President Barack Obama’s governance – observations & opinions

Archive for the ‘leadership’ Category

* terror trial in NYC … another step in cleaning up the disgraceful legacy of the Bush/Cheney years

Posted by Lew Weinstein on November 14, 2009

CASE CLOSED - smallCASE CLOSED is a novel which answers the question “Why did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?” … Here’s an excerpt from the CASE CLOSED story; the (fictional) DIA team reviews the connection between the anthrax attack and the subsequent invasion of Iraq …

“After the nationwide panic caused by the anthrax mailings settled down, pretty much nothing happens in the FBI’s anthrax investigation. The next we hear about anthrax is in February 2003, when Secretary of State Abner Grant goes to the United Nations and holds up a vial of something – it wasn’t actually anthrax – claiming that Saddam can deliver biological weapons of mass destruction to the eastern seaboard of the U.S. Of course, we learn later that Saddam had neither WMD nor any way to reach our shores. U.N. arms inspector Blix said something much like that a few days beforewe invaded Iraq.”

*** click here to buy CASE CLOSED by Lew Weinstein

******

terror trial in NYC

… another step in cleaning up the disgraceful legacy

of the  Bush/Cheney years

******

NYT editorial (11/14/09) …

Attorney General Eric Holder Jr. took a bold and principled step on Friday toward repairing the damage wrought by former President George W. Bush with his decision to discard the nation’s well-established systems of civilian and military justice in the treatment of detainees captured in antiterrorist operations.

  • On Friday, Attorney General Holder announced that Khalid Shaikh Mohammed, the self-described mastermind of the Sept. 11 attacks, and four others accused in the plot will be tried in a fashion that will not further erode American justice or shame Americans.
  • It promises to finally provide justice for the victims of 9/11.
  • Mr. Holder said those prisoners would be prosecuted in federal court in Manhattan.
  • It was an enormous victory for the rule of law, a major milestone in Mr. Obama’s efforts to close the detention camp at Guantánamo Bay, Cuba, and an important departure from Mr. Bush’s disregard for American courts and their proven ability to competently handle high-profile terror cases.

The Obama administration has yet to completely figure out how to rectify the disgraceful Bush detention policies, but it is getting there.

Read the entire editorial at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/11/14/opinion/14sat1.html?ref=opinion

LMW COMMENT …

Another Bush/Cheney mess that President Obama must clean up, all of which have severely impeded accomplishing the positive agenda which Obama would, I am sure, much rather be addressing.

Once healthcare is accomplished, however, I think we will see faster progress on other issues raised during the campaign.

For those of us who support our President, we must remember to be patient as he works his way through the disgraceful Bush/Cheney legacy.

******

Posted in justice, leadership, war & terror | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

* it’s time for Obama to act like a winner; he should forget about Republicans who will never be bi-partisan and get on with the agenda that elected him

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 21, 2009

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

buy CC - why, who, readers

Paul Krugman writes in the NYT (8/21/09) …

  • A backlash in the progressive base — which pushed President Obama over the top in the Democratic primary and played a major role in his general election victory — has been building for months.
  • The fight over the public option involves real policy substance, but it’s also a proxy for broader questions about the president’s priorities and overall approach.
  • on such fraught questions as torture and indefinite detention, the president has dismayed progressives with his reluctance to challenge or change Bush administration policy.
  • I’ve had many conversations with people who voted for Mr. Obama, yet dismiss the stimulus as a total waste of money. When I press them, it turns out that they’re really angry about the bailouts rather than the stimulus — but that’s a distinction lost on most voters.
  • Now, politics is the art of the possible. Mr. Obama was never going to get everything his supporters wanted.
  • But there’s a point at which realism shades over into weakness, and progressives increasingly feel that the administration is on the wrong side of that line.
  • It seems as if there is nothing Republicans can do that will draw an administration rebuke

Read the entire article at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/21/opinion/21krugman.html?ref=opinion

LMW COMMENT …

I very much want Barack Obama to succeed. Our country needs him to succeed. But I am increasingly concerned that he seems unable or unwilling to fight for what he says he wants. Obama’s principles are sound, but will he fight for them? A good place to start would be with the Republicans, by forgetting about them, on healthcare and other issues. They are not going to help. Continued bi-partisan efforts are simply naïve. It’s time to label Senator Grassley and others as the hypocrites they are. They lost. Obama won. Act like a winner.

Posted in healthcare, leadership, politics | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

* healthcare reform … this is the moment for liberals and President Obama

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 19, 2009

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

buy CC - why, who, readers

CHARLES BABINGTON and RICARDO ALONSO-ZALDIVAR, AP 8-19-09 …

  • Frustrated liberals have a question for President Barack Obama and Democratic lawmakers:
    • Isn’t it time the other guys gave a little ground on health care?
    • What’s the point of a bipartisan bill, they ask, if we’re making all the concessions?
    • It’s time to move on without Republicans, they say.
  • On Tuesday, liberals were fuming over Obama’s recent remarks suggesting he might also yield on the federally run insurance option he’s been promoting.
  • Liberal activists say there’s no point in the Democrats winning the House, Senate and White House unless they use their clout to enact the major measures that Obama campaigned for — with or without some Republican support.
  • This week, more than 50 House Democrats issued a letter saying: “Any bill that does not provide, at a minimum, for a public option with reimbursement rates based on Medicare rates — not negotiated rates — is unacceptable.”
  • Some of them told House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, D-Calif., in a conference call Tuesday that discussions with Republicans are pointless.

LMW COMMENT …

I am among the disappointed.

This is President Obama’s biggest leadership test to date, and so far the results are not as good as I would have hoped.

Bob Herbert’s column today is disturbing …

See related post … * the public option … gone? not so fast!

Compromise may be needed, but too much compromise is destructive. The Republicans need to be forgotten; there is no good to come from trying to placate them in any way. Nor can the insurance industry or the drug companies be considered allies.

Sibellius has been less than useful. It is truly a shame that Obama does not have Tom Daschle to help lead this effort, but that is a fact he must overcome.

We need bold leadership from our President; failing to provide it on healthcare insurance reform may well doom his presidency.

Read the entire article at …http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090819/ap_on_an/us_health_care_overhaul_analysis_8

Posted in healthcare, leadership | Tagged: , | 1 Comment »

* the public option … gone? not so fast!

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 19, 2009

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

buy CC - why, who, readers

Bob Herbert writes in the NYT (8/18/09) …

  • The hope of a government-run insurance option is all but gone.
  • Insurance companies are delighted with the way “reform” is unfolding.
  • While it is undoubtedly important to bring as many people as possible under the umbrella of health coverage, the way it is being done now does not address what President Obama and so many other advocates have said is a crucial component of reform — bringing the ever-spiraling costs of health care under control.
  • Those costs, we’re told, are hamstringing the U.S. economy, making us less competitive globally and driving up the budget deficit.
  • Giving consumers the choice of an efficient, nonprofit, government-run insurance plan would have moved us toward real cost control, but that option has gone a-glimmering.
  • The public deserves better.
  • The drug companies, the insurance industry and the rest of the corporate high-rollers have their tentacles all over this so-called reform effort, squeezing it for all it’s worth.

Read the entire column at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/18/opinion/18herbert.html?_r=1

LMW COMMENT …

Maybe not all is lost. See related article and more LMW COMMENT at …

* healthcare reform … this is the moment for liberals and President Obama

Posted in healthcare, leadership | Tagged: | 1 Comment »

* Krugman … the actions of the Obama government saved us from the economic abyss; the Republicans are wrong, as was Ronald Reagan in a different era

Posted by Lew Weinstein on August 10, 2009

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

buy CC - why, who, readers

Paul Krugman writes in the NYT (8-10-09) …

  • A few months ago the possibility of falling into the abyss seemed all too real.
  • So what saved us from a full replay of the Great Depression? The answer, almost surely, lies in the very different role played by government.
  • All in all, then, the government has played a crucial stabilizing role in this economic crisis.
  • Ronald Reagan was wrong: sometimes the private sector is the problem, and government is the solution.
  • And aren’t you glad that right now the government is being run by people who don’t hate government?
  • Back in March, John Boehner, the House minority leader, declared that since families were suffering, “it’s time for government to tighten their belts and show the American people that we ‘get’ it.”
  • Fortunately, Boehner’s advice was ignored.

Read the entire column at … http://www.nytimes.com/2009/08/10/opinion/10krugman.html

LMW COMMENT (posted as a comment on NYT site) …

Good for you, Paul. You are a big enough man to admit that, despite disagreements in some of the details, the Obama stimulus package was and is exactly the right thing to do. You are also to be commended for correctly identifying the ignorance of the Republican proposals. Republicans are so bereft of productive ideas that their best shot is to call for anti-democratic thuggery as the way to deal with complicated healthcare issues. Palin calls Obama’s healthcare proposal “evil,” another indication that she is truly more stupid than George Bush, a very high bar indeed.

******

******

Are you curious about the FBI’s failure to solve the 2001 anthrax case?

I invite you to read my fictional (but realistic) scenario.

* What does a novel have to do with the real anthrax case?

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon *

Posted in economy, leadership | Tagged: , , | Leave a Comment »

* a plea to President Obama … make the FBI come clean about its failed anthrax investigation

Posted by Lew Weinstein on July 24, 2009

WHY did the FBI fail to solve the 2001 anthrax case?CASE CLOSED

WHO had the power to divert the FBI from the truth?

CASE CLOSED offers a fictional scenario that answers those questions

* buy CASE CLOSED at amazon

.

.

******

a plea to President Obama

… make the FBI come clean about its failed anthrax investigation

******

This post is a carryover from my CASE CLOSED blog (www.caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com) where DXer, in his latest comment, raises serious and pertinent questions concerning the integrity of anthrax samples which are critical to the FBI’s conclusion that Dr. Ivins was the sole perpetrator of the attacks. DXer asks …

  • Was there adequate security?
  • Did unauthorized personnel have access to the samples?
  • Was there adequate accountability (i.e., chain-of-custody, evidence storage, evidence in-processing).
  • Who tested the sample that is claimed to have been a false sample submitted by Dr. Ivins?
  • Who chose to destroy the sample submitted using a different protocol.

DXer adds that FBI Counterterrorism Chief Ben Furman wrote to him to say that Amerithrax was a mess but that he thought most information should be kept from the public.

DXer disagrees … so do I.

LMW COMMENT …

DXer’s questions, which are related to a recent interchange on the CASE CLOSED blog between Bugmaster and Ed Lake, go to the core of what appears to be the FBI’s clumsy cover-up of its failed anthrax investigation.

  • The FBI’s case against Dr. Ivins is, on its face, inadequate.
  • Senator Arlen Specter, among many others, has given his opinion as a former prosecutor that the FBI could never get a conviction on the basis of the evidence they have so far made public.

There must be something that makes the FBI delay and hide and continue to make itself look foolish …

  • The FBI is not incompetent; they must know that the case they have presented makes no sense.
  • It is not unreasonable to conclude that the FBI purposely accused a dead man in a press conference in order to avoid the necessity of a trial where evidence would be presented under oath and judged by a jury.
  • It is obvious that the FBI is refusing to tell the Congress and the American people what it knows about this case of mass murder and terrorism.
  • This may be the reason why it has still not “closed the case,” which would make its evidence (or lack thereof) subject to FOIA requests.

In my opinion, the FBI’s behavior, which is the core of the problem, is not rational UNLESS they are under orders to keep Congress and the public from knowing what really happened.

Which comes back to the two questions I raise in my novel CASE CLOSED …

Who benefitted from keeping the anthrax case unsolved?

Who had the power to divert the FBI from the truth?

In CASE CLOSED, I develop a fictional scenario to answer those questions, and the corruption of the FBI investigation in my story goes to the highest levels of the American government.

  • Do I think the story I portrayed in CASE CLOSED is what really happened?
  • I don’t make that claim. I have no way to know. I made up the story presented in CASE CLOSED, with no access to secret witnesses or documents.
  • But I do believe that something like what I portrayed did happen. It’s the only reason I can think of to explain the FBI’s otherwise bizarre behavior.
  • And many of the readers of CASE CLOSED find my story disturbingly plausible.

It seems to me, and to many others, that the FBI is hiding some terrible dark secrets.

We need Rush Holt’s Anthrax Investigation Commission to get out of the House Judiciary Committee and into action.

But I think we need more.

Who has the power to make the FBI tell the truth?

  • We need our new President, who I worked hard for and continue to support, and who I believe to be intelligent, thoughtful, courageous and well motivated, to step away from his reluctance to hold the Bush administration accountable for its many heinous misdeeds.
  • So I call upon President Obama, among his many daunting challenges, to demand that the FBI come clean about its anthrax investigation.
  • The integrity of the American government has been challenged by the FBI’s failed investigation and cover-up of the 2001 anthrax attacks.

Mr. President, please do what is needed to restore the integrity and pride in America which has been so wrongly debased by your predecessor.

Our country needs to know.

Posted in leadership | Tagged: , , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »

* Obama’s path of compromise … there’s no other way

Posted by Lew Weinstein on July 22, 2009

THE ECONOMIST reports (7/4/09) …

  • Having campaigned in poetry, Barack Obama doubtless expected to govern in prose. But it is arithmetic that threatens to cramp his ambitions.
  • Last week, the Congressional Budget Office (CBO) released its long-term budget outlook. If current policies are continued, federal debt held by the public will rise from 41% of GDP at the end of 2008 to 87% by 2020, and (theoretically) to a staggering 716% by 2080.
  • A president who refused to put off unpleasant decisions, as Mr Obama promised during his inauguration, would be honest about all this.
  • Instead of straight talk, however, Mr Obama has mostly been offering happy talk.
  • … rather than shaping public opinion, he is running scared of it. And so, even more, is Congress.
  • The House’s climate bill is a masterpiece of obfuscation.
  • Mr Obama wanted the (carbon emission) permits to be auctioned, which would raise large sums (which were meant to help finance health-care reform) and allocate the permits to the firms that value them most. Instead, the House decided to give away 85% of them free to politically-favoured entities.
  • Some say this was necessary—the bill only passed by a whisker, 219 votes to 212, and would probably have failed without the giveaways.
  • Mr Obama needs to find at least $1 trillion to overhaul health care, and those plans now face an uphill battle of their own in the Senate, which looks set for a long hard summer.
  • Mr Obama promised, on the campaign trail, not to tax private health benefits. He also promised to cut taxes for all but the rich. Arithmetic suggests he will have to break his word on something.

Read the entire article at … http://www.economist.com/world/unitedstates/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13952934

LMW COMMENT …

The Economist has framed Obama’s dilemma well, although I would not be so critical. It’s one thing to sit on the side and compare what is actually accomplished with some theoretical possible achievement.

But where is the proper balance between sticking with what you wanted to do, indeed promised to do, and the necessary compromise to get anything done in the real political world? Is Barack Obama doing everything he could do, or is he giving up too much to accomplish what is possible?

How we answer those questions is likely to depend on which issues are important to us, and what is happening with those particular issues at the moment. But the President does not have the luxury of dealing with each issue in isolation. I am confident that Obama’s objectives have not changed. I also believe he is not surprised by the need to accommodate the wishes and needs of other powerful people.

Obama has a powerful team of his own, but I bet there are some days when Rahm Emanuel tells the President how much he can get on a particular issue while keeping alive progress on the full range of an ambitious agenda where many items are critical to the future of our country and the world.

I’m confident that Barack Obama is making the best decisions he can, and I believe his record at the end of the day will be superb. He’s not perfect, but in my view, no one else could do it better.

Posted in leadership, management | Tagged: | Leave a Comment »

* the crisis in Iran: after 8 years of unproductive Bush/Cheney bluster and wars of choice, Republicans still don’t get it; President Obama does

Posted by Lew Weinstein on June 22, 2009

CASE CLOSED: the FBI’s failed investigation of the 2001 anthrax caseCC - front cover - small

* see CASE CLOSED VIDEO on YouTube

* purchase CASE CLOSED (paperback)

read more at http://caseclosedbylewweinstein.wordpress.com/

***

the crisis in Iran: after 8 years of unproductive

Bush/Cheney bluster and wars of choice,

Republicans still don’t get it;

President Obama does

***

Anne Gearan writes for AP (6-21-09) …

  • Republicans intensified their criticism of President Barack Obama’s handling of his first major test of
    Iran protester

    Iran protester

    international leadership, saying Sunday that he has been too cautious in response to Iran’s postelection upheaval.

    • Both the House and Senate voted overwhelmingly last week to condemn an official crackdown on the mostly peaceful demonstrations, a stronger action than the White House has yet taken.
    • Sen. Lindsey Graham, R-SC … “The president of the United States is supposed to lead the free world, not follow it,” said Sen. Lindsey Graham. “He’s been timid and passive more than I would like.”
    • Sen. John McCain, R-AR, and others noted that Western leaders, including French President Nicolas Sarkozy and German Chancellor Angela Merkel, have demanded a recount or more forcefully condemned the government crackdown. “I’d like to see the president be stronger than he has been, although I appreciate the comments that he made yesterday,” McCain said. “I think we ought to have America lead.”
    • Sen. Chuck Grassley, R-IO, said a slow or muted U.S. response risks undermining the aspirations of Iranian voters to change or question their government. “If America stands for democracy and all of these demonstrations are going on in Tehran and other cities over there, and people don’t think that we really care, then obviously they’re going to question, ‘do we really believe in our principles?’” Grassley said.
  • But in an interview released Sunday, President Obama argued: “The last thing that I want to do is to have the United States be a foil for those forces inside Iran who would love nothing better than to make this an argument about the United States. We shouldn’t be playing into that.”
    • Obama has tried to hold a middle ground as the crisis unfolds, and found the ground shifting by the day. His advisers say any thunderous denunciation of Iran’s rulers would invite them to cry interference and might worsen the violence instead of end it.
    • Obama on Saturday challenged Iran’s government to halt a “violent and unjust” crackdown on dissenters, and he quoted Rev. Martin Luther King Jr., who said, “The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice.”
    • “Right now, we are bearing witness to the Iranian people’s belief in that truth, and we will continue to bear
      Sen. Lugar

      Sen. Lugar

      witness,” Obama said.

  • Sen. Richard Lugar R-IN, a moderate Republican who holds the party’s top position on the Senate ForeignRelations Committee, seemed to echo Obama’s caution. “The challenge continues, which is going to come to a conclusion one way or another,” Lugar said. “Either the protesters bring about change or they’re suppressed, and it’s a potentially very brutal outcome at the end of the day.”

read the entire article at … http://news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20090622/ap_on_go_pr_wh/us_us_iran_11

LMW COMMENT

True leadership is far more than the bullying bluster of the Bush/Cheney years which set America’s position in the world to its lowest depths in memory.

President Obama, in his intelligent thoughtful approach and his willingness to listen, epitomized in his Cairo speech, has set a far different tone which has the possibility of a far different and better result. Does anyone think what’s going on in Iran is unrelated to the call for democracy and freedom in Cairo, and the implicit understanding that efforts in that direction would be welcome.

But to follow that caring outreach with blustering threats would, as President Obama has said, change the debate and permit the dictators in Iraq to demonize America instead of forcing them to respond to the calls for freedom from their own people.

How fortunate we are to have the president we do. And kudos to Dick Lugar for understanding and having the courage to say so.

Posted in international, leadership | Tagged: , , , | Leave a Comment »

* Robert K. Lifton: expanding Israel’s West Bank settlements is not in Israel’s best interest

Posted by Lew Weinstein on June 7, 2009

NOTE: read a short summary of Mr. Lifton’s main points at …

* Israel should separate itself from the West bank settlements

LMW … I have known Mr. Lifton since the early 1990s. I have repeatedly found his analyses of the Middle Eastern situation to be uniquely well reasoned.

Mr. Lifton holds an B.B.A. degree from the School of Business Administration, City University of New York. He graduated Magna Cum Laude and was elected to the honorary society Beta Gamma Sigma. In 1951 he received an L.L.B. degree from Yale Law School, where he was a member of the Order of the Coif and Note Editor of the Yale Law Journal. He was admitted to the New York Bar in 1952. In 1988 he became President of the American Jewish Congress, an association of Jewish Americans organized to defend Jewish interests at home and abroad through public policy advocacy. He is a Founder and served as Chairman of the Israel Policy Forum, a group which combines the policy development and publications of a think tank, with the educational programming and advocacy initiatives of a lobby. Mr. Lifton has been a longtime member of the Council on Foreign Relations, an independent, nonpartisan membership organization which seeks to better understand the world and the foreign policy choices facing the United States and other countries. Mr. Lifton has been engaged in a broad range of  entrepreneurial activities.

Here is Occasional Letter #70 in a series written by Robert K. Lifton …

Dear Friend,

This is the first new Letter I have written to you since my Letter # 69 written in April 2007. Last week I e-mailed a copy of that Letter to you to make a few points.

  • First, how very little progress had been made in dealing with problems in the Middle East  – particularly the Israeli-Palestinian issues – in over two years.
  • Second, the Letter suggested a direct linkage between dealing with Iran and the Israel-Palestinian issues which President Obama recognized in his recent meeting with Israel’s Prime Minister Netanyahu despite Netanyahu’s efforts to keep the two matters separate.
  • Third, the Letter suggested a new diplomatic approach that would connect Iran’s cessation of nuclear development with Israel’s resolution of its relationship the Palestinians.

In the last three weeks we have seen a flurry of activity around the problems gripping the Middle East: first, the meetings of President Obama with Prime Minister Netanyahu and then with Palestinian President Abbas and most recently President Obama’s visit to the Middle East and his inspired speech in Cairo.

In this Letter I would like to focus on one theme that was a central element in the discussions at all of those forums, namely the Israeli settlements.

Israel showing Gaza & the West Bank

Israel showing Gaza & the West Bank

Simply put, in my view the present broad based, highly populated status of the settlements combined with the policy of the Netanyahu government that would result in further growth of the settler population does not only hold out the possibility for serious dispute between the US and Israeli administrations.

  • More important, I believe that it has the potential to threaten the very essence of Israel as a Jewish state. Thus, it has fundamental implications that not only affect the people of Israel but Jews throughout the world who have looked at Israel as the ultimate safety net for the Jewish people.

To explain my perspective, let me share with you some personal history. In 1988 I became President of the American Jewish Congress. Shortly before that the leadership of the American Jewish Congress undertook a mission to the Middle East to educate ourselves and form a basis for our policies regarding Israel and the Palestinians. At that time, Yitzhak Shamir, head of the Likud Party, was Prime Minister of Israel and one of the rising stars of the party was Benyamin (Bibi) Netanyahu who served as Israel’s Ambassador the United Nations.  Both Shamir, Netanyahu and their party were identified with the belief in a biblically inspired “Greater Israel” which would ultimately encompass all of the Occupied Territories,  (a term some on the far right did not like  preferring to call them “disputed territories.”) namely, the West bank and Gaza.

Israel should separate itself from the occupied territories

After days of meetings with people holding a broad range of views, the American Jewish Congress leadership came to a conclusion that set it apart from the rest of the major Jewish organizations: that Israel should separate itself from the Territories.

  • The underpinning for that view was the demographic studies reflecting the anticipated much faster growth of the Palestinian population both in Israel and in the Territories compared with the anticipated growth of the Jewish population in Israel.
  • Thus, if Israel were to incorporate the Territories as part of a Greater Israel, ultimately a majority of its population would be Palestinian. In that case, it would
    • either have to end its position as a Jewish State
    • or disenfranchise the Palestinian population and no longer continue as a democratic state.

The Settlement Issue

With that perspective, let’s look at the issues relating to the settlements.

  • Over the period of years since Israel’s victory in the 1967 War, settlement activity was supported by both the conservative Likud and liberal Labor parties based on two rationales. Some supported settlements as part of a program for expanding Israel to encompass the Territories inspired by the Greater Israel theme.
  • Thus, religious settlers today base their claim to West Bank land on the biblical heritage of the Jewish people.
  • Others supported settlements as part of the security system required to protect Israel from Arab attack.
  • This was the argument offered by General, later Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon who over the years showed many of us detailed maps of the areas where Israel needed settlements in place to protect against vulnerabilities to attack.  Others argued that, in any event, the term settlements was not properly applicable to developments in areas around Jerusalem which belonged to Israel and would never be turned over to the Palestinians.
  • Whatever the rationale, settlements kept on expanding to the point where according to the New York Times, over the last 40 years, about 58,800 housing units have been built with Government approval in the West Bank and an additional 46,500 homes have obtained Defense Ministry approval within the existing master plans.
  • At present, the Israeli population in the West Bank, not including East Jerusalem, approaches 300,000 living in about 120 settlements spread through parts of the West Bank. The settlement population is comprised of people motivated by strong religious beliefs as well as many who moved there taking advantage of government subsidy programs that enabled them to have comfortable housing in suburban areas at lower prices than comparable housing in Israel.

Settlements and the US-Israel Relationship

The subject of settlement expansion has been the focus of a number of US Administrations.

  • One of the more explosive moments arose when Israel was seeking loan guarantees from the United States and President George H.W. Bush together with his Secretary of State James Baker attempted to use the leverage of the guarantees to force cessation of settlement activity. This resulted in pressure from the organized Jewish community against that effort and even unfair mischaracterization of President Bush as anti-Semitic.
  • In the ensuing years, Presidents have stayed away from creating arguments with Israel on the subject, mostly referring to settlement activity as “unhelpful.”
  • However, after the meeting between President Obama and Prime Minister Netanyahu, the President made clear that the US position is to call for a freeze on all new settlement expansion.
  • Part of being a good friend is being honest,” he (President Obama) said, “there have been times where we are not as honest as we should be about the fact that the current direction, the current trajectory, in the region is profoundly negative….”
  • For his part, Mr. Netanyahu has said that while Israel would not allow new settlements, and would take down some illegal settlements, building within the confines of existing settlements must be allowed to continue. “Israel “cannot freeze life in the settlements.” Halting construction, he argued, is “unreasonable.”
  • Moreover, senior Israeli officials complain that Mr. Obama is not following what they call a clear understanding with the Bush administration when they signed onto the so-called road map for a two state solution in 2003.
  • Although the road map provided that Israel agrees to “freeze all settlement activity (including natural growth of settlements”) they contend that understanding nevertheless allowed Israel to build settlement housing within the boundaries of certain settlement blocks as long as no new land was expropriated, no special economic incentives were offered to move to settlements and no new settlements were built. Some American officials from that time challenge that contention.

And so the disagreement is in the open and Mr. Netanyahu has to face tough choices between alienating his right wing constituency or the President of the United States.

Israel - a tiny speck in the Middle East

Israel - a tiny speck in the Middle East

The Difficult Course for Israel – Dismantling Settlements

There is a frightening reality facing Israel, given the broad settlement activity that has already taken place that would be further compounded by any additional settlement expansion.

  • That reality is the enormous difficulty of dismantling settlements in the event the parties reached a resolution of their conflict that called for turning areas back to the Palestinians free of settlements.
  • We have seen how tenaciously some of the settlers are holding on to their homes, particularly religious settlers, that even trying to move a very small number required calling in the army to exert physical force.
  • Any effort at large scale dismantling would generate major internal conflicts that could tear the nation apart, particularly, as religious and secular elements took opposing sides.
  • Perhaps this is in part what Mr. Netanyahu recognizes as he dodges openly accepting a two state solution but rather talks about helping the Palestinians “economically” and “not wanting to control” the Palestinians.

The Threat to Israel – No Two State Solution

The premise of all the negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians as seen by the United States and the rest of the world is that in the end as President Obama stated in his Cairo address  “the only resolution is for the aspirations of both sides to be met through two states, where Israelis and Palestinians each live in peace and security.”

  • We tend to forget that a two state solution is a relatively new concept created in large part by Yasser Arafat who inspired his people to believe that they should and could have a state of their own and then in the Oslo peace process and thereafter acknowledged that such a state would exist with an Israeli state.
  • Before him the Palestinian aspiration was to return to the land they left, believing that somehow Israel would simply disappear. Frankly, I always felt that Arafat did a great service to Israel in influencing the Palestinians and the rest of the world to adopt a two-state solution.

Absent that concept there would be two other scenarios.

  • One scenario, which is totally unrealistic but that some Israelis – maybe even including Mr. Netanyahu – still believe, is that Israel would continue to control the territories for an indefinite time as they “help” the Palestinians grow to the point where they are ready for statehood.
  • The other scenario is that the territories and their inhabitants join together with Israel and its inhabitants in a single state.

In recent times, some Palestinians have begun to reject the idea of two states and call instead for the two people to live together in one state.  As reflected in my opening discussion, that would be a disastrous scenario for Israel.

  • It could not maintain itself as a Jewish state without disenfranchising the faster growing Palestinian population.
  • But such action would open the door to accusations of apartheid with the probable consequences of world wide opprobrium of a kind that South Africa faced until it allowed its larger native population political control.

There are those who will cavil about one or another portion of President Obama’s speech, depending on their political positions.

For Israelis, and those Jews throughout the world who are dedicated to seeing Israel continue as a Jewish, democratic state, however, President Obama’s advocacy of a two state solution and a cessation to settlement activity must be seen as a boon that serves Israel’s very best interests.

Sincerely,

Bob

Posted in Israel, international, leadership | Tagged: , , , , , , | 1 Comment »

* The Economist: unbalanced article omits President Obama’s condemnation of holocaust denial and Palestinian violence

Posted by Lew Weinstein on June 7, 2009

From The Economist (6-4-09) Obama in Cairo

  • Mr Obama rightly scolded recalcitrant Israelis for their refusal even to accept the idea of two independent states and for letting Jewish settlers continue to build or expand towns and villages on the West Bank.
  • The president rightly urged Arab leaders to continue to press all Palestinians to embrace Israel, provided it offers a decent two-state deal.

read the entire article at … http://www.economist.com/opinion/displaystory.cfm?story_id=13799231

LMW COMMENT

The Economist neglects to mention, in this unbalanced account, President Obama’s very clear condemnation of three pillars of Palestinian/Arab rhetoric and action

  • Six million Jews were killed – more than the entire Jewish population of Israel today. Denying (the holocaust) is baseless, ignorant, and hateful.
  • Threatening Israel with destruction – or repeating vile stereotypes about Jews – is deeply wrong.
  • Palestinians must abandon violence. Resistance through violence and killing is wrong and does not succeed.

I wrote a letter of comment to The Economist stating these glaring omissions.

Posted in Israel, international, leadership | Tagged: , , , , , , | Leave a Comment »