.
Both Israeli Arab and nationalist political leaders blasted the speech as political spin.
“There is no such thing as a demilitarized state, Netanyahu knows very well that no political force on earth can prevent a country from arming itself or signing military treaties like any other country.”
MK Zevulun Orlev, of the Jewish Home party, said that the policy represented a drastic change in stance and was an affront to the coalition agreement.
“Netanyahu offered lip service by agreeing to a demilitarized Palestinian state, thus disappointing most of his coalition partners,” he said. “Netanyahu’s speech requires a serious coalition discussion to ensure that the democratic resolution as it was manifested in the elections will be represented in the government’s policy.”
Israeli Arab MK Ahmed Tibi said that the address was full of contradictory policy, and essentially a “ploy” to close the rift growing between Netanyahu’s government and the Obama administration.
“Netanyahu’s mountain turned into a mole hill,” said Tibi. “The speech manifests an intellectual fixation which sees a non-sovereign Palestinian state together with continued settlement construction. I hope that the White House will blow the cover from Bibi’s [Netanyahu’s] public relations ploy. The PLO [Palestine Liberation Organization] doesn’t need to, and never will, recognize Israel as a Jewish state.”
MKs from the opposition Kadima Party, however, said that the speech represented a long-awaited step toward regional peace.
ANALYSIS / Netanyahu speech: Soft words and hardline positions
An aide to Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas said that the speech “sabotages” regional peace efforts, due to Netanyahu’s refusal to accept an influx of Palestinian refugees into Israel and his unwillingness to compromise on the status of Jerusalem.
Chief Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said that Netanyahu “unilaterally ended the negotiations” and took the possibility of peace talks off the table.
- “[Netanyahu] spoke about a Palestinian state, [but only] after he removed from it the issue of Jerusalem, placed the issue of refugees outside negotiations, placed security outside negotiations when he spoke about a demilitarized Palestinian state.”
Erekat also said that there was no chance of Palestinian ever approving Netanyahu’s vision for their state. “He will have to wait 1,000 years before he finds one Palestinian who will go along with him with this feeble state.”
Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas has said talks with Israel cannot resume until Netanyahu halts settlement and accepts a two-state solution.
Haaretz: What you are trying to say is that once Israel is clear about Oslo and a two-state solution, it will force Hamas to take a clear decision?
President Carter: I’m not sure about Netanyahu, but I remember when Oslo was announced, Sharon declared it was a death sentence for Israel. And I would presume at that time that Netanyahu and Sharon were compatible in their denouncing the Oslo agreement. But I can’t vouch for it – you would know better than I.
Haaretz: Obama keeps mentioning the Arab peace initiative. Would you make the initiative a prerequisite, or a pillar, for a comprehensive agreement that will put forward, to Hamas and Israelis, a package deal?
President Carter: Yes I would. I don’t see any substantive incompatibility among the Arab peace proposal and the Geneva recommendation and the final stage of the Quartet Road Map and the United Nations resolutions. I think they’re all completely compatible. King Abdullah of Saudi Arabia – I spoke to him last year – he indicated some flexibility on withdrawal to pre-67 borders, in that if Israel and the Palestinian leaders can negotiate a modification to the borders, a swap, that he would be willing to accept that.
President Carter: Netanyahu was never friendly toward me because of the peace treaty with Egypt. He accused me of giving away the Sinai. Both he and former PM Olmert criticized me for the peace treaty that I negotiated.
.
(The Independent) Feb. 6, 2009 – Israel is about to make a misjudgement as disastrous – and deadly – as the attack on Gaza. In a few days, it looks as if it could elect Benjamin Netanyahu as prime minister once again.
This is a man calling for the violent re-occupation of Gaza to “liquidate” its elected government. This is a man who says he will “naturally grow” the West Bank settlements. This is a man who says he will “never” negotiate over Jerusalem, or the Golan Heights, or control of the West Bank water supply.
This is a man who says establishing a Palestinian state would leave Israel with, “an existential threat and a public relations nightmare reminiscent of 1938 Czechoslovakia”. This is a man who Yitzhak Rabin’s widow said helped create a climate of hate that led to his murder.
The political beneficiaries of Operation Cast Lead have been Israel’s hard-right. The opinion poll numbers have surged for Netanyahu’s Likud and for the even more extreme Avigdor Lieberman. They say the only problem with the 23-day bombing of Gaza – killing 410 children, and hugely strengthening support for Hamas – is that it did not go far enough.
Only option open for Obama is regime change!
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."No, that’s not what he said. He said shove it to Obama and the U.S. nation which, by the way, will never be recognized by Israel as a Christian Homeland.
Of course he said even worse to the Palestinians —– his guest workers.
“guest workers”
I’m really beginning to think you’re getting it. It’s a replay of South African Apartheid when the white Afrikaaners graciously provided work for Blacks in the dangerous diamond and mineral mines, or as maids and gardners for the white elite.
.
(Haaretz) – President Mubarak had informed Netanyahu of his position, according to which Israeli-Palestinian peace talks must be renewed from the point at which they were broken off, and that the call for recognition of Israel as a Jewish state would only complicate matters.
“You won’t find anyone to answer that call in Egypt, or in any other place,” Mubarak was quoted as telling the troops. Mubarak made the comments in a speech to Egyptian army commandos.
Mubarak added that the problems in the Middle East would not be solved until the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was resolved. “The solution to the crises in the Arab and Muslim world lies in Jerusalem.”
Dennis Ross being ousted as Obama envoy to Iran
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence.".
The prime minister’s speech last night returned the Middle East to the days of George W. Bush’s “axis of evil.” Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a patriarchal, colonialist address in the best neoconservative tradition: The Arabs are the bad guys, or at best ungrateful terrorists; the Jews, of course, are the good guys, rational people who need to raise and care for their children. In the West Bank settlement of Itamar, they’re even building a nursery school.
No empathy for the refugees from Jaffa who lost their entire world, not a word for the Muslim connection to Jerusalem — neither a fragment of a quote from the Koran, nor a line of Arabic poetry.
Netanyahu’s provincial remarks were not intended to penetrate the hearts of the hundreds of millions of Al Jazeera viewers in the Muslim world. Instead, he sought to appease Tzipi Hotovely, the settler Likud lawmaker, and make it possible to live peaceably with the settler foreign minister Avigdor Lieberman. Netanyahu’s demand that Palestinians recognize Israel as the state of the Jewish people didn’t even leave him an opening for forging reconciliation with the Arab citizens in the country.
The prime minister’s declaration that Jerusalem will remain he “undivided capital” of Israel – only Israel – slammed the door before the entire Muslim world. And his Hebron is solely the city of the Jewish patriarchs; the Arabs have no such rights at all.
"But I will not let myself be reduced to silence."If I was Obama — and the world can probably be thankful that I am not, at least most of the time — I would offer a counterproposal:
The United States will guarantee the security of the State of Israel by any means necessary, including the use of the geenormous US nuclear arsenal. In return, the following conditions will be met:
The United States recognizes the right of the State of Israel as a sovereign state to reject these terms, but recognizes that doing so will result in a cessation of US funding and a prohibition on private donations in perpetuity.