In the case of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, we believe that the two-state solution, two states living side by side in peace, is the best and the only way to resolve this conflict
Another theoretical way of resolving the conflict of course exists – replacing the religious state + colony with a truly democratic state integrating Israelis and Palestinians. It might have been wise for Mitchell to mention that possibility, if just to indicate that
Historical Pattern of One-Sided Pursuit of "Peace" in Palestine
up to the present day, 'bringing peace to Palestine' has alway meant following a concept exclusively worked out between the US and Israel, without any serious consultation with, let alone regard for, the Palestinians--Ilan Pappe, The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine
Be that as it may, Mitchell’s remarks set a standard for justice that will require enormous effort on the part of practical policy to live up to. With the Netanyahu Administration resisting with all its might, thinking up all manner of precondition and erecting all manner of obstacle, people will soon start doubting Washington’s sincerity if it does not specifying what it means by “two states.” Geographic contiguity? Complete removal of Israeli citizens from land seized in 1967? Partition of
Washington in Denial About Palestinian Future
To a greater degree than perhaps ever before, Washington today is engulfed in denial about Israel and its stupefying behavior, about its murderous policies toward the Palestinians, about the efforts of Israel and its U.S. defenders to force us to ignore its atrocities. Blinders have always been part of the attire of U.S. policymakers and politicians with regard to Israel and Israeli actions, but in the wake of the three-week Israeli assault that laid waste to the tiny territory of Gaza -- an assault ended very conveniently just before Barack Obama was inaugurated, so that he has been able to act as though it never occurred -- the perspective from which Washington operates is strikingly more blinkered than ever in the past.--Kathleen & Bill Christison
More power to Mitchell! And yet, he does sound very much like a sacrificial lamb being set up by his own government. I am not saying he is…just that he sounds like one. Some specifics from
In this context, an editorial in the Arabic newspaper Asharq Al-Awsat by its editor-in-chief, Tariq Alhomayed, exposes an extremely dangerous concept—that Israel would “sell” Palestinians some measure of freedom in return for a U.S. war of aggression against Iran (or perhaps an “Israeli” war of aggression with U.S. collusion):
Why have such warnings against the danger of the military option been issued now knowing that the Israeli press has begun to talk about tough negotiations taking place between Washington and Tel Aviv regarding the peace process and
The Yedioth Ahronoth newspaper published the following headline: ‘Buscher for Yitzhar’. It refers to the idea that in order for
The headline was based on comments made by the White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emanuel to a prominent leader of a Jewish organization. Are we facing a new equation; there will be a stop to the settlements in exchange for stopping
It is difficult to imagine what the moral impacts on
Moreover, the slightest suspicion in Tehran that this Arabic interpretation might represent a plot actually being considered in Washington would be the death knell of any U.S.-Iranian rapprochement, for were such a plot being entertained by Washington, it would prove true the worst accusations of American perfidy tossed about in Tehran. For those who wish to sabotage U.S.-Iranian rapprochement, be they Sunni Arab dictators or “Greater Israel” expansionists, rumors such as this are the perfect weapon.
Yes, U.S.-Iran policy is the other side of the U.S.-Israeli policy coin, but this is hardly the way to coordinate those two issues. Obama should find a way to make very clear that he has no interest in such self-destructive bribes.