Came across a couple of articles within minutes of each other the other day – both interesting enough in themselves but when you put it all together, you can’t help but wonder?
I’m wondering also, if anyone knows if this is true (emboldened)? Apparently, last time around, Bibi:
Netanyahu: Master maneuverer
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/articles/39/Netanyahu_Master_maneuverer.html
If history can provide any guidance, he will maneuver.
Recall that when Netanyahu was first elected Prime Minister in 1996, he had pledged to end the peace process. Facing pressure from the Clinton Administration to continue negotiations, he countered with conditions of his own, in an effort to distort or abort the process. Clinton persisted, and when invited to participate in negotiations at Wye Plantation, Netanyahu, at first, balked.
At that time, famed Israeli peace activist, Uri Avnery, predicted that in response to this invitation, Netanyahu would do one of three things: not go; go and not sign an agreement; or sign an agreement and then continue to maneuver to find a way not to implement it. He took the latter course. Even after the agreement had been reached, he continued to maneuver, suggesting a new condition be added—the freedom for convicted Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard—a move that reportedly angered the U.S. President and was dismissed.
I just thought it interesting, that the first thing Obama is expected to do, is something very akin to the condition set by & which may have cost Bibi his job last time.
US forced to rehabilitate former spy Uzi Arad http://www.redress.cc/palestine/jcook20090520
By Jonathan Cook in Nazareth
20 May 2009
Jonathan Cook considers the rise of a former official of Israel’s spy agency Mossad, Uzi Arad, formerly barred from entering the US by the Bush administration after implication in a spying scandal but recently rehabilitated by Obama. Arad is an implacable opponent of Palestinian statehood and believes that Israel should strike “anything and everything of value” in Iran, including its “holiest sites”.
Considering other things Bibi said in '96:
"The United States has given Israel, apart from political and military support, munificent and magnificent assistance in the economic sphere. With America's help, Israel has grown to be a powerful, modern state. I believe that we can now say that Israel has reached childhood's end, that it has matured enough to begin approaching a state of self-reliance. "
"But I believe there can be no greater tribute to America's long-standing economic aid to Israel than for us to be able to say: We are going to achieve economic independence. We are going to do it. In the next four years, we will begin the long-term process of gradually reducing the level of your generous economic assistance to Israel." http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/MFAArchive/1990_1999/1996/7/PM%20Netanyahu-%20Speech%20to%20US%20Congress-%20July%2010-%201996
& didn't we just hear Obama say no more blank cheques for Israel? No surprise then to hear:
US: We will pay for Israel missile system
http://www.morningstaronline.co.uk/index.php/world/us_we_will_pay_for_israel_missile_system
I’m wondering also, if anyone knows if this is true (emboldened)? Apparently, last time around, Bibi:
Netanyahu: Master maneuverer
http://www.aljazeera.com/news/
If history can provide any guidance, he will maneuver.
Recall that when Netanyahu was first elected Prime Minister in 1996, he had pledged to end the peace process. Facing pressure from the Clinton Administration to continue negotiations, he countered with conditions of his own, in an effort to distort or abort the process. Clinton persisted, and when invited to participate in negotiations at Wye Plantation, Netanyahu, at first, balked.
At that time, famed Israeli peace activist, Uri Avnery, predicted that in response to this invitation, Netanyahu would do one of three things: not go; go and not sign an agreement; or sign an agreement and then continue to maneuver to find a way not to implement it. He took the latter course. Even after the agreement had been reached, he continued to maneuver, suggesting a new condition be added—the freedom for convicted Israeli spy, Jonathan Pollard—a move that reportedly angered the U.S. President and was dismissed.
I just thought it interesting, that the first thing Obama is expected to do, is something very akin to the condition set by & which may have cost Bibi his job last time.
US forced to rehabilitate former spy Uzi Arad http://www.redress.cc/
By Jonathan Cook in Nazareth
20 May 2009
Jonathan Cook considers the rise of a former official of Israel’s spy agency Mossad, Uzi Arad, formerly barred from entering the US by the Bush administration after implication in a spying scandal but recently rehabilitated by Obama. Arad is an implacable opponent of Palestinian statehood and believes that Israel should strike “anything and everything of value” in Iran, including its “holiest sites”.
Considering other things Bibi said in '96:
"The United States has given Israel, apart from political and military support, munificent and magnificent assistance in the economic sphere. With America's help, Israel has grown to be a powerful, modern state. I believe that we can now say that Israel has reached childhood's end, that it has matured enough to begin approaching a state of self-reliance. "
"But I believe there can be no greater tribute to America's long-standing economic aid to Israel than for us to be able to say: We are going to achieve economic independence. We are going to do it. In the next four years, we will begin the long-term process of gradually reducing the level of your generous economic assistance to Israel." http://www.mfa.gov.il/MFA/
& didn't we just hear Obama say no more blank cheques for Israel? No surprise then to hear:
US: We will pay for Israel missile system
http://www.morningstaronline.
Thursday 21 May 2009
Washington has reassured Tel Aviv that it will continue to fund a $100m new-generation Israeli missile system despite recent cuts to the US defence budget.
I dunno but going back to the first article, maybe it's Emmanuel?
For his part, Rahm Emmanuel, the President’s Chief of Staff, has also been quite clear. Last month, in comments to Yedioth Ahronoth, Emmanuel said “In the next four years there is going to be a permanent status arrangement between Israel and the Palestinians on the basis of two states for two peoples, and it doesn’t matter to us at all who is prime minister.”
Washington has reassured Tel Aviv that it will continue to fund a $100m new-generation Israeli missile system despite recent cuts to the US defence budget.
I dunno but going back to the first article, maybe it's Emmanuel?
For his part, Rahm Emmanuel, the President’s Chief of Staff, has also been quite clear. Last month, in comments to Yedioth Ahronoth, Emmanuel said “In the next four years there is going to be a permanent status arrangement between Israel and the Palestinians on the basis of two states for two peoples, and it doesn’t matter to us at all who is prime minister.”
Tags: $$$, emmanuel, israel, netanyahu, obama, usforeignpolicy
http://www.palestinianmothers.