Obama takes Netanyahu 'at his word' on Palestinian state

[Lite Beer]

Obama takes Netanyahu 'at his word' on Palestinian state
DARLENE SUPERVILLE, Associated Press

WASHINGTON (AP) — President Barack Obama said he takes Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu "at his word" for saying that an independent Palestinian state will never co-exist with Israel as long as he is in office, yet another sign of the strained relations between longtime allies.

Netanyahu has backpedaled since he stunned the U.S. and the international community by announcing that dramatic policy reversal on the eve of his re-election Tuesday. But in his first public comments on the election outcome, Obama suggested that he does not believe the Israeli leader's softer position on the Palestinian state issue.

"We take him at his word when he said that it wouldn't happen during his prime ministership, and so that's why we've got to evaluate what other options are available to make sure that we don't see a chaotic situation in the region," Obama told The Huffington Post in an interview released Saturday.

Obama, who placed a congratulatory telephone call to Netanyahu on Thursday, said he indicated to the prime minister that the U.S. remains committed to a two-state solution as the only way to keep Israel secure.

"And I indicated to him that given his statements prior to the election, it is going to be hard to find a path where people are seriously believing that negotiations are possible," Obama said.

Tensions between the Obama administration and Netanyahu escalated as the March 17 Israeli elections neared. The White House was particularly annoyed when Netanyahu accepted an invitation from Republican House Speaker John Boehner to address lawmakers earlier this month. Boehner had not consulted the administration before extending the invitation, which an infuriated White House said was a break from standard practice. Netanyahu sharply criticized a deal being negotiated among the U.S., Iran and other world powers over Iran's nuclear program.

Obama said U.S.-Israeli military and security cooperation would remain unchanged, regardless of disagreements on policy.

"But we are going to continue to insist that, from our point of view, the status quo is unsustainable," he said. "And that while taking into complete account Israel's security, we can't just in perpetuity maintain the status quo, expand settlements. That's not a recipe for stability in the region."

Obama also criticized Netanyahu for saying as the election neared that Arab voters were heading to the polls "in droves." Obama's spokesman Josh Earnest previously denounced the rhetoric as a "cynical Election Day tactic" and a "pretty transparent effort to marginalize Arab Israeli votes."

"We indicated that that kind of rhetoric was contrary to what is the best of Israel's traditions," Obama said, adding that Israeli democracy is premised on everyone being treated equally and fairly. "If that is lost, then I think that not only does it give ammunition to folks who don't believe in a Jewish state, but it also, I think, starts to erode the name of democracy in the country."

White House chief of staff Denis McDonough is scheduled on Monday to address J Street, an Israeli advocacy group that opposes Netanyahu.

-- (c) Associated Press 2015-03-22

[Seastallion]

America needs to show some tough love with this recalcitrant spoiled brat child of a country.

Stop the non-military funding. Stop the military funding that doesn't get spent in the US.

Stop UN SC vetoes made solely on Israel's behalf.

Show them who's boss. The Whitehouse or AIPAC?

[Ulysses G.]

All this because Benjamin Netanyahu exposed Obama's stupid deal allowing Iran to develop nukes. The French are outraged too.

France: Nuclear deal must guarantee Iran can’t get bomb

Read more: France: Nuclear deal must guarantee Iran can't get bomb | The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/france-nuclear-deal-must-guarantee-iran-cant-get-bomb/#ixzz3V4ZXUqBk

[dexterm]

All this because Benjamin Netanyahu exposed Obama's stupid deal allowing Iran to develop nukes. The French are outraged too.

France: Nuclear deal must guarantee Iran can’t get bomb

Read more: France: Nuclear deal must guarantee Iran can't get bomb | The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/france-nuclear-deal-must-guarantee-iran-cant-get-bomb/#ixzz3V4ZXUqBk

All this because Netanyahu said "no Palestinian state" exposing himself as a liar for the last 6 years, because he played the race card against his own citizens at an election, and because he very rudely interfered in US foreign policy (which now looks like succeeding thankfully).

Netanyahu deliberately hoped to undermine the US bipartisan approach to Israel. Looks like he got his wish.

[Somtamnication]

Why not? Israel has nukes!!!

[NeverSure]

Why not? Israel has nukes!!!

If Israel didn't have nukes it would no longer exist.

If Iran had nukes, Israel would no longer exist.

[Scott]

I believe this thread is about the situation with a Palestinian state. There is another thread about the nuclear situation with Iran.

[eastcanje]

All this because Benjamin Netanyahu exposed Obama's stupid deal allowing Iran to develop nukes. The French are outraged too.

France: Nuclear deal must guarantee Iran can’t get bomb

Read more: France: Nuclear deal must guarantee Iran can't get bomb | The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/france-nuclear-deal-must-guarantee-iran-cant-get-bomb/#ixzz3V4ZXUqBk

Can you share the details of the "stupid deal" so that we may also judge? Perhaps the other countries which are participating in the negotiations would also appreciate your inside information!

Netanhayu has been obnoxious, arrogant and ungrateful for many, many years. He was disrespectful to Clinton, Bush and Obama. He conned Bush into attacking Iran in 2003, and look where it led! Bearing in mind that in the first Gulf War, Bush Senior did not remove Saddam because his advisers said that that would destabilize the region!

He recently said that if he has to stand alone, he would! Let's see him refusing the three billion dollars per year from the U.S, but don't hold your breath while you wait!

[Jingthing]

I agree with Obama that work must continue towards a two state solution. The alternatives are too horrible to imagine in the long term. Basically Israel becoming even more right wing and earning the "apartheid" state label or Israel becoming one state fully including all of West Bank and Gaza which would mean the end of the reason for Israel in the first place as the one and only Jewish majority nation in the world. It's not an easy road ... and there are strong forces against a real two state solution on BOTH sides.

The far leftist delusion that all of Israel including West Bank and Gaza can be merged into some kind of full liberal democracy is ridiculous. The Arabs would just vote the Jews out ... and there would be a bloodbath. The factions pushing such a delusion are often just playing a game ... they know it would mean an end to Israel and that is EXACTLY what they want.

This progression towards some kind of resolution doesn't appear that it will happen anytime soon. The only hope is that sometimes it takes a right wing leader (Bibi?) to have the credibility with his populace to make a peace deal. I don't necessary see increased pressure on Bibi from Obama as a bad thing but it needs to be balanced with the realities of the true aims of terrorist Hamas --- the end of Israel.

Bibi is also right ... with so many other enemies in the region, ISIS, Iran proxies, etc. it's not as if Israel can just give up on security concerns in the greater region (West Bank / Gaza) even in the event of a two state agreement. Will the Palestinians agree to that? Doesn't seem so, does it?

Edited March 22, 2015 by Jingthing

[eastcanje]

Regarding my post about the three billion dollars per year which the U.S. provides to Israel, I am not prejudiced. In previous posts in other places, I also said that we (the U.S.) should stop giving our taxpayer dollars to other ingrates, like in Pakistan and Afghanistan!

If you are going to take our money, or our goods, show some class! Don't turn around and bad mouth us!

[maidee]

lets wait till ISIS finally invades ISRAEL ...

[notmyself]

The Arabs would just vote the Jews out ... and there would be a bloodbath.

How could the 'Arabs' win in a vote?

[Wat dee]

All this because Benjamin Netanyahu exposed Obama's stupid deal allowing Iran to develop nukes. The French are outraged too.

France: Nuclear deal must guarantee Iran can’t get bomb

Read more: France: Nuclear deal must guarantee Iran can't get bomb | The Times of Israel http://www.timesofisrael.com/france-nuclear-deal-must-guarantee-iran-cant-get-bomb/#ixzz3V4ZXUqBk

So are they back being french fries now?

[Scott]

Let's stay on topic please.

[eastcanje]

Why not? Israel has nukes!!!

Regarding Israel's nukes, Natanyahu was implicated in smuggling 800 nuke triggers out of the U.S. a number of years ago, contrary to U.S. laws! Perhaps the FBI should pursue that matter!

[Ulysses G.]

Netanhayu has been obnoxious, arrogant and ungrateful for many, many years. He was disrespectful to Clinton, Bush and Obama. He conned Bush into attacking Iran in 2003, and look where it led!

So you types are blaming that on Netanhayu now. Amazing what he could accomplish as a private citizen of a different county. What ever happened to the George W. was defending daddies' honor conspiracy theory?

Edited March 22, 2015 by Ulysses G.

[Jingthing]

You know, Obama pushing a little harder for progress towards a two state solution while respecting the continued existence of Israel is within the mainstream of how most Americans feel including in my opinion the majority of American Jews:

http://jstreet.org/page/j-street-core-principles

I do realize most Israelis do not "trust" Obama and they are correct not to trust him or any other foreign leader. Who can really know what's in his heart? I suspect he is more anti-Israel than his words indicate. But as far as his policy and goals ... progress towards a two state solution. I just don't see the fault.

Edited March 22, 2015 by Jingthing

[DeaconJohn]

You know, Obama pushing a little harder for progress towards a two state solution while respecting the continued existence of Israel is within the mainstream of how most Americans feel including in my opinion the majority of American Jews:

http://jstreet.org/page/j-street-core-principles

I do realize most Israelis do not "trust" Obama and they are correct not to trust him or any other foreign leader. Who can really know what's in his heart? I suspect he is more anti-Israel than his words indicate. But as far as his policy and goals ... progress towards a two state solution. I just don't see the fault.

The Zionist lobby in Washington - represented by AIPAC, and moderate American Jews - represented by J Street, are the same same but different.

In dealing with American presidents and politicians they operate with the good cop/bad cop psych ops technique that has worked very well for them so far.

[Jingthing]

They might be the same to people who think Zionism is a dirty word. But no, in reality, they are NOT the same. J street I would describe as representative of American LIBERAL values, not moderate, and American Jews are overwhelmingly LIBERAL in politics. Obama won the Jewish vote OVERWHELMINGLY in the last two elections and he would again if he ran again, but I can see he might get 10 percent less ... still a vast majority.

Yes it is true AIPAC has had a lot more power and money (than J Street which is more of a late comer) behind it but that is not the same thing as reflecting majority American Jewish opinion.

Being explicitly anti-Zionist (against the existence of a nation state with a majority Jewish character) is not moderate or liberal. In that, different factions find common ground, Islamists, leftists, fascists who just want all Jews dead, and even a small number of fanatical fundamentalist Jews, etc.

Edited March 22, 2015 by Jingthing

[NickJ]

How could anyone in there right mind even debate a solution? There is none there never will be. It is a matter of containment pure and simple. A glass half empty or half full argument. Short of an alien invasion that threatens to wipe out humanity. There will never be peace in the middle east.

has little or nothing to do with whats right or wrong....and the best thing to do is enjoy a nice sag paneer and wake up the next day.

There is no solution. Get over it.

[Jingthing]

How could anyone in there right mind even debate a solution? There is none there never will be. It is a matter of containment pure and simple. A glass half empty or half full argument. Short of an alien invasion that threatens to wipe out humanity. There will never be peace in the middle east.

has little or nothing to do with whats right or wrong....and the best thing to do is enjoy a nice sag paneer and wake up the next day.

There is no solution. Get over it.

I can't know that you aren't right.

The overall conflicts in the Middle East have gone on for thousands of years so its logical to assume that mess will continue.

But Israel / Gaza / West Bank are rather a small piece of real estate.

Maybe there is some hope in that limited area.

Just maybe.

[razer]

Obama and the Dems don't have a chance now that Senators and Congressmen can receive unlimited anonymous donations. I imagine many potentates, oligarchs and despots are lining up outside the Republican HQ to get their donation recognized and appreciated. I hope Netanyahu pays up or he is in deep siht.

[laban]

Cut the 3 Billion in aid, then the peace process might begin, and they might stop building all the new illegal settlements. It is the only way to get things done, but even Obama does not have the balls.

[Jingthing]

Cut the 3 Billion in aid, then the peace process might begin, and they might stop building all the new illegal settlements. It is the only way to get things done, but even Obama does not have the balls.

Call your congresswoman and tell her. I don't think most Americans would support harsh anti Israel measures but you're welcome to lobby for them.

Sent from my Lenovo S820_ROW using Thaivisa Connect Thailand mobile app

[Seastallion]

They might be the same to people who think Zionism is a dirty word. But no, in reality, they are NOT the same. J street I would describe as representative of American LIBERAL values, not moderate, and American Jews are overwhelmingly LIBERAL in politics. Obama won the Jewish vote OVERWHELMINGLY in the last two elections and he would again if he ran again, but I can see he might get 10 percent less ... still a vast majority.

Yes it is true AIPAC has had a lot more power and money (than J Street which is more of a late comer) behind it but that is not the same thing as reflecting majority American Jewish opinion.

Being explicitly anti-Zionist (against the existence of a nation state with a majority Jewish character) is not moderate or liberal. In that, different factions find common ground, Islamists, leftists, fascists who just want all Jews dead, and even a small number of fanatical fundamentalist Jews, etc.

Although you're trying to appear moderate and reasonable, I have to pull you up on your continued fallacy. You should know better.

Anti-Zionist IS NOT "against a nation state with a majority Jewish character". Not at all. Anti-Zionist is against the people who believe that the "Promised Land" is theirs, as promised by God, and that it extends "from the river to the sea", and that the Arabs that live there should leave or should accept 2nd class citizenship.

You KNOW this, so why the silly propaganda?

I also have to pull you up on your PREPOSTEROUS allegation that leftists want all Jews dead. That is SO PREPOSTEROUS, that it is almost worth reporting as against forum rules. How dare you slur left-thinking people so disgustingly!!??

[arjunadawn]

It is so disingenuous to even utter the words to "take him at his word." The speech writers for Obama don't even have a challenge any longer because there is simply nothing this guy will not say, irrespective of his own duplicity and hypocrisy. Obama has lied to the American people and the world so many times it has numbed the electorate (citations excessive). That this man would comment on another's apparent duplicitous words seems unstatesman-like. To take someone at their word at a time when so many cannot take [you] at [your] word seems something the speechwriters should have caught.

[dexterm]

I agree with Obama that work must continue towards a two state solution. The alternatives are too horrible to imagine in the long term. Basically Israel becoming even more right wing and earning the "apartheid" state label or Israel becoming one state fully including all of West Bank and Gaza which would mean the end of the reason for Israel in the first place as the one and only Jewish majority nation in the world. It's not an easy road ... and there are strong forces against a real two state solution on BOTH sides.

The far leftist delusion that all of Israel including West Bank and Gaza can be merged into some kind of full liberal democracy is ridiculous. The Arabs would just vote the Jews out ... and there would be a bloodbath. The factions pushing such a delusion are often just playing a game ... they know it would mean an end to Israel and that is EXACTLY what they want.

This progression towards some kind of resolution doesn't appear that it will happen anytime soon. The only hope is that sometimes it takes a right wing leader (Bibi?) to have the credibility with his populace to make a peace deal. I don't necessary see increased pressure on Bibi from Obama as a bad thing but it needs to be balanced with the realities of the true aims of terrorist Hamas --- the end of Israel.

Bibi is also right ... with so many other enemies in the region, ISIS, Iran proxies, etc. it's not as if Israel can just give up on security concerns in the greater region (West Bank / Gaza) even in the event of a two state agreement. Will the Palestinians agree to that? Doesn't seem so, does it?

I liked your post, and have been saying the same for months/years.

Ideally, I would prefer all Jews, Christians and Muslims (and humanist atheists..my religion..by then I hope they would be the majority) one day to be living together in peace and prosperity in Israel/Palestine/ Israelistine. It will happen one day, but it ain’t going to happen overnight or possibly over decades. Perhaps with a special constitutional proviso that any Jew, Muslim or Christian who is basically a decent person and is genuinely persecuted for their faith can get special refugee status there. Israel becomes the safe religious haven of the world. OK been drinking too much Scotch while listening to Lennon’s “Imagine”.

But in the interim after almost a century of bitter conflict, Israel has legitimate security and reprisal concerns that need to be addressed with lots of checks and balances and time for trust to build. I wish Israel had never come into existence, but it has, I think Zionism is a nasty supremacist ideology...but there’s no turning back the clock, and I would not want to see anyone in Israel persecuted for their faith or race. I want to see Israel grow into a prosperous secular democracy and a member of the EU.

IMO the best way to address that for now is a two state solution. Good fences make good neighbors. But it has to be seen to be a just agreement by the Palestinians and the world community. It might have been a starter if Herzog had won the election, but maybe not under Netanyahu and all his even extremer right wing bedfellows.

But never say never

[Ulysses G.]

It is so disingenuous to even utter the words to "take him at his word." The speech writers for Obama don't even have a challenge any longer because there is simply nothing this guy will not say, irrespective of his own duplicity and hypocrisy. Obama has lied to the American people and the world so many times it has numbed the electorate .

Indeed. It is almost comical to watch all the vicious haters of Israel line up to call Netanyahu a "liar" while defending a much worse one who is also a hypocrite. Off course, they are all on the same team.

[Seastallion]

It is so disingenuous to even utter the words to "take him at his word." The speech writers for Obama don't even have a challenge any longer because there is simply nothing this guy will not say, irrespective of his own duplicity and hypocrisy. Obama has lied to the American people and the world so many times it has numbed the electorate (citations excessive). That this man would comment on another's apparent duplicitous words seems unstatesman-like. To take someone at their word at a time when so many cannot take [you] at [your] word seems something the speechwriters should have caught.

Usually your vocabulary is better.

To say Obama is "disingenuous" to take Netanyahu at his word implies Obama is pretending to think Netanyahu does not want a 2-state solution. You're suggesting that Obama believes (secretly) that Netanyahu DOES want peace.

Really? Neither you nor the other readers here, left and right, believe that for a second.

Then there's your "apparent duplicitousness".....absolutely duplicitous!!! Glaringly obvious, nothing "apparent" about it. Monday say, "No way peace", Thursday say, "Of course, peace".

Your ultimate argument is one that means Netanyahu can never believe anybody and will forever more have to distrust everyone. Thus, he will never be able to sign a peace agreement.

[Seastallion]

I agree with Obama that work must continue towards a two state solution. The alternatives are too horrible to imagine in the long term. Basically Israel becoming even more right wing and earning the "apartheid" state label or Israel becoming one state fully including all of West Bank and Gaza which would mean the end of the reason for Israel in the first place as the one and only Jewish majority nation in the world. It's not an easy road ... and there are strong forces against a real two state solution on BOTH sides.

The far leftist delusion that all of Israel including West Bank and Gaza can be merged into some kind of full liberal democracy is ridiculous. The Arabs would just vote the Jews out ... and there would be a bloodbath. The factions pushing such a delusion are often just playing a game ... they know it would mean an end to Israel and that is EXACTLY what they want.

This progression towards some kind of resolution doesn't appear that it will happen anytime soon. The only hope is that sometimes it takes a right wing leader (Bibi?) to have the credibility with his populace to make a peace deal. I don't necessary see increased pressure on Bibi from Obama as a bad thing but it needs to be balanced with the realities of the true aims of terrorist Hamas --- the end of Israel.

Bibi is also right ... with so many other enemies in the region, ISIS, Iran proxies, etc. it's not as if Israel can just give up on security concerns in the greater region (West Bank / Gaza) even in the event of a two state agreement. Will the Palestinians agree to that? Doesn't seem so, does it?

You're essentially saying what Dexterm has been saying for months, if not years. Good on you for finally seeing the light.

Where your sticking point is, and where you're continuing to be blinkered, is in how Israel establishes it's security.

What Israel is doing, and what you are supporting, is the same as a (lets say) white family moving into a rough black neighbourhood. They not only comandeer the footpath in front of the house, but the alley behind, and then move the neighbour's fences back...all in the name of "making their home secure". What gives them the right??!!?? And when the neighbours try to push back, you throw grenades through their kitchen windows.

Why would anybody have sympathy with that white family and their aggression?...Just because some very distant relative of that family had a hard time 70 years ago?

What Israel needs to do is withdraw to pre-1967 borders and concentrate on protecting those...after all, a smaller, shorter borderline is easier to protect, isn;t it?