U.S.: Israeli Settlement Growth Must Stop

Hillary Clinton Defends U.S. Stance on Jewish Building in Palestinian Territories, Says it Must Halt "Forever"

(AP)  Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton defended the U.S. stance toward Israeli settlement building to worried Arab allies on Wednesday, saying Washington does not accept the legitimacy of the West Bank enclaves and wants to see their construction halted "forever."

Still, she said an Israeli offer to restrain - but not halt - construction represents "positive movement forward" toward resuming Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations.

Clinton met for an hour with Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak during a hastily arranged stopover in the Egyptian capital to soothe Arab concerns that Washington is backing off demands for an Israeli settlement halt. The fears were sparked on Saturday when Clinton, with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu at her side in Jerusalem, praised his government's offer as unprecedented.

She has since tried to clarify the remarks, saying that the Israeli offer does not go far enough. Still, she has indicated that the Palestinians should resume negotiations with Israel without a full settlement halt as they demand.

On Wednesday, Clinton insisted "our policy on settlement has not changed."

"We do not accept the legitimacy of settlement activity. Ending all settlement activity current and future would be preferable," she told reporters after talks with Mubarak.

Of the Israeli offer, she said, "It is not what we would prefer because we would like to see everything ended forever."

"But it is something that I think shows at least a positive movement forward toward final status issues being addressed," she said.

Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is sticking to his refusal to resume negotiations until Israel stops building settlements. He rejected the Israeli plan to complete 3,000 housing units in Jewish settlements in the West Bank, and to continue to construct public buildings and other construction in east Jerusalem - a territory Palestinians hope will be their future capital.

After Arab criticism of her comments in Jerusalem on the Israeli plan, Clinton delayed her return to Washington after attending an international conference in Marrakech, Morocco, and flew instead to Cairo.

Appearing at Clinton's press conference on Wednesday, Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Aboul Gheit said the Mubarak-Clinton talks were "very fruitful and will have clear benefits and results in the future."

"The talks were frank and clear that showed a U.S.-Egyptian common understanding on several issues," he said.

In a new twist Tuesday, Clinton made what appeared to be an inadvertent slip of the tongue in a television interview with the al-Jazeera network, referring to the goal of "an Israeli capital in east Jerusalem."

It has not been U.S. policy to favor including east Jerusalem in an Israeli capital; the Palestinians claim it as their capital, and the issue is one of the most important and delicate points that would have to be settled in any final peace deal between the two parties.

In the al-Jazeera interview, Clinton reiterated that Obama has clearly stated his desire for a halt to settlements. But she added that the Israeli offer of "restraint," to include an end to establishment of new settlements and other measures that limit settlement growth, might be close enough to the ultimate U.S. and Palestinian goal to merit embracing in the near future.

"It is nowhere near enough, but I think when you keep your eye on what we want to achieve, it is a better place to be than the alternative, which is unrestrained (growth)," she said.

[babooph]

"The special relationship" never described by the propaganda system as the host -parasite relationship that it is-Israel has gerrymandered itself into a pure nuclear target & the bitterness in that area makes is a sure thing -just a matter of time-US policy makes it inevitable....

[formrusmcsgt]

"Still, she has indicated that the Palestinians should resume negotiations with Israel without a full settlement halt as they demand."
---
Who is Hillary to define the Palestinian's positions for them?

Incredibly stupid approach.

[formrusmcsgt]

'Hillary Clinton Defends U.S. Stance on Jewish Building in Palestinian Territories"
--
More like "Hillary finally figures out US position on settlements'.

Monday, she was cooing endlessly to the world press because Netanyahu said they'd "slow down" illegal settlement building. "Unprecedented", she gushed.

Imagine the horror we'd have all faced if she'd won the White House.

She can't even keep our ME policy straight.

Sheesh.

[formrusmcsgt]

I stand corrected - she did her cooing on Saturday, not Monday.

[formrusmcsgt]

Surely, George Mitchell is either acutely wincing or laughing right out loud at Hillary's obvious incompetence.....

[formrusmcsgt]

by morgan378 November 4, 2009 2:03 PM EST
Right or wrong they're fighting for survival on any level they can.

Considering that Israel has about 80 nukes compared to their neighbor's conbined total of 0, I hardly think so.

You were doing well up until then, I'll add.

[earth5661]

Forum,

Again, Why don't you demmand that France ot Britain give up their Nukes ?

Israel has had them since the 1950s and did not use them or threaten to use them when they were outnumbered 15-1 on their border.

Now 50 years later your only concerned with Israel having them but not one peep from you about Iran pounding their chest and calling for another state to be destroyed.

I hope Israel has 2000

[formrusmcsgt]

Let Hillary sit in her office and send competent diplomats instead to do our bidding.

It would automatically provide a 50% increase in efficiency as Hillary spends half her time removing her fat foot from her mouth as it is.

Nice to see she was finally brought up to speed regarding our policy on settlements....

[morgan378]

Netanyahu will never stop building and as such Clinton will never be able to bring the Palestinians to the table. Israel wants the Palestinians to come in a "one down" position, and that's not going to happen as long as we're dealing with Abbas. He has enough to worry about with Hamas sitting pretty in the Strip. As for any attack from Israel unto Iran, there's a good chance this will happen if Netanyahu feels the Israeli's back is up against a wall. They only await the fruits of negotiations with Iran - should they happen or not - before striking. They've already drawn up plans for this attack so to be prepared if the Iranian's jink one way they can jag in another. With Iran celebrating an anti-Israel day last month - the writing is on the wall. Far from being surprised that the Iranian's are sending arms to Hezbollah, the Israeli's know it to be true and show it to the World in an effort to condone any actions they may take in the future. Right or wrong they're fighting for survival on any level they can.

[lightningF]

We pay the Palestinians,and they do not do as we ask,so why should Israel.If the Palestinians want peace they will sit down and talk about it with out any preconditions. Why does Israel have to give any to have peace with the Palestinians? You would think it would become like WW1 everyone just got tired of fighting and agreed to quit fighting.

[dwilson59]

I have a question and would like to hear your response.

If Israel stopped building and gave the land back to the Palestine, stopped the check points and opened up the Borders what would happen?

[chonder2]

enza-Your a sick puppy.

[earth5661]

They would get back to what Hamas and Hezzbolah have written in their charter.

and that is to continue and fight Israel.

[Ms_enza]

I can see from the picture that she still talks about me...