Olmert slams Obama obsession with settlements as "mistake"

[Israel Insider]

Former prime minister Ehud Olmert rejected the obsessive US focus on Jewish home-building in Judea, saying that Americans must return their attention to negotiations that contribute to peace.

In an Op-Ed titled 'How to Achieve Lasting Peace' published in the Washington Post on Friday, Olmert said that "the issue of settlement construction commands the agenda between the United States and Israel."

Calling the emphasis on settlements "a mistake," he warned that not only does it not contribute to the peace process or relations with Arab states, but that it "has the potential to greatly shake US-Israeli relations."

While admitting that "settlements are a known issue of contention between Israel and the United States," Olment described in detail the understandings previous reached between the two states over the issue, including agreements reached by former prime minister Ariel Sharon that include the prohibition of building new settlements or the provision of new land for construction, as well as the limitation of construction to certain building lines and the dismantling of "unauthorized outposts built after March 2001."

Olmert said pursuit of a complete freeze in construction was both "impossible to completely enforce" and "will not promote Palestinian efforts to enhance security measures; the institution building that is so crucial for the development of a Palestinian state; better movement and access to the Palestinians; nor an improved economy in the West Bank. Nor will it weaken the Hamas government in Gaza.

"It will not bring greater security to Israel, help improve Israel's relations with the Arab world, strengthen a coalition of moderate Arab states or shift the strategic balance in the Middle East," Olmert continued.

"Only a political process that demands courageous decisions from leaders on both sides will bring a solution to the issue of settlements," he said.

Olmert blamed the Palestinian leadership for refusing to accept his proposal offering "a solution to all outstanding issues: territorial compromise, security arrangements, Jerusalem and refugees.

"It would be worth exploring the reasons that the Palestinians rejected my offer and preferred, instead, to drag their feet, avoiding real decisions. My proposal would have helped realize the "two-state solution" in accordance with the principles of the US administration, the Israeli government I led and the criteria the Palestinian leadership has followed throughout the years… I believe it is crucial to review the lessons from the Palestinians' rejection of such an offer."

"Settlement construction should be taken off the public agenda and moved to a discrete dialogue, as in the past," Olmert urged.

[Rich Sachtleben]

The emphasis of Obama and his administration on the settlements issue is not a mistake, it is a calculation. There may be several reasons, but one I can see is to put Israel in the spotlight as always being instransigent and uncooperative and unwilling to make concessions. Israel always has to be shown to be the problem, the one that always stands in the way of "peace". The goal of course is not peace, but the elimination of Israel and all Jews from the Middle East - for starters.

[RonaldH]

Olmert's criticism of Obama's emphasis on a settlement freeze of ALL growth proves that Obama's policies are misguided. That is because Olmert has been the Israeli leader most willing to withdraw from territory and recognize a Palestinian state. During his administration, he was travelling the world looking for every way possible to give away Israeli land to the Palestinians. The only reason he couldn't succeed was because the Pals are so barbaric that they couldn't refrain from daily rocket attacks on Sderot long enough for Olmert to withdraw. If Olmert can't back Obama's Mideast strategy for peace between Israel and the Palestinians, then it is hard to imagine who will.
I don't know with whom to be more disgusted, Obama or the US Jews who voted for him.

[Robert Bernier]

Israel has an unassailable legal right to establish settlements in the West Bank.
Eugene Rostow, a former dean of the Yale Law School who was also under secretary of state in the Johnson years, would write years later that "Israel has an unassailable legal right to establish settlements in the West Bank." He argued that Israel's claims to the territory were "at least as good as those of Jordan." Prof. Stephen Schwebel, who would become the State Department legal adviser and subsequently the president of the International Court of Justice in The Hague, went a step further when he wrote in 1970 that "Israel has better title in the territory of what was Palestine, including the whole of Jerusalem, than do Jordan and Egypt." More at : http://israelagainstterror.blogspot.com/2009/05/israels-forgotten-rights-in-jerusalem.html

[Robert Bernier]

Not an Inch of the Land of Israel can be given away!
Jewish Pioneers are building, defending, sawing, planting & harvesting the ancient Land of their ancestors. Despite Arab terrorist attacks, harassment by Israeli government's police & international pressure, these Patriots do not retreat! Violent Arab nationalism & radical Islam can not be appeased by stealing Jewish Land at the expense of international security. Despite misguided political schemes, people have been learning that giving in to violent radical forces will bring more 9/11s, Madrid, Bali, Beslan, London & Mumbai bombings & hostage-takings. About the truth : http://xrl.us/bezuxr