Petraeus betrays us
And now we have the background for why Biden went berserk on Tuesday. On January 16, two days after a killer earthquake hit Haiti, a team of senior military officers from the U.S. Central Command (responsible for overseeing American security interests in the Middle East), arrived at the Pentagon to brief JCS Chairman Michael Mullen on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. The team had been dispatched by CENTCOM commander David Petraeus to underline his growing worries at the lack of progress in resolving the issue. The 33-slide 45-minute PowerPoint briefing stunned Mullen. The briefers reported that there was a growing perception among Arab leaders that the U.S. was incapable of standing up to Israel, that CENTCOM's mostly Arab constituency was losing faith in American promises, that Israeli intransigence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was jeopardizing U.S. standing in the region, and that Mitchell himself was (as a senior Pentagon officer later bluntly described it) "too old, too slow...and too late."Read the whole thing.
The January Mullen briefing was unprecedented. No previous CENTCOM commander had ever expressed himself on what is essentially a political issue; which is why the briefers were careful to tell Mullen that their conclusions followed from a December 2009 tour of the region where, on Petraeus's instructions, they spoke to senior Arab leaders. "Everywhere they went, the message was pretty humbling," a Pentagon officer familiar with the briefing says. "America was not only viewed as weak, but its military posture in the region was eroding." But Petraeus wasn't finished: two days after the Mullen briefing, Petraeus sent a paper to the White House requesting that the West Bank and Gaza (which, with Israel, is a part of the European Command - or EUCOM), be made a part of his area of operations. Petraeus's reason was straightforward: with U.S. troops deployed in Iraq and Afghanistan, the U.S. military had to be perceived by Arab leaders as engaged in the region's most troublesome conflict.
The Mullen briefing and Petraeus's request hit the White House like a bombshell. While Petraeus's request that CENTCOM be expanded to include the Palestinians was denied ("it was dead on arrival," a Pentagon officer confirms), the Obama Administration decided it would redouble its efforts - pressing Israel once again on the settlements issue, sending Mitchell on a visit to a number of Arab capitals and dispatching Mullen for a carefully arranged meeting with Chief of the Israeli General Staff, Lt. General Gabi Ashkenazi. While the American press speculated that Mullen's trip focused on Iran, the JCS Chairman actually carried a blunt, and tough, message on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict: that Israel had to see its conflict with the Palestinians "in a larger, regional, context" - as having a direct impact on America's status in the region. Certainly, it was thought, Israel would get the message.
Three comments:
This is why Generals are supposed to stay out of politics. What did Petraeus think the Arabs would say if he asked them the question? They will be satisfied with nothing short of the end of the Jewish state.
And why did Petraeus repeat what the Arabs said at face value without trying to analyze it?
Sorry, but Israel is not going to roll over and die because the Arabs are unhappy with us.
UPDATE MONDAY 2:07 AM
I have been informed by insiders that the author of this piece, Mark Perry, is a former adviser to Yasser Arafat and is now director of the Conflicts Forum, which advocates talking to Hamas and Hezbullah. In other words, he has an agenda.
I have also been informed that Petraeus' people deny the story completely, although my source for that is a high profile blogger who heard it from a reporter.
Setting the record straight on the 1600 units
By Ted Belman http://www.israpundit.com/2008/?p=21375
Forbes published a story by AP, Israel OKs 1,600 new homes in east Jerusalem, which contained a lot of incorrect and biased statements.
- Israel approved the construction of 1,600 new homes for Jews in disputed east Jerusalem on Tuesday -
Ramat Shlomo, where the homes are to be built is not in “east Jerusalem” but northern Jerusalem. It is therefore excluded from the freeze. It is also a long established Haredi neighborhood that is desperate for new housing.
- The U.S., like the Palestinians and the rest of the international community, believes that Israeli settlements built on lands claimed by the Palestinians, including east Jerusalem, undermine peace prospects. President Obama has been more outspoken on the issue than his predecessors.
So what if they are “claimed” by the “Palestinians”. They are also claimed by the Israelis but note how AP didn’t say that. What’s more Israel is in control.
These units are not in east Jerusalem in any event.
- Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu has rebuffed calls from the White House to halt all settlement activity, agreeing only to a limited freeze that does not include east Jerusalem.
More confusion. The limited freeze doesn’t apply to all of Jerusalem. Israel makes no distinction.
- Israel captured both areas in the 1967 Mideast war and subsequently annexed east Jerusalem. Israel considers its east Jerusalem neighborhoods to be part of its undivided capital, but the annexation has never been internationally recognized and the neighborhoods are widely seen as settlements.
The lands annexed were east of the greenline. All such lands are part of Jerusalem and have been for over forty years.
- But Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat said the move was destroying trust needed to go forward with the new round of indirect peace talks,
That’s bu*****t. Israel has repeatedly asserted it would not freeze construction so there was nothing new here that might destroy trust.
- The announcement threatened to embarrass Biden, whose visit is aimed largely at repairing the relationship with Israel.
Why should he be embarrassed. The US had accepted the fact that Jerusalem was excluded from the freeze.
Finally, there is confusion as to what “east Jerusalem” encompasses. Israelis think the Arabs are referring to Arab east Jerusalem. What they are really referring to is that part of Jerusalem east of the greenline on which 300,000 Israelis live..
- Biden’s public comments throughout the day had clearly been meant to calm Israeli concerns that Obama has been less friendly to the country than past U.S. leaders.
Of course he is less friendly. To claim otherwise ignore that Obama has declared all settlements illegal and has come down on the side of the Saudi Plan and the division of Jerusalem.
- Biden … assured Israelis they can count on strong U.S. backing as peace efforts finally resume.
Biden was lying. The US has given a document to the Arabs in which Obama assures them that Israel must meet his expectations or he will blame them. The only thing the US is backing is what she wants, which unsurprisingly, is most of what the Arabs want.
- The relationship between the two allies, Biden told reporters as he stood beside Netanyahu, has always been a “centerpiece of American policy.”
“Progress occurs in the Middle East when everyone knows there is simply no space between the United States and Israel,” Biden said.
More lies. The US is forcing Israel to do what it doesn’t want to do and is preventing her from bombing Iran.
- “The United States will always stand with those who take risks for peace,” Biden said, telling Netanyahu, “you’re prepared to do that.”
It used to be that the US confronted her enemies rather that appeased them. On the contrary, one shouldn’t “take risks for peace”. Israel has taken enough risks for peace to her detriment.
- Obama began his term with a push for Mideast peace, prodding Israel to freeze its construction of West Bank settlements that swallow up land the Palestinians want for a future state.
Israel also claims the land. At least the report didn’t describe the land as “Palestinian” land as most reports do.
- Biden offered assurances that the U.S. remained committed to Israel’s security. Iran appeared to loom large in Biden’s discussions with Netanyahu. “We are determined to prevent Iran from acquiring nuclear weapons,” he said.
How can forcing Israel to give up land needed for her security be reconciled with the alleged commitment to Israel’s security. If the US really had such a commitment, she would support what Israel thinks it needs for security. No one buys the argument that the US is determined to prevent Iran from getting nuclear weapons.
Finally, what most people think of as “east Jerusalem” is Arab east Jerusalem. What the Arabs mean as “east Jerusalem” is all lands annexed by Israel that are east of the ‘67 armistice lines.
Posts
