Upcoming Speeches
From the State Department:
Secretary Clinton to Deliver Remarks on World Water Day on March 22, 2010
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will deliver remarks on World Water Day at the National Geographic Society, in Washington, D.C. at 10:00 a.m. Under Secretary for Democracy and Global Affairs Maria Otero will introduce Secretary Clinton. The event is co-hosted by National Geographic and Water Advocates.
One out of every six people lacks safe drinking water and two out of every five people lack adequate sanitation. By 2025, nearly two-thirds of the world’s population will be living under water stressed conditions and approximately one billion people will face absolute water scarcity. Implications are widespread ranging from health, gender equity, child survival and education to the environment, poverty and peace and security. World Water Day raises public consciousness of these challenges and seeks to ensure that safe, affordable and sustainable drinking water, sanitation and hygiene is accessible for all people around the world.
And the much-anticipated speech to AIPAC:
Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton will deliver remarks to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee Annual Policy Conference Monday, March 22 at 9:10 a.m. at the Washington Convention Center.
AIPAC’s annual policy conference will bring approximately 7,000 of its supporters to Washington, D.C. March 21-23, 2010.
I’m not looking forward to the AIPAC conference but I won’t get into that. Suffice it to say, I’m not a fan. I’m more of a J-Street person myself 
.
To view this animated banner you need to have Flash Player 9 or newer installed and JavaScript enabled. This 
I’m with you Stacy although I admire the restraint with which you said that.
I will not be tuning into the AIPAC pander-fest where everybody gets up on the stage and repeats the tired refrain “the US has an unshakable bond with Israel, we are entirely committed to her security, blah, blah, blah.” First of all, we all know this- the US has always been and always will be Israel’s closest ally. So, why does every politician run to the AIPAC conference to proclaim their undying love for my supposed ancestral homeland? Because if they don’t, they will get labeled anti-Israel or worse (in my case, a self-hating Jew). So, every politician has to pass the “pro-Israel” litmus test or else they will find themselves slimed by this very monied, very powerful lobby group which engages in espionage against the US and bullies and threatens politicians if they refuse to blindly support every single thing Israel does. We saw this most clearly in AIPAC’s response to Biden and Clinton condemning Israel for their rude and self-defeating attempts to scuttle proximity talks. Who did AIPAC side with? Well, Bibi of course!
And naturally, much of the talk will focus on war-mongering regarding Iran. Never mind attacking Iran would only make Israel much less secure, something I certainly don’t want to happen.
I wish somebody in this administration had the balls (or their equivalent) to say the truth- even IF Iran had nukes (which they do not) why would they attack Israel, which already has a huge, very sophisticated nuclear weapons arsenal? So next time you hear someone in the administration (or at AIPAC) talk about how Iran is an existential threat to Israel, think about this- why does the administration never bring up Israel’s nuclear weapons? Two reasons- one is that the US has agreed to never acknowledge they exist so that Israel can continue to refuse any monitoring by the IAEA and never have to sign onto international nuclear non-proliferation agreements like we expect of every other country. The second reason is that if they acknowledge Israel has nuclear deterrence, it kind of makes the whole “Iran is a major threat” argument sound rather silly, doesn’t it?
Well stated as always.
Apparently Netanyahu finally called Clinton and essentially refused to do anything the US had asked. In other words, another big f**k you to the administration. I think this is why all of a sudden Hillary is now punting and toning down the rhetoric. What else is she going to do? It’s not like the US will ever hold Israel accountable for anything. So when the US makes demands of Israel, like with settlements, Israel just says screw you and we have to just take it. Which is of course why Israel is not going to do anything Clinton or Obama ask. Why should they? They know Obama is powerless to do what we should have done a long time ago- cut off the billions of dollars we give Israel every year.
I do not understand how Israel has us by the balls. How are they our BFFs when they won’t do anything we ask? Even the U.N., which gave birth to Israel, is demanding the same things we are.
I agree with Steve, Stacy. You showed remarkable restraint.
Steve and Still4Hill you may have spoke too soon!
I’m sorry, I just can’t help myself. This is just driving me nuts.
I think what this recent “crisis” has illustrated is that Netanyahu and many of his supporters both in Israel and even in the US, don’t really support a two-state solution. In fact, until after Obama took office and pressed about resuming peace talks, Bibi was very open, and proud, of his refusal to agree to such a plan. After taking office, the US clearly leaned on him and he said he was for it, perhaps in part because of his own fragile domestic political situation which required him to make alliances with both the left and the right in the Knesset. AIPAC and other hard-line groups, in my opinion, don’t support a two state solution either although they say they do for political reasons. If they did support it, then I don’t think they would spend pretty much all their time (and considerable amounts of money) engaging in lobbying activities which ensure it will never come about.
Making matters worse was the suspect timing of Netanyahu’s recent announcement proclaiming the Haram al-Ibrahimi and the Belal Mosque (aka the Cave of the Patriarchs and the Tomb of Rachel) as Jewish heritage sites- apparently it infuriated the Obama administration. It was tantamount to walking up to a fire and tossing gas on it. And the obvious question is why would Bibi do that immediately prior to peace negotiations?
All of this is partly why I think AIPAC, some members of Congress, prominent neoconservatives and many commentators were so quick to denounce Biden and Secy Clinton’s rebuke of Bibi- they know Bibi’s actions threaten to expose him for what he is- an uber-right wing, nationalist hawk that is not the slightest bit interested in meaningful peace negotiations- in other words, if the US really pushed Israel to try to hold Netanyahu accountable for not only his actions but the motives behind them, it could become apparent that with respect to being good faith negotiator in the peace process, the Emperor has no clothes and I think that made AIPAC and ADL and others very nervous. So they went into damage control mode and turned the tables to make it all Obama’s fault- they made it sound like it (the settlement announcement during Biden’s visit) was just a simple mistake in timing and nothing more and for the Obama admin. to react so angrily was inappropriate or worse, was evidence of anti-Israel sentiment (which is preposterous of course). Bibi’s brother just gave an interview claiming Obama is an anti-Semite. *sigh*
Now, some pro-Israel groups, J-Street for example, have done a good job of demonstrating that one can support Israel while disagreeing with Netanyahu’s words and actions. Of course, doing so has put them right in the same cross-hairs the Obama administration is in. Sadly, the Israeli government and some folks here in the US have been trying to do everything they can to undermine J-Streets efforts to promote debate and allow for differences of opinion with respect to how best to achieve peace in the Mideast, calling them traitors to Israel, self-hating Jews, blah, blah, blah.
I just a little while ago that Congress is putting pressure on the admin. to only criticize Israel in private- a letter written by AIPAC is being circulated by both Democrats & Repubs in Congress, a copy of which will end up on Secy Clinton’s desk and also Obama’s:
http://www.jpost.com/International/Article.aspx?ID=171404
I have to say, there comes a point when I look at the uber-defensive reaction of many in Congress as they rush to defend Bibi and I can’t help but scratch my head and think “the lady doth protest too much…” What are they so afraid of?
And this is an example of the type of knee-jerk commentary that has been plastered all over the op-ed pages recently:
http://www.saratogian.com/articles/2010/03/20/opinion/doc4ba4105465bbd238395929.txt
For a good summary of the tense and untenable situation in E. Jerusalem, check out this article from the Economist:
http://www.economist.com/world/middle-east/displaystory.cfm?story_id=15612463
Israel is a small country and pretty soon, there won’t be much more land for Israel to appropriate- soon, a two state solution may be physically impossible, if its not already.
This is from 2009 but it gives a taste of the subtle ways in which this is being done:
http://www.nytimes.com/2009/05/10/world/middleeast/10jerusalem.html?_r=2&emc=eta1
If Netanyahu refuses to suspend settlement construction in East Jerusalem only *temporarily* during negotiations, what do you think the chances are he will dismantle said settlements as part of a peace deal? Slim to none? The Palestinians know this, as does the US government. Put quite simply, time is running out. So, the other option is to have a one state solution where Jewish people will be a minority but they retain majority status in terms of rights and privileges via an Apartheid system. Even Israeli Foreign Minister Ehud Barak has said (recently during an interview on Amanpour) that that would likely be the result of a one-state solution.
For an excellent discussion of the possibility of having the UN create Palestine as a Class A Mandate, see Professor Juan Cole’s post about it and take a look at the map he provides of how much territory the Palestinians have lost from 1946-2000 and it’s striking- it’s one thing to talk about how much Palestinian territory has been lost its quite another to see it in a graphic- there’s simply no way to deny what is happening.
http://www.juancole.com/2010/03/lord-curzon-on-palestine-as-class.html
None of the above is meant to imply that the Palestinians have always been oh-so-reasonable in the way in which they have approached negotiations in the past or more recently. In fact, they have spent a tremendous amount of time shooting themselves in the foot and complaining later that it hurts. And that gets old. At least that corrupt, creepy snake Arafat is out of the picture. In fact, Abbas and Fayed are about as good of partners in peace as the US or Israel could hope for, which makes this all the more frustrating. Of course, there are some Palestinians who also don’t want to see peace negotiations succeed at all- Hamas certainly is part of that group. I have no idea what to do with or about them.
Since Obama delayed his Asia trip to help pull in votes on the health care bill and will be in the country at the time of the AIPEC conference, now Netanyahu plans to address the group. Should make for interesting political theatre. I hope Hillary nails him — very publicly.
I think instead of Hillary, I think Obama should show up at AIPAC tomorrow but not tell anyone ahead of time. In other words, gate crash.
Netanyahu’s arrogance knows no bounds:
http://haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1157844.html
Excerpt from article:
“Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu will use a visit to Washington this week to press the U.S. to release advanced weapons needed for a possible strike on Iran’s nuclear sites, the Sunday Times reported.
[snip]
For the first time since Operation Cast Lead, Israel has agreed to ease the blockade on the Gaza Strip. Netanyahu has also agreed to discuss all core issues during the proximity talks, with the condition of reaching final conclusions only in direct talks with the PA.
But according to the London weekly, Netanyahu will also seek returns for the concessions, asking Israel’s closest ally to provide the IAF with sophisticated ‘bunker-buster’ bombs needed to break through to Iran’s nuclear enrichment installations, many of which are buried underground…”
****
Ummm…Netanyahu think the US *owes* him something? He has refused to do what Clinton asked of him during her phone call- he outright refuses to halt the illegal settlement construction in E. Jerusalem even temporarily during negotiations but he thinks that in return for his “concessions”, Barack Obama should give him advanced weapons systems to essentially start a war with Iran? A war that the US will then be forced to fight, which would play right into the hands of Ahmadinejad, Hezbollah and Hamas. Brilliant!
This “special relationship” with Israel has become a tad one-sided.
Think about it another way. What if the US acted like Israel is right now? What if we made a habit of making Israeli diplomats look ridiculous? What if we continued to spoil for a fight with the same people we claim to want peace with? What if we kept saying “we want peace” while trying to buy new bombs and such? What if?
The international reaction to the Iraq War would pale in comparison. We would be deemed bullies and worse and that would be fine because it’s the US. Those statements can’t be made about Israel without outcry and I frankly don’t understand why a person can’t disagree with Israeli policy without being viewed as hating Israel and all jewish people everywhere. What special sign was the nation of Israel born under that eternally absolves it from from all criticism?
I’m sorry for the tirade.