US wants Palestinian state now

#1
The US secretary of state has said it is time for a Palestinian state to be founded, and that the US will put its full weight behind such efforts.

Condoleezza Rice said she and President George Bush would make finding a two-state solution a priority for the remainder of their terms in office.

Ms Rice was speaking from the West Bank, where she has been trying to get agreement for a peace summit in the US.

She said the conference would have to be "serious and substantive".

"We frankly have better things to do than invite people" to the planned conference in Annapolis, Maryland, "for a photo op," said Ms Rice.
She said the US regarded a two-state solution "as absolutely essential for the future, not just of Palestinians and Israelis but also for the Middle East and indeed for American interests".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7044914.stm

I guess it finally sunk in then.........
 
#3
John_Charity_Spring said:
How about establishing one in Wisconsin or Idaho, they're quite empty?
I think Michigan already has the distinction.
 
#4
What are the chances of the US offering a viable Palestinian state?

I'd say slim to none.

Groundhog Day in DC..
 
#5
Rumpelstiltskin said:
What are the chances of the US offering a viable Palestinian state?

I'd say slim to none.

Groundhog Day in DC..

Depends. Sounds like there is an opportunity to exclude, illegitimatize, and isolate hezbollah. They will put a lot of effort into this. Be interesting to see how it plays out.

Some folks would have made that bet when it came to Israel being viable.
 
#6
What is promising is the offer of US help to build up a PA Army.

A bit late, after laying the groundwork (by discrediting Fatah in the eyes of the Palestinian street) for a Hamas takeover of Gaza, but hey ho.
 
#7
What would make such an entity viable? Given the following criteria:

Territorial contiguity in the West Bank - difficult, wall or no wall.
Control over their own water resources? This hasn't been on the cards for a very long time, and is probably out of the question even now.
Existence as anything other than a client state at best - unlikely, as the Israelis are likely to want to stamp on anything in a Palestinian area as they deem necessary.

Is any US solution really likely to accept any Palestinian government that isn't Fatah or Fatah-by-proxy? I can't see it myself.
 
#8
Until Hamas have been categorically crushed nobody in the region wants a Palestinian state. Even then it is a moot point whether a genuine state would be viable or not.

Whatever motives the USA has for establishing a Palestinian state concern for the Palestinians will not be one of them.

A chance to salvage something positive from Bush's presidency?

A preparation for an attack on Iran by getting the Sunni states 'onside'?

Wanting to leave Israel free to attack Syria and Lebanon with only a token garrison on its Southern and Eastern borders.?

The general feeling in Israel is that the last time they listened to a talking Bush they spent forty years wandering in the wilderness........

Given that Bush will be replaced soon the Israelis are unlikely to cave into any pressure this year. The American presidential candidates will also be looking towards the Jewish vote and the 'Zionist' Christian right wing that supports Israel for religious reasons.
 
#9
Rumpelstiltskin said:
What is promising is the offer of US help to build up a PA Army.
Well as long as they don't privatise the whole affair and we get another sterling effort like some of the early Iraqi units. ;) This is one of the things that has always puzzled me, if everyone is so against Hamas' takeover of the Gaza Strip why didn't anything ever get done about it? Why not take the Palestinian units loyal to Fatah out to a third country, train them up intensively in FIBUA, donate a bit of equipment and share what intelligence there is to be had about Hamas positions and pesonnel then send them back in to Gaza to retake the place?
 
#10
John_Charity_Spring said:
Until Hamas have been categorically crushed nobody in the region wants a Palestinian state. Even then it is a moot point whether a genuine state would be viable or not.
Fairly certain that the everyday Palestinians would strongly dissagree with you. Isn't this the point? To put the proverbial nail in the hamas coffin? At this point, instead of resisting Israel they would be seen as resisting what the people wanted the most, a state of their own.

John_Charity_Spring said:
Whatever motives the USA has for establishing a Palestinian state concern for the Palestinians will not be one of them.
None of their neighbors want them, some of them grew up to know nothing but the countries they were born in and yet are not welcome there. Who is concerned for the pals? They benefit from this regardless of motive, so who cares.

What do you do to help them?

John_Charity_Spring said:
Wanting to leave Israel free to attack Syria and Lebanon with only a token garrison on its Southern and Eastern borders.?
You speak as if Israel is an aggressor nation. After your neighbors invade you multiple times, launch rockets, and kidnap your people you learn to be proactive.

John_Charity_Spring said:
The general feeling in Israel is that the last time they listened to a talking Bush they spent forty years wandering in the wilderness........
That's actually quote funny.

John_Charity_Spring said:
Given that Bush will be replaced soon the Israelis are unlikely to cave into any pressure this year. The American presidential candidates will also be looking towards the Jewish vote and the 'Zionist' Christian right wing that supports Israel for religious reasons.
Um, not everyone in the US that supports Israel is some Zionist right wing neocon lunatic bent on world domination. Some of us are Atheists, keenly aware that Israel has been victimized by it's neighbors and attacked without let up for the past almost 60 years and made to look like an aggressive nation if they defend themselves.

You use words like "Jewish Vote" and "Zionist Christian", not sure what you mean by that. Are you anti semitic? Your entitled, but would just like some clarification on your position.
 
#11
ghost_us said:
John_Charity_Spring said:
Until Hamas have been categorically crushed nobody in the region wants a Palestinian state. Even then it is a moot point whether a genuine state would be viable or not.
Fairly certain that the everyday Palestinians would strongly dissagree with you. Isn't this the point? To put the proverbial nail in the hamas coffin? At this point, instead of resisting Israel they would be seen as resisting what the people wanted the most, a state of their own.

John_Charity_Spring said:
Whatever motives the USA has for establishing a Palestinian state concern for the Palestinians will not be one of them.
None of their neighbors want them, some of them grew up to know nothing but the countries they were born in and yet are not welcome there. Who is concerned for the pals? They benefit from this regardless of motive, so who cares.

What do you do to help them?

John_Charity_Spring said:
Wanting to leave Israel free to attack Syria and Lebanon with only a token garrison on its Southern and Eastern borders.?
You speak as if Israel is an aggressor nation. After your neighbors invade you multiple times, launch rockets, and kidnap your people you learn to be proactive.

John_Charity_Spring said:
The general feeling in Israel is that the last time they listened to a talking Bush they spent forty years wandering in the wilderness........
That's actually quote funny.

John_Charity_Spring said:
Given that Bush will be replaced soon the Israelis are unlikely to cave into any pressure this year. The American presidential candidates will also be looking towards the Jewish vote and the 'Zionist' Christian right wing that supports Israel for religious reasons.
Um, not everyone in the US that supports Israel is some Zionist right wing neocon lunatic bent on world domination. Some of us are Atheists, keenly aware that Israel has been victimized by it's neighbors and attacked without let up for the past almost 60 years and made to look like an aggressive nation if they defend themselves.

You use words like "Jewish Vote" and "Zionist Christian", not sure what you mean by that. Are you anti semitic? Your entitled, but would just like some clarification on your position.
I am a very long way from being anti semitic......

Until Hamas is crushed Jordan, Egypt and Israel would rather not see a Palestinian state - regardless to what they might say publically.

I couldn't care less about the Palestinians and I wouldn't do anything to help them unless I first saw them helping themselves (and I don't just mean to the EU funding and Foreign aid that is supposed to develop the infrastructure, not line politicians pockets and fund militias).

I do not have any problem whatsoever with Israel attacking it's enemies either in retaliation or pre emptively. I do prefer that they have clear war aims, a viable strategy and proper leadership next time. With Barak as defence minister they might have.

I did not for a moment consider all Americans to be Neo cons - or anything else for that matter- I take it for granted that a nation of 300,000,000 or so people contains a certain diversity of opinion...

I refered specifically to the 'Jewish vote' and the Evangelical Christian communities who support Israel for religious reasons, maintain close ties with the country and expect their elected representitives to do the same. Politicians keep one eye on these groups because they want their votes. They court other interest groups as well. The Jewish community in the states is not blindly pro Israel but they would not elect a politician who was against the state.

???? ???? ????
 
#12
PartTimePongo said:
The US secretary of state has said it is time for a Palestinian state to be founded, and that the US will put its full weight behind such efforts.

Condoleezza Rice said she and President George Bush would make finding a two-state solution a priority for the remainder of their terms in office.

Ms Rice was speaking from the West Bank, where she has been trying to get agreement for a peace summit in the US.

She said the conference would have to be "serious and substantive".

"We frankly have better things to do than invite people" to the planned conference in Annapolis, Maryland, "for a photo op," said Ms Rice.
She said the US regarded a two-state solution "as absolutely essential for the future, not just of Palestinians and Israelis but also for the Middle East and indeed for American interests".
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/world/middle_east/7044914.stm

I guess it finally sunk in then.........
Whats in it for the Yanks ? IMO they are not doing this for the palestinians, nor are they doing this without Israels agreement.
 
#13
I've said it afore, and i'll say it again... declare independance AGAIN, this time just for the city of Jursaelum, call it and merge all the rest in Israelistine.

Move in the Swiss after one or two generations, and bobs your mothers, sisters, brother.

Which option is that again? Option 5?

;)
 
#14
JCS,

Some very fair points there. The particular problem with Hamas is that unless it is Palestinians giving them a thrashing then it is likely to exacerbate the problem and just look like another grievance to add to the long list of grievances that they seem to be building up. It is a shame that Fatah are so inept (was it Gold Meir who coined that great phrase about the Palestinians never missing an opportunity to miss an opportunity). I am no fan of the Palestinians and normally have a cheer from the sidelines when Israel goes up against them but this issue needs sorting out or it will keep poisoning issues in the Middle East for another 50 years.
 
#15
Israel is holding Marwan Bargouti in reserve (in the nick at tsomet Tel Megido IIRC...) as a future Palestinian leader.

He will probably be released at an opportune moment and allowed to form a strong and pragmatic Fatah govt.

Without him or someone like him the Palestinians will turn into everybodies worst nightmare.
 
#16
Is the real problem going to be what ever the US does to try and effect a stability and peace, will not anything that is proposed then be used and twisted by those who hold up America as 'The great demon', thus ensure that any good ground that could be made is then regardless properly sown with salted.

I certainly hope that good will come of this but i fear it will not, As the various sides and lobbies worry and rip apart any proposal like a pack of hounds to a fox.
 
#17
John_Charity_Spring said:
...Palestinians will turn into everybodies worst nightmare.
palestinians have been the worlds nightmare since the Munich massacre and will continue to be a nightmare for years to come.
 
#18
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3460372,00.html

US secretary of state says there is no need to set schedule for final status accord as precondition for Annapolis conference; hints conference could be delayed
...
"This is the beginning of negotiations, not the end. We don't need to try to go too far. Let's see how much progress we can make with this next step," Rice said.

The US secretary of state said she would have liked to see the Israelis and Palestinians each implement their obligations under the first stage of the Road Map to Peace.

Under that agreement, the Palestinians were obligated to stop terrorism and the use of violence and Israel was to freeze settlement building activity and dismantle illegal outposts.
It means the USA readlly doesn't want Palestinian state just now (if the Americans ever want it).
 
#19
KGB_resident said:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3460372,00.html

US secretary of state says there is no need to set schedule for final status accord as precondition for Annapolis conference; hints conference could be delayed
...
"This is the beginning of negotiations, not the end. We don't need to try to go too far. Let's see how much progress we can make with this next step," Rice said.

The US secretary of state said she would have liked to see the Israelis and Palestinians each implement their obligations under the first stage of the Road Map to Peace.

Under that agreement, the Palestinians were obligated to stop terrorism and the use of violence and Israel was to freeze settlement building activity and dismantle illegal outposts.
It means the USA readlly doesn't want Palestinian state just now (if the Americans ever want it).

Why would requiring you to stop the violence in order to get what you want equate to the US not wanting a Pal state? Its a road to peace, peace requires you stop violence. Surely this is a concept that even russians can understand, no?
 
#20
ghost_us said:
KGB_resident said:
http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3460372,00.html

US secretary of state says there is no need to set schedule for final status accord as precondition for Annapolis conference; hints conference could be delayed
...
"This is the beginning of negotiations, not the end. We don't need to try to go too far. Let's see how much progress we can make with this next step," Rice said.

The US secretary of state said she would have liked to see the Israelis and Palestinians each implement their obligations under the first stage of the Road Map to Peace.

Under that agreement, the Palestinians were obligated to stop terrorism and the use of violence and Israel was to freeze settlement building activity and dismantle illegal outposts.
It means the USA readlly doesn't want Palestinian state just now (if the Americans ever want it).

Why would requiring you to stop the violence in order to get what you want equate to the US not wanting a Pal state? Its a road to peace, peace requires you stop violence. Surely this is a concept that even russians can understand, no?
Equally, what are the chances of Israel returning to 1967 borders (which is what the above would entail)?

I'd say nil.
 

Similar threads

New Posts

Latest Threads