He'd be wrong about that.
In a dramatic departure from longstanding policy, the United States intends to support a United Nations Security Council resolutions censuring Israel for building settlements in Palestinian territory.
The Obama administration told Arab governments Tuesday it will back a draft resolution saying the Security Council "does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlement activity," according to Foreign Policy magazine.
The language, which was confirmed to Foreign Policy by two Security Council diplomats, calls the Israeli settlements "a serious obstacle to the peace process." It says the Security Council "condemns all forms of violence, including rocket fire from Gaza, and stresses the need for calm and security for both peoples."
The Obama administration has used similar language to criticize Israel on settlements, but has not supported any such UN resolution condemning Israel. Doing so would constitute a significant US policy shift towards its ally.
But the US also intends to veto a stronger non-binding resolution by the 15-member body denouncing the Israeli settlements as "illegal." The new language was part of a compromise put forth by Susan Rice, the US Ambassador to the UN.
The earlier resolution was offered by the Palestinian Authority and garnered nearly 120 co-sponsors, all Arab and non-aligned states. UN diplomats told Reuters it would probably be approved by all Security Council members other than the US.
The fact is that before the Obama administration, the US has always used its position on the UN Security Council to veto any and all criticism of Israel by the UN, even when pretty much the entire rest of the world is behind it, including all the other UN permanent Security Council members.
This time however the US is allowing Israel to get dinged. It's still stopping the more forceful declaration that the settlements are illegal, which if passed could have serious international repercussions for Tel Aviv. But if the Obama administration has gotten to this point, it's pretty clear Netanyahu has gone way too far.
It's making a lot of people on Capitol Hill very, very nervous.
Perhaps we'll have a realistic debate about Israel.
Perhaps people will start acting like adults in Congress, too.
Perhaps the moon is made of cream cheese as well.
Posts
2 comments:
Perhaps we'll have a realistic debate about Israel.
Perhaps people will start acting like adults in Congress, too.
And what debate would that be?
Would those who aren't acting like "adults" include Rep. Anthony Weiner (D-NY)? Rep. Gary Ackerman (D-NY)? Rep. Nita Lowey (D-NY)? Rep. Shelley Berkley (D-NV)? Or from the link to the Politico piece, Rep. Steve Rothman (D-NJ)? Rep. Joe Crowley (D-NY)? House Minority Whip Steny Hoyer (D-MD)?
Your post seems quite a bit out of date. Abbas has already rejected what Obama wanted to do. And the U.S. will veto the new resolution.
...when pretty much the entire rest of the world is behind it, including all the other UN permanent Security Council members.
So, UN anti-Semitism is OK in your book, is that what you're saying? The U.S., even under Obama, isn't going to allow Israel to get "dinged".
...if passed could have serious international repercussions for Tel Aviv.
The capital of Israel is Jerusalem.
Post a Comment