Posted on 03/23/2015 2:11:50 PM PDT by Dave346
Chief of Staff Denis McDonough says that Israel’s government must match up ‘words with actions and policies,’ warns Netanyahu’s statements can’t be willed away
WASHINGTON — White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough called for the end of Israel’s “50-year occupation” and doubled down on the Obama administration’s critique of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in a warmly received speech to the lobbying group J Street in Washington Monday.
Speaking to the dovish group’s national conference, McDonough became the latest in a series of Washington officials to highlight the administration’s displeasure with Netanyahu, while also talking up the permanence of US-Israel ties, repeating Washington’s commitment to continued military, security and intelligence cooperation.
“No matter who leads Israel, America’s commitment to Israel’s security will never waiver,” McDonough said.
At the same time, McDonough said later, “an occupation that has lasted for more than 50 years must end,” referring to Israel’s 48-year hold on the West Bank.
The statement represented an unusually harsh repudiation of Israel’s control over the Palestinian territories, using a term the administration generally avoids.
The longtime confidant to US President Barack Obama said that the administration believes that “the best way to safeguard Israel’s long-term security is to bring about a comprehensive peace between Israelis and Palestinians.”
Washington, he said, “has long advocated direct negotiations” toward a two-state solution — a position, he noted, that Netanyahu embraced in his 2009 speech at Bar-Ilan University.
“That’s why the prime minister’s comments on the eve of the election, [which] made very clear that a Palestinian state will not be established while he is prime minister, were so very troubling,” McDonough said, referring to comments made by Netanyahu in a preelection interview with the NRG website in which he seemed to take a Palestinian state off the table.
McDonough rejected Netanyahu’s claims that he had not changed his position, as well as Netanyahu’s explanation that conditions in the Middle East must be more stable for a Palestinian state to be established.
“We cannot simply pretend that these comments were never made,” McDonough proclaimed, receiving a standing ovation from the 3,000-person audience.
McDonough did not, however, address the first precondition that Netanyahu stipulated earlier this week for Palestinian statehood — that the Palestinian Authority renounce its nearly year-old alliance with Hamas.
McDonough denied that the basis of the current low in US-Israel relations was based upon bad personal chemistry between Obama and Netanyahu.
“Nothing could be further from the truth,” he said, arguing instead that it stems from the fact that “America’s commitment to a two-state solution is fundamental to American foreign policy.
“We will look to the next Israeli government to match words with action and to policies that demonstrates a commitment to a two-state solution,” McDonough continued.
“In the end, we know what a peace agreement should look like. The borders of Israel and an independent Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps. Each state needs secure and recognized borders, and there must be robust provisions that safeguard Israel’s security.”
As the deadline for a political framework agreement with Iran approaches at the end of the month, McDonough said that “diplomatic engagement with Iran has already delivered concrete results. Through the Joint Plan of Action, we’ve succeeded in stopping the advance of Iran’s nuclear program and even rolling it back in key areas.”
He reiterated the terms for an agreement that the US National Security Advisor stated earlier this month during the American Israel Public Affairs Committee’s conference — that Iran would not be able to develop weapons-grade plutonium or to use its underground site at Fordow to enrich uranium; extend the amount of time it would take Iran to reach breakout capacity; and would establish “frequent and intrusive inspection” to prevent Iran from pursuing a nuclear weapon through a covert channel.
The US chief of staff stressed that “the deal we are pursuing is both realistic and achievable. A scenario where Iran forgoes domestic enrichment capacity for all time would surely be ideal, but it’s not grounded in reality.”
“The bottom line is this: Compared to the alternatives, diplomacy offers the best and most effective way to prevent Iran from obtaining a nuclear weapon, and this is our best shot at diplomacy. We have to give diplomacy a chance to succeed,” McDonough added.
He had choice words for the 47 senators who, earlier this month, wrote a letter to Iran’s leaders warning that any deal signed without the consent of Congress was liable to be impermanent. “It was a blatant political move — as the president said, that is not how America does its business,” McDonough complained. “The letter was also critically flawed in its legal reasoning. We are pursuing a political arrangement with Iran that does not require congressional approval. Such deals are an essential, long-standing element of international diplomacy. Republican and Democratic presidents alike have relied on them.”
McDonough warned that legislation, such as the bill coauthored by Sen. Bob Corker (R-TN) and Robert Menendez (D-NJ) that would require Congress to vote on any deal, “would embolden hard-liners in Iran. It would separate the United States from our allies. And it would potentially fracture the international unity that has been essential to keeping the pressure on Iran.
“A good deal,” McDonuogh assured, “is the best way to reach our shared goal — preventing Iran from gaining a nuclear weapon.”
Acknowledging that “even if a nuclear deal is reached, our concerns about Iran’s behavior in the region and around the world will endure,” McDonough insisted that “to walk away from the opportunity to diplomatically and peacefully resolve one of the greatest threats to international security would not strengthen our hand to stop Iran’s destabilizing actions.”
The Attack of the White Mosque and al Qaeda.
Put in by Pelosi’s Perjury which was KNOWN in advance
apparently by EXEMPT Boehner and EXEMPT McConnell,
who thereafter did demand profit financially
from their conspiracy to sellout America
and the electorate.
Iranian tools in the WhiteHouse
Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu explained, after the election, that he did not abandon Bar-Ilan and/or the TWO-STATE SOLUTION!!
Obama is making up several issues ... which are really “non-issues” ... and are for only making “political hay”! Obama wants to get rid of Ambassador Dermer, because of the arrangements made through him (with the Speaker of the House) to have Netanyahu give a speech to a Joint Session of Congress. That really fired up the political opposition to the Iran agreement that Obama is trying to push through, and therefore Obama is looking for some “payback” ... namely “get rid of Dermer”!
And in regards to the other issue, and Obama accusing Netanyahu of being against a TWO-STATE SOLUTION ... that’s just an outright lie from Obama.
Obama is making this out to be REAL BIG ISSUE and is throwing a Temper Tantrum over it, even though he knows it’s TOTALLY FALSE and it’s a LIE that he’s telling the American public. Obama is hoping the FOOLS in America will believe him and not Netanyahu, when Netanyahu says he STILL supports a Two-State Solution, per Bar-Ilan.
The reason why Obama is making this out to be a big issue, is that he wants to “use it” to abandon Israel in the United Nations (by refusing to block UN Security Council Resolutions against Israel) and in the future by implementing sanctions against Israel.
As Obama knows very well, and as Netanyahu has made clear repeatedly after the election ... Netanyahu has not abandoned his Bar-Ilan policy speech regarding his support for the Two-State Solution.
Obama is trying to take a misunderstood campaign blurb and turn into a major policy reversal. It’s no such thing and Obama knows it!
This is what I said regarding what the Liberal press and Obama are doing ...
— — —
This a FALSE statement from the press and from Obama. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has REPEATEDLY sought to correct the mistaken impression that he does not support a TWO-STATE SOLUTION.
He does support it and he says that he has maintained that same support ... going back to his Bar-Ilan speech, when Obama first got into office. He says his position in support of the Two-State Solution has not changed since then.
What it is ... is that the liberal press and Obama want to hammer on Netanyahu no matter what ... and they’ve picked up on a LIE that Netanyahu does not support the Two-State Solution.
Here’s Netanyahu’s support for a Two-State Solution from what he has been referring to in the last several days to COUNTER THIS LIE!
Address by PM Netanyahu at Bar-Ilan University [Relates to Netanyahu’s Re-election]
http://www.freerepublic.com/focus/news/3270248/posts
The areas being referred to are the ones under military rule and law and which were captured during the Six Day War. And then there is the real big problem area that is semi-autonomous under Hamas rule, which no one wants that government to stay in place!
The list, Ping
Let me know if you would like to be on or off the ping list
WASHINGTON — White House Chief of Staff Denis McDonough called for the end of Israel’s “50-year occupation”
...
Jews were there for several centuries before the Jihadists showed up.
It’s taken TWENTY YEARS to move from where the status quo was back then to now. At that rate, it could take another twenty years to get to Final Status talks. But it appears that the entire world is getting tired of the issue and I’m going to predict that there will be a REALLY BIG PUSH to get the Final Status Talks done in a couple of years, or else the solution will be imposed from the outside.
The BIG PROBLEM, however, is that there are SIX MILLION ARABS residing, right now, in those Territories.
It would be interesting to see who would try to “impose” a settlement on the Palis. They have three demands, all of which are poison pills, 1967 borders unadjusted, “right of return” and East Jerusalem. So, just who is going to send troops to make the Palis give those up?
There is a bad moon arising...
5.56mm
No land can be given to a people who democratically elected a party
that in its Charter calls for the genocide of the Jews.
I think the Zero regime is working on that.
Well, generally the “politics” of what is going on has fit right onto what the Bible says about the area. And, in that regard, it’s the Anti-Christ’s forces who move into Jerusalem, militarily, one day in the future.
In a strictly secular viewpoint, it doesn’t take much for that to happen with Israel, If the USA no longer blocks UN Security Council Resolutions against Israel, things will move in progression from verbal condemnations, to sanctions upon Israel where their goods will no longer be sold to nations in the world, to the USA no longer supplying Israel with any military supplies or any military cooperation, to not intervening in any way if Israel is attacked, to finally having a world-wide coalition put together (like the first Gulf War) to invade Israel. Those are the things that can very easily happen over the course of five or more years.
Let me just say this about the situation, Israel will become an “occupied nation” by outside forces and they will move on Jerusalem and take control of that city. The Jews will be escaping that situation and hiding out (in the wilderness) for 3-1/2 years ... until the Messiah of Israel returns to earth to take control of all the nations on earth, setting up his capital city to be Jerusalem.
Now, the interestimg thing is that this is all very plausible for how the “real world” works.
It’s not going to be a pleasant time for the world!
What a schmuck.
I think this might be part of the reason why Ted Cruz dove into the race early: the need for a conservative of authority to say:”his will not stand!”
Spot on - they are evil. They are his wicked enablers.
Silly me.
I always thought Russia or China was Gog.
Occupation? Just because the UN said you get this and they get that doesn’t mean it is set in stone. All the territory in the world today is occupied by some group who took it away from another group. Do we try to find the Canaanites and give Israel and the West Bank to them?
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.