Simulation: Pro-Israel Group
Please post your comments here. This posting is mandatory. In about a paragraph or two summarize the substance of the discussions and the conclusion. Also list the demands that the group came up with in order to present to the quartet.
11 Comments:
As a representative for AIPAC I came to the table with an immediate response to the US's potential withdrawl from Israel. The United States cannot withdrawl military aid, economic aid and political support. AIPAC does not deny that the circumstance is very unfortunate, however pulling out is not the answer. What kind of message does it send to the global community if the United States ceases support when the situation becomes difficult. The United States and Israel are long time allies on the war against terror, the prevention of nuclear arms in Iran, and both advocate the spread of democracy in the region. Israel is the US's most important ally in the region.
At the meeting I suggested a number of improvements that need to be taken regarding the relationship between Israel and the US. I would say Olmert agreed with most of my suggestions, however Condi Rice resisted my suggestions, repeating that Israel needed to be punished and that the US's support must cease until Israel proves its allegiance towards the US. I suggested an increase of US presence and aid. Our heightened interest would display to the world our commitment, it would allow us further investigation into the failed missile attack, would protect our global image and would aid us in our long term goals in the Middle East. We cannot leave Israel now if we wish to continue our promotion of democracy and our fight against terror and nuclear proliferation.
This wasn't a particularly productive meeting. Much time was spent arguing with Ms. Rice over the differences between "pulling" support and "freezing" support, and whether or not the US was actually accusing Israel of intentionally murdering Ms. Clinton. Ms. Rice kept on insisting that freezing support of Israel was the only option, all the while totally ignoring the fact that this will severely undermine their War on Terror. I argued (along with AIPAC) that by pulling support from their closest ally in the region because of ONE mistake, the US will be sending the wrong message to terrorists. The Bush administration is very fond of the phrase "cut and run" - and that's exactly what the US will be doing.
One proposal in particular made me a bit wary - the idea of placing UN peacekeeping troops in the West Bank. Ms. Rice insisted that the troops would not be there to enforce UN resolutions, but I can't help but feel uncomfortable with this situation. The UN has always maintained an unfair, hostile position regarding Israel’s settlements in liberated West Bank lands, and I see this as a sneaky first-step in a plot to eventually evacuate the West Bank settlements. I think the US could keep forces stationed in the area as “neutral peacekeeping forces,” while imposing a freeze on all other support, without it being a conflict of interests.
Bentzi Lieberman (Dan Curtin)
Chairman of the YESHA Council
(the official representative body of the West Bank settlements)
This post has been removed by the author.
As a representative of the US Administration I made sure to make it clear that we needed to see good faith measures by the Israeli Government. Our relationship had been damaged, however that did not mean we were diplomatically separated. I made clear that the US would not pursue a permanent policy against Israel, contrary to what the representatives of both AIPAC and the settlers would have you believe. While negotiations were bumpy a joint road to a new diplomatic relationship between Israel and the US is well on its way.
We have in come to an agreement with Israel’s Prime Minister Olmert in accordance to a UN Security Council meeting to have UN peacekeeping troops take over control of Border security and checkpoints. This serves as a necessary measure to both the US and the international community to show compliance by Israel. The events that have occurred are very unfortunate and have fallen on a historically very strong diplomatic relationship. As I expressed throughout this meeting we intend to work to restore our diplomatic relationship with Israel while making sure that the commitment and loyalty is still there amongst the Israeli administration.
Condoleeza Rice
US Secretary of State
(Mike DeVoll)
The meeting that was held with the pro-Israeli leaders and Sec. of State Condi Rice was heated to say they least. It is my belief that Condi Rice was just saying what Bush wanted him/her to say, and was not the least bit concerned with the ramifications of the policies that would be instituted. The favorite phrase of “cut and run” was used a lot to describe these policies, and I, along with AIPAC, YESHA council member, and Ehud Olmert agreed that to totally withdraw support of “freeze” (which is withdrawing support temporarily) was not a smart option. Yes, my wife did die at the hands of the IDF, and punishments should ensue. But, with that said, Israel has always been a tremendous ally of the US, and to cut off our support of them would damage out political relationship further, which is something that need not occur. I believe that Condi Rice did a good job at bringing our concerns back to the President which he then used to discuss with us a plan of attack on the whole situation.
Joshua Kagan
"Bill Clinton"
Former POTUS
As Al Jazeera's local correspondent, this was a very interesting meeting to cover. A very tense air was about this conference as one by one, each faction of the Israeli lobby abandoned their immediate support for the Israeli settlers in the West Bank. This culminated as the Christian zealot George Bush announced that "God spoke to me" in response to the Chairman of the YESHA Council's incredulous plea to understand the American President's sudden reversal of support for Israel's settlers.
This meeting of the Israeli lobby may prove an historic day, as finally the Americans and the Israelis themselves see what the rest of the world has known for decades; that the settlement of the West Bank and Gaza is an illegal seizure of the Palestinian's rightful land, and the Settlers will never again oppress the Palestinian people from their own hilltops.
-Brendan Taubman, Al Jazeera Correspondent
This meeting started off slowly because our negotiations with the United States initially ran in circles. The primary condition for the normalization of diplomatic relations with the US was the withdrawal from the West Bank and Gaza, which I did not contest. This diplomatic step on our part is a step forward in the effort to stabilize the region. The concessions we agreed to make were done under the assumption that we will not allow our security to be jeopardized.
We stressed that a healthy diplomatic relationship between the US and Israel is mutually beneficial, and it would be in nobodys interest to allow one incident, however egregious, to adversely affect both Israeli security and the United States' War on Terror. Israel has always been a close ally of the US and terrorism is our common enemy. This should be taken into serious consideration before any decisions are made.
Ehud Olmert
This post has been removed by the author.
Not much was said in this meeting except for the very issue of the United State stating that they will withdrawal or as Condi Rice liked to refer to it as "temporarily freezing" military aid, economic aid and political support until "good faith" is shown.. this went on for approximately the entire meeting w/ AIPAC and prime minister Ehud Olmert going back and forth in the issue.
Ms. Rice concluded that the position of the United States will not be changed and that Israel need to recognize that its done wrong and certain measures will be taken whether or not this was an "accident" ... although details weren’t explicitly discussed as to how far these measure will be, however, Israeli prime minister has recognized that there will be a great loss if these "measures" are taken!
Amirah Alkotf
Representative of the
Israeli refuseniks
All that this meeting really yielded was a lot of bickering between Condoleezza Rice and the Israeli representatives. Rice was sure to make it clear that the US was not ending its efforts to combat terrorism against Israel in the region, though if that is the case, she has a strange way of showing it. It is irresponsible and frankly quite dangerous on a number of levels to withdraw support for the great nation of Israel at this time. US military, economic and diplomatic support necessary to protect Jerusalem from the threat of Palestinian terror. Even more importantly, it is hard not to look at the disastrous death of President Elect Clinton as a potential early portend of the apocolypse, and should the rapture come, it's difficult to imagine that Christ will look favorably upon us after betraying our long time ally for an occurance that may be purely the fated work of God. The group's failure to entertain this possiblity was perhaps the most dissapointing aspect of our meeting. Incredibly, Rice refused to lend even the slightest credence to the idea, a sure sign of the sorrowful state of Christian piety in today's society. What would the founding fathers think? Though a temporary withdrawal of support while the situation is being investigated might be a prudent decision, there really is no telling what could happen between then and now, America seems to simply not understand the risk involved. We cannot control God, but we can control our own actions such that we may gain his favor before the end of times, and Christians must not stand idly by and allow our salvation to rest in the hands of godless foreign policymakers.
-Greg Gallo, Christian Zionist
This first meeting left me uncertain of future relations with the United States because of the almost hostile dialogue between Rice, Olmert, and the representative for AIPEC. Eventually it became clear that there will be a temporary halt of military aid and a replacement of IDF soldiers with UN peacekeeping troops. The U.S. is not considering the consequences of their actions concerning the security and stability of Israel. Withdrawing military support will leave Israel vulnerable to terrorist attacks and unable to aid the U.S. in their war on terror. The rift in U.S.-Israeli relations will send a message a weakness to terrorist organization. The fact that UN troops will replace our very capable IDF soldiers concerns me also. While I have confidence in the UN I am not so sure they will they could would be as efficient as our soldiers in detecting terrorist activity. While Olmert expresses concern for the security of Israel, he seems to be accepting any conditions Rice puts forward without really examining the true consequences. He is once again showing weakness in leadership and the Israeli citizens want a strong leader who is concerned about their security from terrorists.
Danielle Cobb
Binyamin Netanyahu
Opposition leader
Post a Comment
<< Home