world

Netanyahu rejects Obama's idea on borders

55 Comments

The requested article has expired, and is no longer available. Any related articles, and user comments are shown below.

© Copyright 2011 Associated Press. All rights reserved. This material may not be published, broadcast, rewritten, or redistributed.

©2019 GPlusMedia Inc.

55 Comments
Login to comment

Obama needs to go back to his room and just play-act with his ken and barbie dolls. It will keep the US out of more trouble.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The U.S. sends billions in massive military aid to Israel then looks the other way. Such inconsistent policies are hypocritical and have provoke many anti U.S. sentiment. Ultimately jeopardizing the safety of people living in the U.S. Ending aid to Israel will show the world that the U.S. truly respects human rights. The U.S. can build its own security by gaining the trust and respect of the international community.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama, Hamas, Palestinians, the UN, the Arab nations, European nations vs. Israel. Wonder who will win.

Obama will reneged his promise to help Israel when she comes under attacked from her Arab nations if Israel should go back to the 1967 borders.

Obama is trading Israel for world peace. Obama is a man people can trust and they should feel very safe because he's got their back.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

sfjp330: The U.S. sends billions in massive military aid to Israel then looks the other way. Such inconsistent policies are hypocritical and have provoke many anti U.S. sentiment.

The same can be said of the Arab nations surrounding Israel. The U.S. give billions of dollars and turned a blind eye as how that money is misused by people who are in power.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

skipbeat at 08:33 AM JST - 21st May. Obama will reneged his promise to help Israel when she comes under attacked from her Arab nations if Israel should go back to the 1967 borders.

The issues that will have to be resolved as part of any two-state solution. Israel captured the eastern half of Jerusalem during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. The international community views east Jerusalem as occupied territory and the potential capital of any future Palestinian state. Jerusalem is not only of political, religious, and emotional significance to Palestinians. It's the cultural and economic capital of any future state of Palestine. To carve out east Jerusalem from the rest of Palestine would be to deprive of it the geographic area which traditionally has been the heart of the Palestinian economy. This is why Israel stance will not change.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So much for Obama's idea on borders.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Netanyahu should watch the first Madagascar movie. "You don't bite the hand."

Taka

0 ( +0 / -0 )

If the Israelis give up all the land they won in the 1967 war, they can live in peace and security with the Palestinians and the Syrians, according to Obama. Hey, maybe Obama's right! But if he's wrong...

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Amatuer hour at the white house.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I see that Israel continues to be above the law. All Obama has to do is cut the several billions of "aid" Israel has gotten every year.

If the Israelis give up all the land they won in the 1967 war...

Israel did not "win" the land. Israel stole the land; Israel has absolutely no rights to that land.

I am glad Obama has finally joined the rest of humanity in calling for a return to the 1967 borders. But does he mean it? Is this another of his many empty promises?

Obama will reneged his promise to help Israel when she comes under attacked from her Arab nations if Israel should go back to the 1967 borders.

Israel has about as much to fear from her neighbours as the US has from Canada.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The issues that will have to be resolved as part of any two-state solution. Israel captured the eastern half of Jerusalem during the 1967 Arab-Israeli War. The international community views east Jerusalem as occupied territory and the potential capital of any future Palestinian state. Jerusalem is not only of political, religious, and emotional significance to Palestinians. It's the cultural and economic capital of any future state of Palestine. To carve out east Jerusalem from the rest of Palestine would be to deprive of it the geographic area which traditionally has been the heart of the Palestinian economy. This is why Israel stance will not change.

East Jerusalem has not, and never will be on the table. Any idea that includes any part of Jerusalem in a future Pal state, is a non starter. Not only that, but much of the West Bank is in a similar situation, with hundreds of thousands of Israelis living there. The Pals can say it as often as they like, it will not change the reality, that they will never have a state so long as they insist on including land that will never be given to them.

Netanyahu should watch the first Madagascar movie. "You don't bite the hand."

Obama should consider, if you treat your friends like enemies, and your enemies like friends, pretty soon, you wind up friendless and alone.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The Pals can say it as often as they like, it will not change the reality, that they will never have a state so long as they insist on including land that will never be given to them.

Its not just the "Pals" who are saying it; the whole world is saying it. Its also international law saying it.

Obama should consider, if you treat your friends like enemies, and your enemies like friends, pretty soon, you wind up friendless and alone.

Israel is not America's friend, they just suck money out of it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

For those who saw the news conference, Netanyahu was so much better at concealing his contempt for Obama than Obama was for Netanyahu. Netanyahu basically told Obama to shove his 1967 borders idea and that Israel wasn't going to take on any more Arab refugees. That obligation should go to Palestine. It was great to watch Netanyahu blow Obama out of the water.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

That’s going to happen between friends.

With friends like Obama, ...

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

It's funny how some of the posters here actually think they have a clue about the geopolitics of the region. Do you really think that if Israel goes back to the 1967 borders, there will be Mideast peace? Do you really think the Arab governments could care less about the Palestinians? Are you really that naive?

The Palestinians are pawns in the Iran/Syrian effort to do whatever they can to destroy Israel. They can't do it through military force (as they have tried several times in the past), so they try undermine and discredit Israel through incitement to aggression through Hamas and Hezbollah (i.e. their proxies).

To get a better idea of the Palestinian leadership, try reading Hamas' Covenant (Charter) sometime. For example, "[Peace] initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement ..." (article 13), or "The Day of Judgment will not come about until Muslims fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Muslim, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him." (Article 7).

Go back to the '67 borders and there will be one result. Increased attacks against Israel.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

East Jerusalem has not, and never will be on the table..

Very true. When the Muslim Arabs who call themselves "Palestinians" occupied East Jerusalem prior to 1967, Jews were forbidden from even entering East Jerusalem. They were not allowed to visit their holy sites, including the Western Wall. Israel is never going to let this happen again.

Israel has about as much to fear from her neighbours as the US has from Canada.

Really? Because I don't think Canada has thousands of rockets aimed at the US, armed by Jihadists receiving Iranian funding, who seek its destruction. But I could be wrong.

Israel did not "win" the land.

Yeah, it did.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Let's see. Israel has more nuclear weapons than "Great" Britain and the ability to deliver them nearly anywhere in the world with its (German made) submarines and we are supposed to believe Israel is at risk? That its very existence is in peril if it goes back to the 1967 lines? Please. This isn't the Warsaw ghetto we are talking about. No one is being fooled by Israeli propaganda except the low-IQ, low-information crowd. And of those, only the ones who vote Republican support Israel. Time for Israel to cut the best deal it can, while it can, before Arab-Israeli and Occupied-Arab demographics swamp that gallant little "democracy." Obama is offering that best, last deal.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Wow, Netanyahu rejects an idea he doesn't like. Who'd of thought?

Seriously, though, as one poster said, you shouldn't bite the hand that feeds you. Obama should say, "No agreement? no aid. Bottom line". Sure, Netanyahu will go on the usual 'anti-Semetic' name calling rant, but he'll have to back down or face the consequences.

Of course, it'll never happen. I hope at least Obama CUTS the aid somewhat.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So Obama simply reaffirms longstanding US policy - policy that most neutral observers consider just and achievable - and Obama-bashers go nuts. Perhaps they would prefer that Netanyahu write US policy.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The return to 1967 boundaries has one major condition attached to it: that Palestinians, in return, recognize Israel's right to exist and guarantee its security.

Of course, neither situations will happen, unless they happen together at the same time, not one before the other.

So what is there to worry about?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

fooled by Israeli propaganda except the low-IQ, low-information crowd

The "Palestinians" were created as a propaganda tool by the Muslim Arabs in their quest to destroy Israel. PLO Zahir Muhsein said it best, "The Palestinian people does not exist. The creation of a Palestinian state is only a means for continuing our struggle against the state of Israel for our Arab unity." So it would appear that anyone who supports the "Palestinian" struggle must either be a complete dupe or simply want Israel eliminated. Regardless, Israel is not going to be fooled into giving up land for some promise of peace.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just like in Japans case, once all those baby boomers/old school farts retire and younger generations take office, much change is forseen. The younger israeli generation hate the fact they have to join the army, be involved in the unhumane treatment of pals at check points and raids. They want this to be over with as much as the pals. Just the few powerful old farts that seem to control the masses.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

So Obama simply reaffirms longstanding US policy - policy that most neutral observers consider just and achievable - and Obama-bashers go nuts. Perhaps they would prefer that Netanyahu write US policy

laguna -- agreed. Past Isreali PM's have even accepted this concept. What's the problem?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Netanyahu showed the world that once again, Obama is choosing the wrong position in the Israel-Palestine issue. Siding with terrorists is not the best diplomatic course of action.

What's more, Netanyahu did it by speaking outside of his native language and without the aid of a teleprompter. It was a truly great teaching moment for Obama.

RR

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Blimey, Obama and Israel - the interweb nutbags will be frothing at the mouth!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Benjamin Netanyahu

Thank you Ben. I am a Jew and today is the Sabbath. Shabot Shalom. Keep the faith and stay strong and long live Israel.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Keep the faith

@ihavegreatlegs--I assume you mean that Israelis need to stick to the illusion that they are somehow endowed with greater rights than anyone else and that anyone who questions that is anti-Israel or anti-Semitic. This is an idiotic and childish bronze-age belief, and though extremist Muslims share a similar irrationality, there will be no peace in the region until the 'faith and land' myth is discarded by both sides. I admire Obama for daring to challenge Israel on this point. Israel has the right to exist, but it should not enjoy privileges beyond any other people or state. Israel has long had opportunities to stop settlements in the West Bank, but has continued in the arrogant assurance that the US would never really penalize them for it.

@RRII--your teleprompter gag is old and stale, and is one of the marks of your obvious commitment to blind bitterness over rational debate

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I admire Obama for daring to challenge Israel on this point. Israel has the right to exist, but it should not enjoy privileges beyond any other people or state.

plasticmonkey, first off most of her neighbors refuse to even recognize Israel as a legitimate state in the first place. Maybe we really should start there and overcome that little item first before we start talking about any 'privileges' she is enjoying.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The return to 1967 boundaries has one major condition attached to it: that Palestinians, in return, recognize Israel's right to exist and guarantee its security. Of course, neither situations will happen, unless they happen together at the same time, not one before the other. So what is there to worry about?

Very well put. It's a completely rational position, which is why it is sure to be rejected immediately by both sides. Neither leadership group stays in power without the animosity and chaos, so what's in it for them?

I should take off my cynical hat.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Equality:

" It's funny how some of the posters here actually think they have a clue about the geopolitics of the region. Do you really think that if Israel goes back to the 1967 borders, there will be Mideast peace? Do you really think the Arab governments could care less about the Palestinians? Are you really that naive? "

Many in this forum (and in the Western media) really are that naive. I agree it is mind-boggling, and sad.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Where was all the sudden republican outrage when bush said Israel return to 49-67 lines, when Israeli PM also said the basis shouls be 67 lines??? Is it just because Obama said it that it suddenly became a ditch on Israel??

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The 1967 borders is not the end game - it's just supposed to be the starting point for negotiations. Each (Israel and Palestine) is supposed to get some and lose some lands, as negotiations go on.

This should really be no surprise anyways. This position has been the US's informal stance for years. All Obama did was finally make it formal. In fact, back in 2010, Netanyahu himself and Clinton made a US-Israel Joint Statement about this. Here from the Israel Ministry of Foreign Affairs website:

mfa(dot)gov(dot)il/MFA/Government/Communiques/2010/Joint _statement _PM _Netanyahu _US _Sec _Clinton _11-Nov-2010(dot)htm

The Prime Minister and the Secretary agreed on the importance of continuing direct negotiations to achieve our goals. The Secretary reiterated that "the United States believes that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can mutually agree on an outcome which ends the conflict and reconciles the Palestinian goal of an independent and viable state, based on the 1967 lines, with agreed swaps, and the Israeli goal of a Jewish state with secure and recognized borders that reflect subsequent developments and meet Israeli security requirements." Those requirements will be fully taken into account in any future peace agreement.

Perhaps it's time for the US, as the #1 power, to be bold, stake out its position, and take the lead in the dance and let Israel follow it, instead of the other way around.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Lostrune2:

Perhaps it's time for the US, as the #1 power, to be bold, stake out its position, and take the lead in the dance and let Israel follow it, instead of the other way around.

The timing of this is clearly related to the Arab Spring. Causes and effects on that region are convoluted; allowing the Palestinian problem to fester may well lead to hereditary flaws in successor Arab governments, but at the same time, strict adherence to UN resolutions and historical precedent as a basis for a final push towards a permanent peace might finally be achievable, given the malleability of current Arab societies. If this can be instituted now, in these early stages, it could become part of the DNA of their societies and thus accepted and unalienable.

Obama was wise to bring this issue up again at this point. Bashar al-Assad in Syria now must be feeling renewed pressure - history is moving, and he is on the wrong end of it.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Obama was wise to bring this issue up again at this point.

In what way? To remind those seeking freedom and democracy that the United States is willing to throw a democracy we support under the bus to appease the more radical elements in those societies that are killing their own people who want democracywe can be 'tough' on a democracy?

This is wisedom??? This is nuts.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

McC72

Where was all the sudden republican outrage when bush said Israel return to 49-67 lines, when Israeli PM also said the basis shouls be 67 lines???

Get your facts straight. Obama is the first sitting US President to actually mention the 1967 borders. Previous Presidents, both Democrat and Republican, who have dealt with this issue only talked about 'swaps and other territorial arrangements' but never defined these as the 1967 borders. And who is this Israeli PM who you claim did?

Is it just because Obama said it that it suddenly became a ditch on Israel??

No, because Obama is the first one to actually propose something this propesterous.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

lostrune2

I believe you are speaking of the Clinton Parameters, which BTW, William Jefferson officially withdrew before he left office.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

I also do not get this. To tell Israel to return to the 1967 borders with no promise or concrete guarentees that the land given back will not be used to mount further attacks on a smaller Jewish target? Israel reset the border with Gaza, withdrew her settlements and the Jewish folks that are more or less in the 1967 border outside of Gaza have been subjected to pretty much daily rocket attacks from Hamas. This is the peace we want Israel to return to? I for one do not want to see the Jewish state or the Jews wiped out a second time, they've been through more than enough in their collective history. Until the Arab states and the Palistinians finally accept them as a legitimate nation can peace finally be achieved.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

This is wisedom???

No; it is wisdom: it is good policy, it is the future, it is the only way to extricate ourselves from this mess.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

@sailwind--I agree with you about the need for the Arab states to officially and sincerely recognize the state of Israel as equals. And I think that needs to come along with Israel's return to the pre 67 borders. Both are necessary. I may be dreaming too much, but it really is crucial. Any step toward compromise is good. The extremists will always try to derail the process, but dedication toward prosperous coexistence must stay alive. I admire Obama's current statement for that. The United States has repeatedly (and rightly) chastised the Arab world for its refusal to recognize Israel. The US needs to show that it is dedicated to peace in the region, and not just subservience to the pro-Israel lobby. The latter hasn't worked, and it will not work.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

Is Netanyahu serious?

0 ( +0 / -0 )

To tell Israel to return to the 1967 borders with no promise or concrete guarentees that the land given back will not be used to mount further attacks on a smaller Jewish target?

How would one make a concrete guarantee of such a thing? That's impossible. Nothing is concrete. If either side wants peace there must be concessions, and someone must make the first step.

Until the Arab states and the Palistinians finally accept them as a legitimate nation can peace finally be achieved.

Very true, but Israel needs to make steps towards peace as well.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Pull out all aid on all sides and leave them to it. How long have we being supporting this quagmire of ego and the id. It's an obscene drain on essential resources when neither party will budge a cm.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

“What we are in complete accord about is that a true peace can only occur if the ultimate resolution allows Israel to defend itself against threats, and that Israel’s security will remain paramount in U.S. evaluation of any prospective deal.”

It's not uncommon to US presidents to indoctrinate American notion of democracy in the public addresses like this, but none of them has ever expected Israel to behave like a mirror of their country in the 18th and 19th century. Sure, Israel has more enemies than friends across the borders in the Middle East. But it's quite unrealistic for them to work their way to (re-) constitute and maintain democracy exactly the same way the US did at the time of Declaration of Independence and the Revolutionary War. Israel's got to find its own way out to break with the past for reconciliation and peace settlement.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Hello USNinJapan2, we aren't allowed to post links here but just be a bit impartial for once and watch Ratigan's show on msn on 20th. There is a video Bush saying the EXACT words Obama used right in Israel on 20th January 2008.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

The amount of money and blood the US has spent on this piece of land could have bought the land outright but Israel needs to keep the current situation to continue the money flow. Anyone trying to correct this situation is automatically branded anti Semitic. Obama, welcome to the club

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Its not just the "Pals" who are saying it; the whole world is saying it. Its also international law saying it.

The Pals could demand that every male Jew commit suicide, and that every female jew serve as their personal prostitute. And why not, those things are as likely to happen as Israel giving us East Jerusalem. In other words, its not, and never will happen. Even bringing it up, or the so called right of return shows you are not even interested in a serious discussion.

To bring things closer to home. It would be like demanding that Okinawa be returned to its original owners and Japan giving up all claim to it. This is simply not going to happen.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Even Canada, our neighhbor and biggest trading partner, does not support Obama's dingbat request that Israel redraw its borders to 1967.

The Globe and Mail:"The Harper government is refusing to join the United States in calling for a return to 1967 borders as a starting point for Mideast peace, a position that has drawn sharp criticism from Canada’s staunch ally Israel."

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Even Canada does not support Obama's dingbat request

Well, at least Harper doesn't, and that isn't surprising. I think there are plenty of balanced and rational people in the world who do support Obama's request. It's a bold move, and a wise one.

-1 ( +0 / -1 )

We would all be better off if Jewish families returned to their pre-1948 borders which is mainly Europe and end the nonsense about thousands of years of continuous history and right to exist on land that has essentialy been the home of the Palestinians Arab semetics for at least the last two millennia. Roman General Titus wiped out all 600,000 Jews in very short time in Palestine in 70AD after which there was only a very small Jewish presence of 20,000 at most thereafter, until it started to grow in the 1930's when they got thrown out of Germany et al. The smart ones went to the USA, Britain, Australia and Canada. All the world's people have to accept responsibility for their own bad choices, even Jews. Artificially created and maintained,Israel has little long term prospects as a self reliant entity like anything starting on a false premise. At some stage Israel may have to be self reliant, but at that point it will collapse under the rush of departing patriots with duel citizenship's. The US is changing and Israel has to change too.

Netanyahu is a Zionist expansionist and has no empathy with Arabs per se. So peace under regimes similar to his are fantasy. Nothing in nature has a right to exist that cannot sustain and enforce its own existence, as earlier Jewish communities found out under the brutal sword of General Titus, and more recently Hitler. Tragically there has been other mass killings in between. I would not be seeking a new life there!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Why dont Israeli offer the US to return to previous boarders of america: to return alaska to russians, return texas to mexicans, and 90% of territory to indians.That will be really smart and democratic. -sigh- such an idiot to be in a president chair.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

electrokids,

America bought Alaska, all $7.2M worth of Seward's icebox.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

electrokids: Reason tells us that you can hang on to something valuable while you can defend it from others that seek it too. That applies to white, black and Asian Americans in formerly Indian lands in the US. If the Indians were strong enough and desired to push them all out, they might have to relocate too. Non-Indians can't live in Indian Reservation land only because it is the same power and force of non-Indians that protect those reservations for he Indians, not the Indians themselves.

As shocking as it may seem, Israel with few natural resources and a small population that essentially survives on international handouts and protection is not a long term viable self sustaining state in its present form. Palestine's traditional occupants, the Palestinian Semetic Arabs, are relatively large in number and growing at a faster rate than Jewish populations, and still reside in greater Palestine. If Israel became art of a greater democratic Palestine state the "Jewish Palestinians" would be out voted and that is why they build big walls to ghetto themselves inside.

With a mere 22 million people, Australia for example, relies heavily on the goodwill of its friendly neighbors and especially its greatest Ally, the US. Australia works hard on its relationships with its neighbors as it is in their common interest. Australia, like the US takes migrants from all races, religions and cultures on earth and does not pick fights with neighbors for land grabs. We fight to end wars and tyranny.

All Australians are treated equally under the law. If all non-pure bred Aboriginal Australians left, there would be just a handful of traditional Aboriginal owners left in this massive continent, most of whom are now Christian, and would soon drift back to live a primitive lifestyle - something they would not want. Australia works hard to ensure everyone gets a "fair go", especially its Aboriginal population.

Also Australia has extradition treaties with most countries, so if an Australian commits and fraud or other crime overseas, they cannot take the first flight home to avoid being charged for the crime. Israel on the other hand is a haven for numerous Jewish serial offenders and that stance is not being "kosher" in my book.

Israel sadly has many almost unsolvable problems and Jewish occupation there has been a disaster for them over millenniums - read history. They can have a better and safer life elsewhere and just visit and holiday in the Holy Land, as so many people do from various world religions.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Bruno, I think you have a point in there, cept the one about Australia. While Israel might give haven to serial offenders, Australia gives haven to serial economic offenders; and that really isnt that fair to those who are nothing but AUstralian. You been lapping up too much 'fair go' talk, Id say. But can we stay on topic here now please, what's Australia got to do with Israel and AMerica, theyre both (s)miiiiiles away!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Just stop expanding the settlements otherwise there will be more and more conflict!

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Nothing is going to happen as long as Israel gets 4 billion USD annually in aid from the U.S.

Stop U.S. aid to Israel, and Israel will quickly find a solution to this situation. Necessity is the mother of invention.

0 ( +0 / -0 )

Login to leave a comment

Facebook users

Use your Facebook account to login or register with JapanToday. By doing so, you will also receive an email inviting you to receive our news alerts.

Facebook Connect

Login with your JapanToday account

User registration

Articles, Offers & Useful Resources

A mix of what's trending on our other sites