Obama her delegates (particularly Michigan). She could have had VEEP but knows SoS is the office with real visibility and power.
Still I wonder, this whole episode never made any sense and I still think maybe this came from Netanyahu’s team and perhaps it was done in large part to undermine Obama’s credibility on the issue.
Such is my desperation to be able to trust anyone in this administration, that I am willing to believe Hillary was blindsided by Obama. No matter how ardently leftist she is, she knows what her job description is: She is to represent the views and policies of the president. I seriously doubt that she would do something that would so badly damage her credibility. (I realize that using that word to apply to a Clinton is risible).
but who does Ozero have credibility with that it could be undermined?
Or Hillary is screwing over Obama, by promising what she knows Obama will not agree to, then appearing like the good guy to Israel.
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.