FACT CHECK: Netanyahu speech ignores rival claims

JERUSALEM (AP) — Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu gave an impassioned defense of his approach to peace during a speech to Congress on Tuesday. But the address reflected the world view of Israel’s nationalistic right wing, one of several conflicting narratives that divide Israelis and Palestinians.

Here is a sampling of Netanyahu’s claims along with what he did not mention.

___

NETANYAHU: “You don’t need to send American troops to Israel. We defend ourselves.”

THE FACTS: Israel is a leading recipient of American foreign aid, including more than $1 billion in military assistance each year.

___

NETANYAHU: “In Judea and Samaria, the Jewish people are not foreign occupiers. We are not the British in India. We are not the Belgians in the Congo.”

THE FACTS: While the West Bank, or Judea and Samaria, is promised to the Jewish people in the Bible, the international community considers the West Bank occupied territory. Israel captured the area in the 1967 Mideast war but has never annexed it. Its occupied status is underscored by the presence of tens of thousands of Israeli soldiers who protect Israeli settlements and control the movement of Palestinian residents in the name of security.

___

NETANYAHU: “You don’t need to export democracy to Israel. We’ve already got it.”

THE FACTS: Israel does give its Arab minority full civil rights, including participation in elections. But Israeli Arabs suffer from systematic discrimination in housing and the workplace. Also, more than 2 million Palestinians living in the West Bank do not have Israeli citizenship and therefore cannot vote in Israeli elections.

___

NETANYAHU: “The vast majority of the 650,000 Israelis who live beyond the 1967 lines reside in neighborhoods and suburbs of Jerusalem and greater Tel Aviv.”

THE FACTS: Nearly all of these communities were built in the face of overwhelming international opposition and are considered illegal settlements by the world, including the U.S. There are 300,000 Israelis living in the West Bank and 200,000 in east Jerusalem, making a total of 500,000.

___

NETANYAHU: “The Palestinian economy is booming. It’s growing by more than 10 percent a year.”

THE FACTS: The West Bank economy is indeed growing rapidly. But the World Bank has noted that the growth comes after years of contraction during fighting with Israel and has been fueled by huge amounts of foreign aid. It warns the growth is unsustainable unless Israel does more to encourage the Palestinian private sector.

___

NETANYAHU: “Israel will not negotiate with a Palestinian government backed by the Palestinian version of al-Qaida.”

THE FACTS: While Hamas and al-Qaida have killed hundreds of people in religious holy wars, they have no connection, and Hamas has in fact come under criticism from the global terror network for being too moderate. Al-Qaida preaches global jihad. Hamas says its struggle is solely against Israel, not the West at large. In its Gaza stronghold, Hamas has violently clashed with smaller armed groups that claim inspiration from al-Qaida.
Sources:The Associated Press

ADL director joins list of top US Jews speaking out against Obama’s Israel policies.

The Anti-Defamation League’s National Director Abe Foxman over the weekend joined the growing tide of American Jewish leaders criticizing US President Barack Obama’s policy toward Israel.

In a statement, Foxman described as “deeply distressing,” the “significant shift in US policy toward Israel and the peace process, which has been evident in comments from various members of the Obama Administration and has now been confirmed by the president himself in his press conference at the Nuclear Security Summit.”

Foxman continued that Obama’s statements that “the absence of a resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict undermines US interests in the broader Middle East and the larger issue of resolving other conflicts is a faulty strategy” and “an incorrect approach on which to base America’s foreign policy in the Middle East and its relationship with its longtime friend and ally, Israel.”

Foxman’s statement went on to criticize the “blatantly disproportionate number and the nature of statements issued by this administration criticizing Israel as compared to what has been said about the Palestinians,” as well as what he described as “dangerous thinking” that “shifts responsibility for success of American foreign policy away from Iraq, Afghanistan, Pakistan, Saudi Arabia, and Egypt and directly onto Israel.”

Instead, Foxman called on the US administration to demand that Palestinians “abandon their tactic of just saying no” and “insist that the rest of the Arab world move toward normalization relations with Israel.”

Foxman was far from alone in his criticism.

Late last week, World Jewish Congress Chairman Ronald Lauder penned an open letter to Obama, published in a number of major newspapers including The Jerusalem Post, in which he, too, called on Obama to reassess his administration’s policy regarding Israel.

Lauder, who is known to support Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu and ran as a Republican candidate in a New York City mayoral race, also blasted the administration for “seeming to blame Israel for the lack of movement on peace talks,” arguing that “after all, it is the Palestinians, not Israel, who refuse to negotiate.”

Nobel Laureate Elie Wiesel also put his thoughts in print, taking out paid advertisements in The Washington Post and The Wall Street Journal entitled: “For Jerusalem.”

Wiesel wrote that “For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics. It is mentioned more than 600 times in Scripture – and not a single time in the Quran.”

Wiesel emphasized that only under unified Israeli rule, “for the first time in history, Jews, Christians and Muslims may all worship at their shrines.”

Wiesel warned against “tackling the most complex and sensitive problem prematurely” and suggested instead to “first take steps which will allow the Israeli and Palestinian communities to find ways to live together in an atmosphere of security.”

But Sheldon Schorer, counsel for the Democrats Abroad-Israel, recalled that according to poll recently released by the American Jewish Committee, “the majority of American Jews still support Obama on the Middle East and Israel.

“It could be that these statements reflect some sectors of the American public, but these figures may also be trying to make their voices heard and shore up their position as American Jewish leaders,” Schorer added.

“Speaking out against the settlements pretty much reflects American policy as a violation of the status quo. It is a valid tradition to be opposed to settlements and even during his campaign Obama said that in order to support Israel one doesn’t have to be a Likudnik,” Schorer explained.

“I would personally prefer to see these issues settled at the negotiation table by representatives of the two parties, and in that case, the role of the United States should be procedural.”

To read more about jpost.com article, click here

Israel is coming under growing international pressure following its approval of new housing for Israelis in occupied East Jerusalem.

Britain, France, the EU and the Arab League have all added their protests against the decision.

The housing row has overshadowed a visit by US Vice-President Joe Biden which is meant to promote a new round of US-led negotiations.

He has condemned the move, saying it undermined trust in the peace process.

Israel and the Palestinians had agreed to hold indirect “proximity talks” in a bid to restart the process, which has been stalled for 17 months.

But earlier this week it approved 1,600 new homes for ultra-Orthodox Jews in East Jerusalem.

The international community considers East Jerusalem occupied territory and building on occupied land is illegal under international law.

Israel regards East Jerusalem – which it annexed in 1967 – as its territory, but Palestinians want it as the capital of their future state.

‘Ill-timed’

UK Foreign Secretary David Miliband described the Israeli move as “a bad decision at the wrong time”.

“It will give strength to those who argue that Israel is not serious about peace,” he said.

“Along with our EU partners, I condemn it as certain to undermine the mutual confidence we need.”

French Foreign Ministry spokesman Bernard Valero said the decision was “completely ill-timed”.

To read more click below…
Israel under pressure over East Jerusalem homes

The Middle East Region: Out of date and out of touch

Many in the Muslim world, including the Palestinians, and in the West still have a distorted knowledge of Israeli positions toward peace-making.

Whenever I deal with Palestinians, Arabs, or those describing themselves as supporters of these groups, whether in the Middle East or in the West, what makes the greatest impression is their total lack of knowledge about Israeli positions toward peace-making.

Among Palestinians, and more broadly with most of the public in the Muslim world and many of those in the elite classes in Europe, there exists a mythical Israel, reminiscent of the fabricated anti-Semitic stereotypes of the past and which has little to do with reality. They believe Israel isn’t interested in peace, doesn’t offer the Palestinians anything, opposes any real Palestinian state, intends to keep the West Bank (until Israel’s withdrawal from all of the Gaza Strip in 2005, they would have added that territory as well), and is led by intransigent hardliners. Such a concept was comprehensible – if not fully accurate – and describes the situation in parts of the 1980s but has nothing to do with the two decades.

In 2010, they have no idea what Israel actually offered during the 1990s peace process, or at the Camp David summit in 2000, or what former president Bill Clinton offered with Israel’s agreement in December 2000, or what former prime minister Ehud Olmert proffered in 2008, or what is in the current Israeli government’s peace offer. All proposed the creation of an independent Palestinian state, the first three in close to 100 percent and the last three as equivalent to 100 percent (with some small, equal land swaps) in size to the pre-1967West Bank and Gaza Strip.

Lacking any knowledge of these offers, or at least knowing only very distorted versions, they can maintain that Israel has offered “nothing” and that therefore the continuation of the conflict is not due to Palestinian intransigence but Israel’s alleged opposition to the creation of an independent Palestinian state. This reminds me of how Mahmoud Abbas, today the leader of the Palestinian Authority, responded to some reasonably accurate descriptions in the Palestinian media of what Israel offered in 2000 at Camp David. It is better, he said at the time, not to talk about these things at all, presumably lest some Palestinians might think that it was a reasonable deal.

INDEED, THERE are a surprising number of people who have not absorbed the changes made since 1994, when the Palestinian Authority began to take control of theWest Bank and Gaza Strip. After all, it has governed these territories for more than 15 years and certainly has responsibility for what has happened there. And even while Israel has real ability to restrict travel, control access for trade, and is able to send in troops at times – along with the continued existence of settlements – these powers are only exercised in response to high levels of terrorist attacks from these places.

Equally, many don’t seem to realize that Israel withdrew from the Gaza Strip in 2005 – that’s almost five years ago – and that if Hamas didn’t persist in attacking Israel or openly planning for future attempts to destroy it, Israel would leave that area alone entirely.

Anyone who actually lives in Israel knows – whether they like it or not – that Israel is ready to make big concessions and take reasonable risks to achieve peace. They know, whether or not they agree, that the overwhelming majority is ready to accept an independent Palestinian state as long as it is willing to end the conflict and live side by side in peace.

Outside Israel, far fewer people understand this reality. And that includes journalists, academics, and politicians. If they address the issue at all, they presume that Israel is asking the Palestinians to make some huge or unreasonable concession. Often, as noted above, their understanding of Israeli views is more than 20 years out of date.

But the Palestinians especially and Westerners generally know even less about Israel’s own demands, which is not surprising since they are never explained in the Arabic-language media and virtually never mentioned in the Western media. These include security guarantees, non-militarization of a Palestinian state, an end to the conflict, and the resettlement of Palestinian refugees in Palestine.

The above observations can produce a simple definition of the difference between moderates and radicals. The radicals, both among the Palestinians and their Western sympathizers, know – even if they pretend otherwise – that they want all the land from the Jordan River to the Mediterranean Sea along with Israel’s elimination.

This is true whether they seek it through a two-stage process, the dispatch of a million or two Palestinians to Israel in a peace agreement, a one-state solution, or a temporary binational state. Consequently they are indifferent to what Israel actually offers except to distort it for propaganda purposes.

A moderate is someone who actually thinks the Palestinians today want a two-state solution and is genuinely fooled by the ploys outlined above. Consequently, the moderates – few as they are among Palestinians, more numerous in the West – can have the facts explained to them. But the radicals know precisely what they are doing and don’t care about any chance for compromise.

The writer is Director at the Global Research in International Affairs Center (GLORIA) (http://www.gloria-center.org) and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs Journal (MERIA). He blogs at The Rubin Report http://rubinreports.blogspot.com.

To read more, click here
The Middle East Region: Out of date and out of touch

Clinton wants Saudis to prod China on Iran sanctions
by Lachlan Carmichael Lachlan Carmichael – 1 hr 26 mins ago

SHANNON, Ireland (AFP) – Secretary of State Hillary Clinton flew Sunday to the Gulf to ask for oil-rich Saudi Arabia’s help in pressing China to join the US drive for sanctions against Iran’s disputed nuclear program, aides said.

The chief US diplomat’s three-day trip to Qatar and Saudi Arabia is also aimed at enlisting broader regional support, including Turkey’s, in a drive to stop Iran’s sensitive nuclear work, her aides told reporters.

Her mission comes amid US security buildup involving the deployment of anti-missile systems in the Gulf as well as a flurry of high-level visits to the region by senior US diplomats and military officials.

Clinton’s aides neither confirmed nor denied suggestions that they would ask Saudi leaders to offer China, which imports much of its oil from Iran, supply guarantees in return for winning Beijing’s support for new UN sanctions.

“Saudi Arabia has an important trading relationship with China already,” Jeffrey Feltman, Clinton’s top diplomat for the Middle East, told reporters en route to Doha, via Shannon, Ireland.

Feltman noted that there have been a number of recent visits between the Gulf and China.

“We would expect them (the Saudis) to use these visits, to use their relationship in ways that can help increase the pressure that Iran feels,” said Feltman, the assistant secretary of state for Near East Affairs.

China appears to be the strongest holdout to sanctions among the five veto-wielding members of the UN Security Council, which also include the United States, Russia, Britain and France.

Moscow has hardened its stance toward Iran lately.

In Doha, aides said, Clinton will discuss Iran but also the Arab-Israeli peace process with Sheikh Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani, Qatar’s emir, and Sheikh Hamad bin Jassim Al-Thani, who is both foreign minister and prime minister.

She will hold similar talks with other Muslim leaders attending the seventh US-Islamic World Forum, where Clinton will deliver remarks building on President Barack Obama’s own speech in Cairo last year calling for a “new beginning” with Muslim communities worldwide.

Clinton’s spokesman Philip Crowley said the chief US diplomat will discuss Iran with Turkish Prime Minister Recep Tayyip Erdogan.

“We obviously need to have Turkey’s support as we move forward and contemplate particular actions on the pressure track,” Crowley said.

Turkish Foreign Minister Ahmet Davutoglu is due to visit Iran next week to push for a diplomatic solution to the stand-off over Iran’s refusal to curb its uranium enrichment program.

The West fears the program masks a drive to build an atomic bomb, while Iran denies the charge and says its goal is the peaceful use of nuclear power.

Turkey, the only NATO member that neighbors Iran, insists the row should be resolved through dialogue, arguing that economic sanctions or military action against Iran would have a damaging impact on the whole region.

China has taken a similar stand.

During her stop in Riyadh on Monday, Clinton is set to meet Saudi Arabia’s King Abdullah bin Abdul Aziz Al-Saud and Foreign Minister Prince Saud Al-Faisal.

Aaron David Miller, a former Middle East advisor in past US administrations, doubts the Saudis would offer oil guarantees to China, whose economy is growing rapidly, to encourage Beijing to change its stance on sanctions.

Miller told AFP US-Saudi ties have eroded since the September 11, 2001 attacks — which involved many Saudi members of Al-Qaeda — and Obama has disappointed Riyadh with his failure so far to revive Arab-Israeli peace talks.

In an apparent switch in emphasis on the Arab-Israeli peace process, the Obama administration is urging Gulf Arab leaders to offer Palestinian leader Mahmud Abbas political and financial support to revive peace talks with Israel.

Last year, the administration urged Gulf Arab states to take steps toward normalizing ties with Israel, such as allowing the Israeli airline El Al to fly over their territories.

The aides omitted to mention such a step as the Arabs accuse Washington of failing to follow through on its demand for Israel to halt settlements.

However, Feltman and Crowley urged Arab states like Qatar, Bahrain, Morocco and Mauritania to reopen Israeli trade offices in their capitals after they were closed in protest over Israeli military actions against the Palestinians.

During her tour, Clinton is scheduled to meet with the board of directors of the controversial Qatar-based Al-Jazeera television and answer questions from Arabs and Muslims in “town-hall style” events broadcast on television.

US officials said visits to the region this month involve top diplomats James Steinberg, Jacob Lew and William Burns. Top military officials Michael Mullen and General David Petraeus are due to visit the Gulf this week.

For more reading, click here Clinton wants Saudis to prod China on Iran sanctions