Middle East News
US "disappointed" in new Palestinian direction (Roundup)
Mar 18, 2007, 4:07 GMT
Washington - The United States late Saturday expressed disappointment in the direction of the new Palestinian government, saying its policies were 'inconsistent' with the principles of an international peace plan.
The US believes that any new Palestinian government 'must renounce violence, recognize Israel and respect previous agreements and obligations between parties,' a US State Department official said.
The Palestinian Legislative Council (PLC) earlier Saturday confirmed the new national unity government between the rival Palestinian groups Fatah and Hamas.
In a speech, Prime Minister Ismail Haniya pledged to honour international peace agreements. But he also proclaimed that the Palestinians have the 'legitimate right' of resistance and to 'defend themselves against any Israeli aggression.'
Nancy Beck, a press officer of the US State Department, said that the reference to right of resistance was 'disturbing and contradicts directly' the renunciation of violence that is a cornerstone of the roadmap laid out by the international mediation group called the quartet.
She called Haniya's speech 'disappointing and inconsistent' with the quartet's principles and a 'missed opportunity' to confirm the new government's commitment to peace.
'A Palestinian state will not be born from terror,' she said.
The US would however continue to evaluate the new government's 'word and action,' which she said should begin with the immediate freeing of the Israeli soldier, Corporal Gilad Shalit, held captive in Gaza since last summer.
Haniya said his government would support efforts to gain Shalit's release.
Israel has already rejected cooperation with the government because the radical Islamic Hamas movement does not explicitly accept Israel's right to exist.
The unity government between the rival Palestinian factions was formed after a crippling, one-year-old boycott by the international community of Haniya's previous Hamas-led government, which had refused to renounce violence or recognize Israel.
Earlier Saturday, the European Union said it would keep its financial boycott in tact, but greeted the swearing in of the new unity government.
The EU president said EU support would continue to consist of direct payments for social projects until the new government adopts a platform that respects the principles of the Mideast quartet, which consists of Russia, the US, the United Nations and European Union.
© 2007 dpa - Deutsche Presse-AgenturCOMMENT
blog comments powered by DisqusLatest Headlines in Middle East
- 1. Jerusalem prelate tells Arab Spring youth to have confidence
- 2. More than 100 killed in Syria ahead of ceasefire deadline
- 3. At least 43 killed in Syria, despite UN criticism
- 4. 19 killed in Syria as ceasefire deadline approaches
- 5. Pilgrims flock to Jerusalem for Easter, Passover
Older Talkback
page: 1
'A Palestinian state will not be born from terror,' she said.
here's a historical fact that you never see in news reports about israel:
the state of israel was created through terrorist intimidation of the british government that had a mandate over palestine, which should have been an 'international zone,' according to a 1916 agreement. zionist extremists blew up arabs, british, and illegal jewish immigrants (ex: 1940 - 252 victims on a ship called The Patria) in terrorist actions beginning as early as 1938. they used the holocaust as an excuse.
A month after the Nazi pogrom against Germany's Jews, famously known as Kristallnacht, Ben-Gurion (a pioneer of modern zionist ideology and one of the founding fathers of israel) stated in December 1938:
'If I knew it was possible to save all [Jewish] children of Germany by their transfer to England and only half of them by transferring them to Eretz-Yisrael, I would choose the latter-because we are faced not only with the accounting of these children but also with the historical accounting of the Jewish People.' (Righteous Victims, p. 162)
The State Department is to be commended for sticking to its principles, and not allowing itself to be fooled.
While Haniyeh was speaking from one side of his mouth about 'recognizing international agreements' he from the other was calling for continued violence against Israel, for non- recognition of Israel.
You can fool most of the people most of the time, but this time the U.S. refused to be fooled.
Let 'Hamas' change its constitution and recognize Israel. Let the Palestinians, both Hamas and Fatah truly stop the violence and let it be known that they would live in peace with Israel. Once they do that there will be better days ahead for all the peoples of the area.
because its policies are 'inconsistent' with the principles of international peace, here one has to look no further than Afghanistan and Iraq.
To demand from the Palestinians to recognize Israel's right to exist is ludicrous, as Israel does not recognize the Palestinian state, either. This demand, adopted by the Americans and, hard to believe, by the EU, is just designed to forever stall any progress towards peace and a fair solution, but most importantly, it keeps Israel from having to return all stolen lands in the West Bank, Golan Heights and East Jerusalem. A state can only be recognized by another state, so the recognition must be mutual if it has to make any sense.
So this dissembling 'business as usual' continues, the U.S. and EU in chorus with Israel repeating its non-sensical demands that are impossible to satisfy in the attempt to make the world believe that the victims (those whose lands were stolen by Israel) are in the way of a solution. Israel ignores US resolution 242, which orders Israel out of the occupied lands and the return of the land to its rightful owners, for 40 years now.
That the Palestinians have the 'legitimate right' of resistance and to 'defend themselves against any Israeli aggression, goes without question. Confiscation of land in violation of international law is the ultimate aggression. Israel still drives Palestinians from their homes and farms (those that are still left) and keeps others from returning to their land, on which illegal Israeli settlement have been built. What should Palestinians do? Leave peacefully, with their heads bowed? 250,000 Israelis now live illegally on the Palestinian West Bank and in East Jerusalem.
That the US State Department says that the reference to right of resistance is 'disturbing and contradicts directly' the renunciation of violence that is a cornerstone of the roadmap laid out by the quartet is hypocritical, because Israel's land theft goes on unabated and is, by definition of international law, the classical act of aggression by an occupying power against the civilian population in an occupied land.
I am ashamed that my country is part of this outrageous injustice.
A disgusted German.
Good for the US, never give in to kiddy killing terrorists.
The Eichmann escapees are feeling the ground beginning to shift.
'To demand from the Palestinians to recognize Israel's right to exist is ludicrous,'
To say that is ludicrous. How do you negotiate with someone if they refuse to acknowledge you exist?
'as Israel does not recognize the Palestinian state, either. '
At the moment there IS no palestinian state, Just the lawless territory of Gaza.
'A state can only be recognized by another state, so the recognition must be mutual if it has to make any sense.'
Yes, by that logic the way for 'palestinians' to achieve statehood is to recognize Israel.
'That the Palestinians have the 'legitimate right' of resistance and to 'defend themselves against any Israeli aggression, goes without question.'
I question it. No one has a 'legitimate right' to terrorism. By your equation Israelis also have the right to wall them in to save themselves from their savagery.
'What should Palestinians do? Leave peacefully, with their heads bowed?'
No, should they continue to live in rubble and chaos to get their all important revenge?
'A disgusted German.'
After reading the antisemitism, holocaust denial, anti-Americanism, pro-Islamic terrorism and pervasive bigotry coming out of your countrymen(probably you tooas well) on these pages I think it is safe to say I am pretty disgusted with Germans too.
page: 1
VicMar 18th, 2007 - 05:19:35
whether George Washington being considered terorist by G.Britain ?
Whether Boston Tea Party was violent act or revolt against oppression ?
Should we consider French resistance in WWII as bunch of terorists or else ?
Can we persue moderation and just in our life and policies or we must label 'national' to the interest of few ?
Report this comment