What is Obamas' plan for the Palestinians ?

[Tom Grainger]

Low priority for Palestinian issue if Obama elected US president

October 17, 2008, 3:44 PM (GMT+02:00) DEBKAfile


US Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama
The Democratic presidential candidate Barack Obama has decided not to treat the Palestinian issue as a top priority if he wins the Nov. 4 election, DEBKAfile’s Washington exclusive sources reveal. The Middle East experts on the senator's transition team advised him there was no hurry to address the issue in the early stages of his presidency because the Palestinian side has no leaders authoritative enough to sign a peace accord. Their internal divisions are too profound for such a leader to emerge in the foreseeable future, said those advisers.

Their chief recommendation was for the next president to assign top priority to a nuclear Iran and its relations with Syria, according to our sources.

While nothing is being said publicly, DEBKAfile’s sources report that some of Senator Obama’s advisers have remarked that Presidents Clinton and Bush discovered too late that over-involvement in the Palestinian-Israel dispute achieved nothing and in fact caused them to neglect more consequential Middle East business.

Their misplaced concern hurt their reputations for effectiveness as international statesmen.

By setting the Palestinian question aside, the Democratic candidate if elected will effectively terminate Bush’s 2007 Annapolis initiative and the subsequent on-and-off negotiations with Palestinian leaders conducted by outgoing prime minister Ehud Olmert and his would-be successor foreign minister Tzipi Livni.

Those talks anyway achieved very little.

This was admitted in Amman Thursday, Oct. 17, by leading Palestinian negotiator Ahmed Qureia who put the blame for the lack of progress on Palestinian Authority chairman Mahmoud Abbas.

Comment:
I am a bit confused here with the Rev. Jesse Jackson & Samantha Powers advocating a change in US foreign policy will come after Obamas election to be very Pro-Palestinian, even perhaps to "force" (militarily?) a peace agreement on a recalcitrant State of Israel. It is also reported that President Bush & the State department are drawing up an agreement to be concluded soon for a Palestinian State with Israeli settlers removed from the West Bank, Jerusamem divided, Golan given to Syria etc. Ironically President Bush's actions seems to be in agreement with the CRC Justice committee position papers .
Can anyone help ?

[Marc Peterson]

Hi Dave, good questions. On the creation of the State of Israel, it was of course ham-handed and clumsily done, as are all internationally-mandated events like that. What many don't know is that there were actually more Jews expelled from other lands that year than there were Palestinian people moved from their property, almost 900 thousand of them. This was done with no supervision or even international visibility. They had no redress for the property stolen, have no UN agency to represent them and no outraged press vilified those who kicked them out, it was ignored. Now, the palestinians have become the world's first multi-generational refugees, perpetually living hand-to-mouth while their wealthy brothers and sisters in their former homelands of Jordan or Egypt use them politically and cruelly.

[Dave Timmer]

Thanks. I don't think though that that addresses the justice question. What do we believe is just in that situation? The hard part is obviously working out the details in light of what we all (Jews, Palestinians, Zionists, Egyptians, etc) might believe politically, theologically.......that is where my problem comes with thinking the creation of the state of Israel was God fulfilling THOSE promises. In light of the current situation - it doesn't seem just. Or is justice just that messy?

As to his promises being forever. Yes.....but could WE have gotten it wrong in 1948. God was not AWOL from that but he could have rather let it happen the same way he lets a tragedy happen. eg. I have troubles buying that the tsunami was a part of God's broader plan for justice. Rather it was a heartbreaking tragedy that happened - how can we help. Perhaps I am getting off track..........

[Marc Peterson]

Hi Dave, maybe I'm making a mistake, but I tend to separate the two. As I mentioned above, I'm not to the point of believing the modern state of Israel is who the Bible was speaking of in the verses above (although reading accounts of the underdog Israeli victories in '48 and '67 sure make a good case) but rather the Jews themselves, wherever they live. Again, just my opinion.

As to the worldly question of whether the Jews should have one small place on earth that they can call home and must be taken in, I fall into the "yes" category.

[VDB]

Also, it is easy for us to lecture "justice" from here - on the other side of the world. How will this affect us? We get to lecture from afar.

Perhaps it would make it more relevant to remind ourselves of who took who's property in our own country. Yes, I am speaking of the land of the Native Americans.

To let the rubber hit the road, are you ready to give back your property - yes, where you have your house - to the Native Americans? If not, why not?

And how is this different from the State of Israel and those Iranian neighbors wanting the Israelees to resettle in the state of Alaska?

Serious question. My point is, talking about justice when it's about someone else's sacrifice and not our own is a bit too easy, don't you think? And do we not do it to avoid issues more closer to home? Let's be honest.

We use grand "institutional sins" of the "others" to avoid those much closer to home - personal sins, family sins, our own community sins. Yes, I am suggesting we avoid looking and we hide much like a boy hiding his Playboy magazines when his mother unexpectantly enters into his room. We use distraction - a lot. Ever since the Garden of Eden, it's our past time.

I'll take all the American talk of the Jews of Israel giving their land back to the Palestinians a bit more seriously when it comes from someone who has actually given his or her land back to the American Indians. And even that is not the same as both Palestinians and Jews are natives - dispersed over time - to Israel. Otherwise, I consider it - most of it - to be mere chatter to distract ourselves - and others - from our own issues (issues may be a euphamism here - pardon me - and I should say "sin").

[Dave Timmer]

Ok - maybe we should be talking about both those issues in light of what is just. Isn't that what this website is all about?

Ironically........I haven't given any land back to the American Indians, but the tribe that I work for gives me a paycheck every two weeks which allowed me to purchase a tiny piece of land with a house on it. They pay me to restore the land that was taken from them (some of which they've recently bought back) to ecological health.

[Dave Timmer]

So.....can we continue this chatter?

[Marc Peterson]

Dave, you've said a couple of times now that we're not discussing justice but it seems to me that's exactly what we're discussing. What will happen in the M.E., what should happen, and foremost of course- what would God want to happen, etc.. are all justice issues, aren't they? Did you have another line of discussion that you think would be more helpful?

[VDB]

Yes, and I am part of the chatter and I am part of our national sin against the American Indians. I'm just saying let's at least be honest about that and let that remind us of a humility we should have when we discuss justice demands for someone else. Of course, we can talk about international issues, but God knows our hearts and we should be on guard against using institutional sin and the politically correct justice issues of the day to serve as distractions for God, others and ourselves vis-a-vis our own sins.

We all know the common stereotype of the "savior" who ends up destroying his people or killing innocents within his people (e.g. Jim Jones, Adolf Hitler, John Brown, William Aires, etc. - the list is vast). We all know the common stereotype of the religious zealot against sexual sin who ends up in public sexual sin himself (Jimmy Swaggart, Jim Baker, and for financial sin - Charles Keating). The point is, as old as the Garden of Eden, we have used distractions to attempt to get God to look away from our sins, or to distract others and even ourselves.

I am in this boat also. We all are. And we can encourage each other and hold each other accountable. And we can remind ourselves of the need to be humble when we look at complex justice issues abroad.

Just as we know complete reconciliation has hardly even begun in our own land because of the complexity - how do you get 300 million people to give up their lands to the American Indians? Let's acknowledge the same is true for the Middle East. There are no simplistic answers that will bring about reconciliation overnight.

And let us acknowledge the very real and documented anti-Semitism that is part of the sin of the Christian churches as well. And I am referring to more than the Catholic church or the middle ages. Bring this real close to home.

And parallels may be useful for us here:

Geronomo, for example, exercised revenge for by killing of his own people by killing innocent miners and settlers in Arizona. The story reveals the complexity of attempting to protect and meet out justice. Who was guiltiy? Who was blameless? All were guilty and none were blameless.

I am just suggesting that we acknowlege our own sinfulness when we discuss he sins of others. The beam in our own eyes as we discuss the toothpicks in the others' eyes - that Jesus spoke about.

I have also received federal funds designated to provide help for Native American children (Head Start) and traveled to 20 different tribal communities within Arizona and met with several of their leaders (including with the White Mountain Apache). To my great shock (and you may laugh at my naivete), I discovered sinfulness there as well. "What's in this for me" is alive and well also with those who are oppressed. All have sinned and fallen short of the glory of God. And "do-good" simplistic approaches such as giving every young person at age 18 an automatic grant of $15,000 to start out in adult life actually reduced college entrance rates for an Indian tribe rather than increased it. Simplistic do-gooder approaches that give someone something for nothing usually make the problem worse. Just drive through any tribal nation in our country today to see the results. It is beyond sad. And what is most needed? Jobs is what I was told. Jobs. Not money, jobs.

This is our sin as we thrown money at the problems and hope it just goes away and leaves us without guilt. This is our shame and we participate in this each and every day - all of us other than those who are Native Americans (they have their on set of sins). Let's acknowledge this and consider this as we discuss "solutions" to a complex justice issue on the other side of the world - a side in the world that will not really demand any sacrifice from us unless we send a loved one to war, only sacrifices from others.

[Dave Timmer]

Marc - I'm confused, did I say we're not talking about justice? Your questions are exactly what I have been asking. The wonders of electronic discussions...........

[Marc Peterson]

Sorry, I guess that makes two of us. I took your comment above -"Ok - maybe we should be talking about both those issues in light of what is just. Isn't that what this website is all about?" to mean that we somehow weren't talking about justice. Again, sorry for the misunderstanding.

[Tom Grainger]

back to the thread - see www.israelnationalnews.com/News/News.aspx/128402


Report: Obama Favors Saudi Initiative, Dividing Jerusalem
by Maayana Miskin

(IsraelNN.com) United States President-Elect Barack Obama will support the Saudi Initiative for peace between Israel and Arab nations, the British Sunday Times reported Sunday. Obama told Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas, “The Israelis would be crazy not to accept this initiative,” according to the Times.

The initiative calls on Israel to withdraw completely to its 1949 borders in exchange for normalized relations with Arab League countries. It includes a full retreat from the eastern half of Jerusalem, including the Temple Mount, and from the strategic Golan Heights in northern Israel.

Ah yes ..things are clearer now and the Rev. Jesse was indeed on to something after all. ; - (