[Peace-discuss] USA takes orders from Israel

Tue Jan 13 09:17:21 CST 2009

Probably bravado by the feckless Olmert.  He undoubtedly knew the story of the 
Bush administration's slap-down of the Iran hit was about to break.  Remember 
Sharon had said after 9/11, "First Iraq, then Iran."  Olmert leaves office 
having failed at the grand design.

Remember too that the US primary role all along (as in 2006) has been to keep 
the UN (and the "int'l community") off the back of the Israelis as they continue 
their diry business. The US has used the veto threat to do that, and had here 
crafted an innocuous resolution that could maintain the lie of US even-handedness.

If Rice was traduced in the event, it probably has more to do with faction 
fights in the Bush administration (the neocons hate Rice for staging the 
ineffective coup against Hamas in 2007) than the laughably small influence of 
the departing (and indictable) PM of Israel.  He's pretty erratic anyway -- see 
the famous interview with Yedioth Aharonoth -- and is not even running the war 
in the final days of his premiership. He tries to insist he's not totally 
irrelevant and leave his successor (Netenyahu?), who'll be dealing with a new 
gov't in DC anyway -- to overcome the embarrassment. --CGE

============

	Last update - 19:44 29/09/2008  	 	 	
	ANALYSIS / Olmert's epiphany is too little, too late
	By Aluf Benn, Haaretz Correspondent

At the age of 63, just moments before his departure from premiership, Ehud 
Olmert has reached an extraordinary epiphany. In order to make peace with the 
Palestinians and the Syrians, Israel must withdraw from "nearly all the 
territories, if not all." As he told Yedioth Aharonoth in a holiday interview, 
even East Jerusalem must be given to the Palestinians.

Whoa.

What an epiphany: In order to make peace with the Arabs, we must give them land. 
How come we never thought of that before? And where was Olmert when the Israeli 
left, and the whole international community, was repeatedly exhausting this 
claim? Was he really among the screaming spokesmen for the camp opposing all 
agreements and all compromises? Or was that just the evil child within him, and 
not actually the real Olmert?

Olmert is repenting now for his sins: For 35 years, he said, "I was not prepared 
to see reality in all its depth." Now he is regretting his vote in Knesset 
against a peace agreement with Egypt, as well as his stubborn refusal to annex 
even a millimeter of Jerusalem's wide border. But most regretfully, he has 
reached this realization too late for it to have any influence.

In his words, agreements with the Palestinians and the Syrians are "very close." 
If he were to stay in his post, he could fulfill them, could "bring the State of 
Israel to a decision." But then this mishap occurred, and the State of Israel 
brought about his dismissal, with just "one dubious witness, no trial and no 
substantial evidence."

So now it's clear who is to blame for dragging out this state of war and 
preventing peace: the state prosecutor, key witness Moshe Talansky, the justices 
who decided to hear his testimony, and Defense Minister Ehud Barak who coerced 
the prime minister to resign.

Olmert fell, he says, due to the lust for power of unrestrained clerks, who did 
not like his tendency to initiate and to make decisions. He would not discuss 
the suspicions and investigations against him, but was rather insulted by the 
criticism against him. A hedonist? Olmert? All he did was smoke some cigars.

Olmert believes so strongly in himself and in his self-righteousness, that he is 
trying to make us forget a few of the details that don't fit into his new image 
as prophet of peace.

First of all, his negotiating partners have been painting an entirely different 
picture altogether - if not opposite - of peace progress. Palestinian President 
Mahmoud Abbas has said the Palestinians would never accept Olmert's proposal for 
"partial peace." Syrian President Bashar Assad has still not agreed to direct 
negotiations with Israel, even at a low level. This does not mean that they are 
right and he is wrong. It is clear that there is a huge difference of opinion 
when it comes to the chance for an agreement.

Second, let's assume that Olmert is right and he soon signs an agreement with 
Abbas. What could be done with this agreement? Should it be hung on the wall? 
Who would execute it and when? And what would happen on the ground in the meantime?

Third, Olmert's attitude toward the settlers raises doubts about his 
trustworthiness. Olmert disparages Ariel Sharon in the interview, saying that he 
spoke only of vague concessions without detailing what they would be. Olmert is 
willing to be specific. "What I am saying, no other Israeli leader has said 
before me," Olmert boasts.

Sharon really was vague, but he was the only leader willing to stand up to the 
settlers and evacuate them from their homes. Actions, not words. Olmert is a 
hero in a newspaper interview, but in reality has been a marionette of the 
settlers just like the leaders who preceded him.

Olmert knew full well that settlement expansion would be an obstacle to any 
peace agreement in the West Bank, and had said as much in the past. However, 
after the bloody 2006 evacuation of the Amona settlement outpost during his 
early days in office, Olmert became fearful of any confrontation or friction 
with the settlers. And when extremist settlers became increasingly violent 
toward their Palestinian neighbors and Israel Defense Forces soldiers, Olmert 
did not even try to curb it. What was he waiting for? Why did he decide to add 
thousands of housing units to settlement blocs that only add to their rivals' 
propaganda, even if they are ultimately absorbed into Israel? And why did he 
leave the outposts where they are?

The conclusion that emerges is that Olmert is an excellent commentator, but he 
lacks the firmness to execute his ideas. The interesting parts of the interview 
touch on security issues. Olmert expresses doubts about a potential attack on 
Iranian nuclear facilities, and he strongly opposes a new incursion into Gaza - 
something he was unwilling to say during the barrage of Qassam rockets into 
Israel, when the topic was at the center of public discussion.

But Olmert also acts like a politician: He ignores the only political agreement 
reached during his tenure with the Palestinians - the truce with Hamas in Gaza - 
because that accomplishment is credited to his rival Barak.

Ron Szoke wrote:
> Olmert says called Bush to force change in U.N. vote
> 
> Tue Jan 13, 2009 1:52pm GMT
> 
> JERUSALEM (Reuters) - Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert said a telephone call 
> he made to U.S. President George W. Bush last week forced Secretary of State 
> Condoleezza Rice to abstain in a U.N. vote on the Gaza war, leaving her 
> "shamed."
> 
> Pouring on political bravado in a speech late Monday, Olmert said he 
> demanded to talk to Bush with only 10 minutes to spare before a U.N. Security 
> Council vote Thursday on a resolution opposed by Israel calling for an 
> immediate cease-fire.
> 
> "When we saw that the secretary of state, for reasons we did not really 
> understand, wanted to vote in favour of the U.N. resolution ... I looked for 
> President Bush and they told me he was in Philadelphia making a speech," 
> Olmert said.
> 
> "I said, 'I don't care. I have to talk to him now,'" Olmert said, describing Bush, 
> who leaves office on January 20, as "an unparalleled friend" of Israel.
> 
> "They got him off the podium, brought him to another room and I spoke to 
> him. I told him, 'You can't vote in favour of this resolution.' He said, 'Listen, I 
> don't know about it, I didn't see it, I'm not familiar with the phrasing.'"
> 
> Olmert said he then told Bush: "'I'm familiar with it. You can't vote in favour.'
> 
> "He gave an order to the secretary of state and she did not vote in favour of it -
> - a resolution she cooked up, phrased, organised and manoeuvred for. She was 
> left pretty shamed and abstained on a resolution she arranged," Olmert said.
> 
> Fourteen of the Security Council's 15 members supported the resolution, which 
> has failed to halt Israel's offensive in the Gaza Strip and Hamas's cross-border 
> rocket fire.
> 
> Olmert, under police investigation over alleged corruption, resigned as prime 
> minister in September but is serving in a caretaker capacity until a new 
> government is formed after Israel's February 10 parliamentary election.
> 
> (Writing by Jeffrey Heller, Editing by Alistair Lyon)
> _______________________________________________
> Peace-discuss mailing list
> Peace-discuss at lists.chambana.net
> http://lists.chambana.net/cgi-bin/listinfo/peace-discuss