Obama backs Palestinians' 1967 border claims
Israeli soldiers walk past the controversial Israeli separation barrier with graffiti depicting late Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat during clashes with Palestinian demonstrators in Qalandia between Jerusalem and the West Bank city of Ramallah on May 15, 2011 as Palestinians marked the 'Nakba' or 'Catastrophe' of the 1948 creation of Israel. / Getty
Updated: 2:56 p.m. ET
WASHINGTON - President Obama endorsed on Thursday a key Palestinian demand for the borders of its future state and prodded Israel to accept that it can never have a truly peaceful nation that is based on "permanent occupation."
While his speech Thursday marked a shift in U.S. policy and represents a victory of sorts for Palestinian leaders ahead of delicate, upcoming negotiations with the Israelis, Obama still warned of the major challenges that the Palestinian's current position brings to the table.
The president cautioned that the recent power-sharing agreement between the mainstream Palestinian faction led by Mahmoud Abbas and the radical Hamas movement, which rules Gaza, "raises profound and legitimate" security questions for Israel, whose Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu has said he refuses to deal with a Palestinian government that includes Iran-backed Hamas.
"How can one negotiate with a party that has shown itself unwilling to recognize your right to exist?" Obama asked. "In the weeks and months to come, Palestinian leaders will have to provide a credible answer to that question."
Obama: America's future bound to Middle East
Obama to Syria's Assad: Democracy or leave
President Obama's Middle East speech (full text)
Obama also rejected a push by the Palestinians for U.N. recognition of a state in the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem late this year. "Symbolic actions to isolate Israel at the United Nations in September won't create an independent state," Obama said.
But Obama said that despite all the suspicion and hostility he is convinced the majority of Israelis and Palestinians want peace and so negotiations must happen.
Obama's urging that a Palestinian state be based on 1967 borders, those that existed before the Six-Day War in which Israel occupied East Jerusalem, the West Bank and Gaza, marked a significant shift in U.S. policy and seemed certain to anger Israel.
Israel has said endorsing the 1967 borders would prejudge negotiations. Obama also took pains to show respect for Israel's views ahead of his meetings Friday with Netanyahu.
Still, Mr. Obama's tough stand could set the stage for a tense meeting Friday when Netanyahu goes to the White House.
In a statement following Mr. Obama's remarks, Israeli Prime Minister rejected the president's endorsement, and said a return to his country's 1967 borders would spell disaster for the Jewish state.
Calling the 1967 lines "indefensible," Netanyahu said such a withdrawal would jeopardize Israel's security and leave major West Bank settlements outside Israeli borders.
The 1967 war, also known as "The Six-Day War," pitted Israel against all of its surrounding Arab neighbors, save Lebanon. Israel emerged victorious, and the resounding Arab defeat resulted in a depression throughout the region lasting decades that has left bitter scars.
The 1967 border issue largely refers to East Jerusalem and the West Bank, which was larger and Jordanian-occupied prior to the conflict. The Gaza Strip's borders were defined after World War II and were largely the same then as they are today.
Popular in Politics
- Officials on Benghazi: "We made mistakes, but without malice" 422 Comments
- Poll: Most think IRS targeting was deliberate 161 Comments
- Obama: "Full focus" is on recovery from Oklahoma tornado 77 Comments
- Top IRS official to invoke 5th Amendment at congressional testimony 101 Comments
- Former IRS chief: "I can't say" what led to IRS targeting
- Va. GOP candidate: Planned Parenthood "more lethal" for blacks than KKK 1144 Comments
- IRS scandal highlights leadership vacancies
- Senate committee approves immigration bill
What do you think all of us Americans would feel? We would hate French first, and then all of their supporters (Russia in this analogy) that make the occupation of our land possible. Still questioning yourself why people in the Middle East and other parts of the world do not like us? Because our Zionist controlled government, not the people, supported the very exact scenario as described above against our will and with our tax money making us accomplices in this unspeakable crime. The scenario that would outrage all of us Americans and make us fight against it if it happened in Michigan or anywhere else in the U.S.
This comment is not intended to make derogatory remarks about France and Russia. It is merely used as an example of how Americans would be outraged and fight back in the same situation as the forced establishment of the Zionist regime and its occupation of Palestine.
Urge your state representatives and senators to immediately stop any remaining support for the Zionist regime. Much of the support already stopped because of the increasing pressure on this issue, but we Americans need to completely distance ourselves from this oppressive regime and start actively opposing it.
The biggest problem in Palestine is that the Zionist regime never offered a choice to All People of Palestine on how they want to govern their land because the Zionist regime cannot exist as a democratic entity. If there was ever any democratic process in Palestine, Zionists would have been outvoted and the Zionist regime would have never existed. That is why the Zionist regime is the occupier because it does not offer choice (i.e. democracy), but instead imposes its regime (i.e. occupies). Imagine if Russians would simply occupy a town in the U.S. where they are in significant numbers and attempt to create a Russian state there without giving the rest of the Americans living there a choice. Imagine then if they would try to institute a "peace agreement" that would attempt to legitimize their occupation. The "peace agreement" would logically and legally be illegitimate because the Americans were not given a choice.
Under all countries' laws, any contract is null and void if it is signed under duress. The current Palestine "peace agreement" process reminds me of The Godfather movie where the mafia boss (i.e. the Zionist regime) made a guy "an offer he could not refuse" by placing a gun (i.e. Zionist conventional and nuclear arsenal) to his head and making him sign the contract. Like the mafia boss' offer, any "peace agreement" other than the choice for All People of Palestine is a crime, and the contract is legally null and void.
The bottom line is that All People of Palestine never wanted to divide their land into artificial two states the way the occupation and this "peace agreement" attempt to divide it. From the beginning of the Zionist regime to its unavoidable end, All People of Palestine and the region never wanted the Zionist regime and they do not want it even more after all the atrocities the Zionist regime committed. I just cannot believe how the Zionist regime can be so ignorant to think that this or any other "peace agreement" that does not allow people to choose how they want to be governed will last and ensure its people's survival. The Zionist regime fails to realize that no matter if it succeeds in muscling this "peace agreement" by unspeakable historic coercion tens of millions of moral people around the world will oppose it until it is corrected, and until justice and free choice prevail. Also, ever increasing number of Jewish people are realizing that Zionism is becoming a destructive force for them and are leading the global resistance to it.
Feel free to copy this comment, email it to other bloggers, and repost it on other blogs, newspaper websites, Facebook, Twitter, and other social networking websites, and include it in any correspondence/lobbying with senators, state representatives and any other public officials so the public learns the truth&
The only issue with the fair democratic process is what to do with all manipulated Jewish people who the Zionist regime imported for decades to increase the Jewish population from around 100,000 to over 5 Million since the start of the occupation. This is obviously an attempt to unjustly manipulate any future democratic process by forcefully increasing the occupier's population at the expense of others. Any compromise other than the absolute fair democratic process with no manipulated population will be temporary with terrible conflicts looming to correct it in the future. The truth is that the Zionist regime will not accept any democratic process even if the manipulated Jewish population is included because it cannot exist as a democratic country as Zionists will be outvoted by all others who live there (Zionists were in an infinite minority before the occupation). The Zionist regime can only temporarily exist through the force of its arms as a one people country where only select ones can vote and where different laws apply to different people. The world must stand up against the Zionist regime by cutting all diplomatic and economic relations with it. Many countries have already stopped all relations with the Zionist regime and others are in the process of doing the same. We Americans need to completely distance ourselves from this oppressive regime through urging our state representatives and senators to do what the rest of the world is doing.
The whole world, with a notable few exceptions, has endorsed such a vision every year at the UN General Assembly. This is not a concession, it is a right of the Palestinian people to which Israel has NO legal claim.
I cannot understand why he laments Palestinians for pursuing recognition at the UN. The Israelis done much the same to declare there state and then used it as a launchpad to conquer the rest of the West Bank, Gaza and East Jerusalem - all occupied according to the whole international community.
Until the framework and stage for resolving this conflict is radically altered, there can be no peace. It can no longer be up to Israel to decide, since prevarication is the strategy it has used to make the death of Palestinian State a fait accompli.
Obama's statement concerning Israeli Settlements was pathetic. However, it was consistent with the isolated veto at Security Council earlier this year. I notice here also his bias: Whereas as Palestinians walked away from talks it seems, he failed to castigate Israel for placing preconditions and also malignantly nibbling away at Palestinian land.
[Kind of a bogus headline. Here ... from the transcript. Its the same as current ... US policy: ]
Looks like nearly everyone ignored your (valid) point: Obama's comment about: "borders ... based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps," has already been (not just US policy but) the basis of Israel & Palestinian negotiations for quite a while!
It's the media which has generated the impression this is something new.
It does not, however, have the right to behave like a rogue state.
Obama said that the peace talks should begin with the 1967 borders and discuss land swaps - Israeli settlements traded for land in Israel. What is new about this? What have peace negotiators been talking about for these many years?
It is against UN law to claim land that has been occupied in war (thanks, George HW) this has been applied retro- actively in the case of the Greco -Turkish wars and Ottoman occupation.
Which is WHY the vote on a UN recognized Palestinian state is so important.
Obama is a lawyer and a politician first and foremost. He wants his Camp David moment. This is all merely leverage on Israel before November to get them round the table to make it appear he's some big peace maker on the Middle East issue.
Good luck with that. The far right can collapse an Israeli government quicker than a beach chair.
International law( for the pedants).