Wednesday, 30 April 2014

John Kerry on Israel

John "hairstyle in seach of a brain" Kerry tried to look tough with the zionist state - for a day

John Kerry backpedals on Israel ‘apartheid state’ comment
Secretary of State John Kerry, under fire for warning that Israel risks becoming “an apartheid state” in the absence of a peace deal, released a statement Monday evening pushing back hard.


29 April, 2014



I will not allow my commitment to Israel to be questioned by anyone, particularly for partisan, political purposes,” Kerry said in a release put out by the State Department. “… If I could rewind the tape, I would have chosen a different word to describe my firm belief that the only way in the long term to have a Jewish state and two nations and two peoples living side by side in peace and security is through a two state solution.”

The tape in question was published by the Daily Beast on Sunday — a recording of Kerry’s comments to a meeting of the Trilateral Commission on Friday in which he lamented the breakdown of talks between the Israelis and Palestinians.


A two-state solution will be clearly underscored as the only real alternative. Because a unitary state winds up either being an apartheid state with second-class citizens — or it ends up being a state that destroys the capacity of Israel to be a Jewish state,” Kerry says in the recording.

From across the spectrum of right to left, the condemnations rolled in Monday. Anti-Defamation League national director Abe Foxman called the apartheid comment “startling and deeply disappointing.” The American Israel Public Affairs Committee said the comment was “deeply troubling” and “inappropriate.” In a statement, AIPAC said, “Any suggestion that Israel is, or is at risk of becoming, an apartheid state is offensive and inappropriate.”

In addition, Republican Jewish Coalition executive director Matt Brooks called it “inflammatory and inaccurate.” The National Jewish Democratic Council expressed its “deep disappointment.” Sen. Ted Cruz (R-Texas) called on Kerry to resign.

Kerry was speaking at the end of the most difficult week yet in his attempts to make progress on peace between the Israelis and Palestinians — and just ahead of the official April 29 deadline for extending negotiations.


Just a few weeks ago, Kerry left the region in frustration and declared “reality-check time” when the two sides could not agree to terms in a prisoner exchange. Just last week, Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas announced plans to strike a reconciliation deal with Hamas — which the United States and Israel designate a terrorist organization, but which has political control in the Gaza Strip — ending a nearly decadelong split between that group and Abbas’ Palestinian Authority, which has control over the West Bank.

Abbas’ outreach to Hamas drew the condemnation of Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, who said Israel would never negotiate with a government that accepts Hamas, which officially calls for the destruction of Israel. In response, the State Department said last week it acknowledged that the reconciliation would create conditions that the Israelis can’t be expected to negotiate under.

President Barack Obama gave his own disappointed assessment of the status of the peace process at a news conference Friday in South Korea, adding his own point of warning.

There may come a point at which there just needs to be a pause, and both sides need to look at the alternatives,” Obama said. “As I’ve said in the past and I will continue to repeat: Nobody has offered me a serious scenario in which peace is not made between Israelis and Palestinians and we have a secure, democratic Jewish state of Israel and the Palestinians have a state.”


Kerry still declared himself hopeful earlier last week — but by Friday, special peace envoy Martin Indyk was headed back to Washington and the secretary of state was blaming both sides in a private meeting with leaders from North America, Western Europe and Japan.

The “apartheid” reference in those remarks was an attempt to warn what might happen if the two sides aren’t able to reach a solution — though in his apology he said, “I do not believe, nor have I ever stated, publicly or privately, that Israel is an apartheid state or that it intends to become one.”

Kerry, in his statement, said that everything in his record showed him to be a strong supporter of Israel, arguing that his word choice had created a “misimpression.”


For more than thirty years in the United States Senate, I didn’t just speak words in support of Israel, I walked the walk when it came time to vote and when it came time to fight. As Secretary of State, I have spent countless hours working with Prime Minister Netanyahu and Justice Minister [Tzipi] Livni [who is leading peace talks for the Israelis] because I believe in the kind of future that Israel not only wants, but Israel deserves,” Kerry said. “I want to see a two state solution that results in a secure Jewish state and a prosperous Palestinian state, and I’ve actually worked for it.”

While Justice Minister Livni, former Prime Ministers [Ehud] Barak and [Ehud] Ohlmert have all invoked the specter of apartheid to underscore the dangers of a unitary state for the future,” Kerry concluded, “it is a word best left out of the debate here at home.”


From yesterday -

Israel risks becoming apartheid state if peace talks fail, says John Kerry

It is believed to be the first time a US official of Kerry's standing has used the term 'apartheid' in the context of Israel


28 April, 2014

The US secretary of state, John Kerry, has warned in a closed-door meeting in Washington that Israel risks becoming an "apartheid state" if US-sponsored efforts to reach an Israeli-Palestinian peace settlement fail.

In an apparent sign of Kerry's deep frustration over the almost certain collapse of the current nine-month round of peace talks – due to conclude on Tuesday – he blamed both sides for the lack of progress and said failure could lead to a resumption of Palestinian violence against Israeli citizens.

The remarks were made on Friday at the Trilateral Commission, a non-governmental organisation of experts and officials from the US, western Europe, Russia and Japan. A recording was acquired by the Daily Beast website.

Kerry also suggested that a change of either Israeli or Palestinian leadership might create more favourable conditions for peace and the final, long-delayed agreement on the shape of a Palestinian state.

Aftewards, as a public storm grew around the remarks, Kerry issued a statement regretting the use of the word apartheid, saying it had opened him to "partisan political" attacks.

"If I could rewind the tape, I would have chosen a different word," he said.

Israeli leaders had made similar points in the past but "apartheid [is] a word best left out of the debate here at home", Kerry said.

Regardless of the apology, Kerry's remarks represent a significant departure, as senior US officials historically have avoided the word "apartheid" relating to Israeli policies. It is believed to be the first time a US official of Kerry's standing has used the contentious term in the context of Israel, even if only as a warning for the future.

The Emergency Committee for Israel, whose chairman is the prominent neo-conservative William Kristol, said: "On Friday secretary of state John Kerry raised the spectre of Israel as an 'apartheid state'. Even Barack Obama condemned the use of this term when running for president in 2008. It is no longer enough for the White House to clean up after the messes John Kerry has made. It is time for John Kerry to step down as secretary of state, or for President Obama to fire him."

Although the danger to Israel of a failure to move towards a two-state solution has been framed by Israeli politicians in terms similar to those used by Kerry, US officials have long been wary of following suit. When the former president Jimmy Carter used it for the tile of his 2006 book Palestine: Peace or Apartheid it caused controversy.

Kerry's comments reflect similar recent warnings to Israel from western diplomats that the collapse of the peace talks might lead to the country's increasing isolation.

Kerry said: "A two-state solution will be clearly underscored as the only real alternative. Because a unitary state winds up either being an apartheid state with second-class citizens – or it ends up being a state that destroys the capacity of Israel to be a Jewish state.

"Once you put that frame in your mind, that reality, which is the bottom line, you understand how imperative it is to get to the two-state solution, which both leaders, even yesterday, said they remain deeply committed to."

Kerry has had a sometimes strained relationship with some senior Israeli officials as the peace talks have become gridlocked. In January Israel's defence minister, Moshe Ya'alon, described Kerry as "obsessive and messianic".

In 2008 in an interview during his election campaign, Barack Obama explicitly rejected "injecting a term like apartheid" into the discussion over Israel and Palestine. "It's emotionally loaded, historically inaccurate, and it's not what I believe," he said.

Attempting to defuse the row, Jen Psaki, spokesperson for the US state department, said: "Secretary Kerry, like justice minister Livni and previous Israeli prime ministers Olmert and Barak, was reiterating why there's no such thing as a one-state solution if you believe, as he does, in the principle of a Jewish state.

"[Kerry] was talking about the kind of future Israel wants and the kind of future both Israelis and Palestinians would want to envision. The only way to have two nations and two peoples living side by side in peace and security is through a two-state solution. And without a two-state solution, the level of prosperity and security the Israeli and Palestinian people deserve isn't possible."


No comments:

Post a Comment