Posted on 08/04/2002 1:13:39 AM PDT by Jordi
A damaging rift has opened up between London and Washington over demands by Tony Blair that the Bush administration revive Middle East peace talks before any attack on Iraq.
The Telegraph has learned that the Prime Minister is privately urging President Bush to call Arab-Israeli peace talks before any military action against Iraq, but the White House is resisting.
"The Washington argument is: You can deal with Iraq in a separate box. That is not the London position," said a senior Whitehall figure.
"It doesn't mean you cannot do anything until there is a settlement in the Middle East, but you have to make progress.
"We want the Americans to say they are going to fix it in the Middle East. They are capable of doing it, even with [Israeli prime minister Ariel] Sharon, but they are not doing so."
Mr Bush is reluctant to deal with Yasser Arafat, the Palestinian leader, having called for him to be removed from office. US public opinion was outraged last week by the terrorist bombing at the Hebrew University in Jerusalem, in which Americans were killed.
Downing Street believes, however, that the talks are vital to placating moderate Arab opinion in the build-up of military and diplomatic pressure on Saddam Hussein.
The diplomatic dispute will fuel objections by Labour MPs to early military action. It could also raise Iraqi hopes of creating fresh splits between the US and its allies after the mixed reaction that followed Saddam's offer last week of talks on the readmission of UN arms inspectors. That was met with scepticism by London and the US but welcomed by France and Russia.
Mr Blair's anxieties over the Middle East may have led to the remarks by King Abdullah of Jordan last week that the Prime Minister had "tremendous concerns" about the idea of attacking Iraq.
Sir David Manning, the Prime Minister's foreign policy adviser, is engaged in intense diplomatic talks with the White House, while Mr Blair and Mr Bush are on holiday.
Colin Powell, the US secretary of state, is expected to meet Palestinian representatives this week and Mike O'Brien, the British foreign minister, will fly to Libya for talks with Colonel Muammar Gaddafi.
What the . . .? Does anyone understand what's going on with Libya?
By walking away from it and inciting more violence, even after the deal was sweetened post sept 2000 at Taba and Sharm El Sheik, only proves Arafat's intentions.
Arafat never wanted a peace agreement with Israel. He wanted to see his 2 stage "liberation of Palestine" plan to work. He already achieved stage one of his plan with autonomy and absense of IDF in Areas A and B. He had no reason to continue negotiating for "statehood" because his aspirations were for all of the land including Israel proper. He was prepared for war, entrenched in "stage 1" and had been planning the Sept 2000 intifada months in advance.
Those that call themselves Palestinian should go back to where they came from, Egypt, Lebanon, Jordon...oh that's right, these countries don't want them either.
Where exactly did you come up with this horseshit notion?
Prissy, limp-wristed, Euro-weenies.
The only "settlement" in the Middle East is the destruction of Arab and Islamist power through total war. If the London sops want a settlement, then they can help hand the Islamists a bloody defeat, letting the bodies of multitudes of these people rot in the desert sun to haunt the nightmares forever of those who happen to escape the destruction.
That will "settle" the middle east. London obviously hasn't yet figured out (or it has forgotten) that pieces of paper waving in the air don't settle anything.
You should soon learn to never underestimate the knowledge of a Freeper.
I assume you have proof of this, right? Real conservatives use truth in their arguments, and they can back it up. Can you? :-)
Arafat didn't just walk away. He turned right back to his favorite pastime, massacring innocent men, women and children to get his way. He's a depraved and cruel animal. Bush is right to never, ever negotiate with him.
Tony Blair, is trying to please everyone, without offending anyone. I agree, he has to take a leaf from the past and stand up and be countered for something he believes in, not what the opinion polls feel he should be saying or doing.
"There is a Time for Talking and a Time for War"
An apology will not cut it, if Saddam or any terrorist strikes again, before action is taken.
Find another forum.
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.