good speech by obama. let's see if he follows up with action. charisma and words are not enough.

that the settlements must stop is only a first step. they must be eventually evacuated. under international law, they are illegal. there can be negotiation between the parties to what extent that will take place.

there are those who flaunt international law. may i remind these people that it was via an international body that the state of israel was created.

As an Israeli, I cannot overemphasize the extent to which Obama's massage can invigorate the defeated peace camp here. In all our meetings, websites, forums and dinner talks, we have become accustomed during the last decade for the US government to function as a force that did not promote peace and quietly supported my government's ongoing violent annexation policies. With the US as the only power that would enable agreement between the sides, it seemed as if the region was bound to continue its slide to never-ending conflict. One can only hope that the new spirit of moderation brought by the new administration will be followed by tough action and pressure, that will hopefully lead to the collapse of Netanyahu's government, and to the formation of a sane, peace-oriented government.

I don't usually repeat comments, but the linkes in quotes on one I put on a reader blog yesterday bear repeating. it's not just words, but the words are important. Peace between warring parties can be accomplished only through words and by words.

Freidman's column in the NYT yesterday.

“We have a joke around the White House,” the president said. “We’re just going to keep on telling the truth until it stops working — and nowhere is truth-telling more important than the Middle East.”

A key part of his message, he said, will be: “Stop saying one thing behind closed doors and saying something else publicly.” He then explained: “There are a lot of Arab countries more concerned about Iran developing a nuclear weapon than the ‘threat’ from Israel, but won’t admit it.” There are a lot of Israelis, “who recognize that their current path is unsustainable, and they need to make some tough choices on settlements to achieve a two-state solution — that is in their long-term interest — but not enough folks are willing to recognize that publicly.”

Also, this fascinating post on "The Cable" blog at the Foreign Policy website.

In the 10 days since Netanyahu and President Barack Obama held a meeting at the White House, the Obama administration has made clear in public and private meetings with Israeli officials that it intends to hold a firm line on Obama's call to stop Israeli settlements. According to many observers in Washington and Israel, the Israeli prime minister, looking for loopholes and hidden agreements that have often existed in the past with Washington, has been flummoxed by an unusually united line that has come not just from the Obama White House and the secretary of state, but also from pro-Israel congressmen and women who have come through Israel for meetings with him over Memorial Day recess. To Netanyahu's dismay, Obama doesn't appear to have a hidden policy. It is what he said it was.

* * *

It's not just the administration that's delivering Netanyahu that message, however. Whereas in the past Israeli leaders have sometimes eased pressure from Washington on the settlements issue by going to members of Congress, this time, observers in Washington and Israel say, key pro-Israel allies in Congress have been largely reinforcing the Obama team's message to Netanyahu. What changed? "Members of Congress have more willing to follow the leadership of the administration ... because [they] believe it is in our national security interest to move toward ending the conflict and that it is not a zero sum for Israel," the former senior Clinton administration official said.

"Netanyahu and [Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor] Lieberman are probing, looking for areas they can get space gratis from the United States," says Hussein Ibish, a senior fellow at the American Task Force for Palestine. "And they are not finding it."

"We've been watching the move in Congress, especially among certain high profile Jewish American members -- people like Representative Gary Ackerman, Representative Robert Wexler, and Representative Howard Berman," Ibish said. "What has occurred -- and this has been greatly intensified by the election of Obama: There has been a growing sense of members of Congress who are well-informed on foreign policy ... that peace is essential to the American national interest and the Israeli national interest. And there's been a growing sense that the possibility of a two-state agreement is time-limited and that things like the settlements are incompatible with the goal of creating two states."

It's a perplexing moment in history. On one hand, the problem has finally become as intractible as those with a modicum of foresight have been saying it would become for the last thirty years. The settlement movement has created a geographically concentration of radical and militant Zionists who seemingly cannot be uprooted without touching off an Israeli civil war at precisely the same moment that the combination of population growth and dispair make the settlers' continued presence in the West Bank the greatest threat to Isreal's continued existence as a democratic and Jewish state.

The actual occurance of this long-predicted state of affairs, combined with the Bush Administration's many object lessons in the limits of military force as a problem-solving tool, has apparently convinced the members of Congress and the bureaucracy who the Likudniks used rely upon to undermine any efforts by the current president to move toward a two-state solution that the AIPAC postition is unteneble.

And yet because they didn't come around until after that easily-predicted future had finally come to pass, it may be too late for their conversion to reason to do any good. I am profoundly pessimistic about the possibility of a decent resolution of this mess, or of any resoltuion that doesn't entail a bloodbath of some kind. The only glimmer of hope comes from the fact that that's exactly how I used to feel about South Africa before de Klerk came to power.

One small piece of your excellent comment:

"I am profoundly pessimistic about the possibility of a decent resolution of this mess, or of any resoltuion that doesn't entail a bloodbath of some kind."

While I share your pessimism, I am profoundly grateful for the words of our President today, which have been a long time coming. A rational, graceful yet firm speech is no more than words perhaps, but as M.J. states this is incredibly different from the idiocy and madness of the last eight years. If we can make real progress in this area of world affairs, we truly can hope for anything.

Hossam el-Hamalawy
His last comments were in the Times, this is in the Huffington Post. More here.

Right before he took off from DC, on what the media has been depicting as some “odyssey,” to address the Muslim World from Cairo, President Obama had described the 81-year-old Egyptian President Mubarak as a “force for stability.”This week Cairo and its twin city Giza have been a showcase of what this “stability” cost.
The capital is under occupation. Security troops are deployed in the main public squares and metro stations. [Arabic] Citizens were detained en masse and shops were told to close down [Arabic] in Bein el-Sarayat area, neighboring Cairo University, where Obama will be speaking. In Al-Azhar University, the co-host of the “historical speech,” State Security police raided and detained at least 200 foreign students, held them without charges in unknown locations. Exams were postponed in the major universities fearing demonstrations, and students were told to stay at home. And in several areas in Cairo and Giza, there will be in effect a curfew, where shops won’t be allowed to open, citizens instructed not to open their windows. Almost everyone I know will be staying home tomorrow watching Obama’s speech, not necessarily because they are keen on knowing what the freshly-elected US leader has to say to the Muslim world, but because they know it will be virtually impossible to move anywhere in the city on Thursday thanks to Obama’s force-for-stability host.

As'ad AbuKhalil:"What can you say about Obama? It will--and should--be remembered that he praised the "wisdom" of the Saudi King. What is next? Will he praise the public beheadings in the kingdom as example of ideal justice?"

One more point:
MJR: "Islam is part of the American fabric and always has been."
But he is not willing to say the same of Islam in the "Jewish State."

Like Josh Marshall he defends multicultural America in the defense of an ideal of a monocultural Israel.

Review in from the Corner Store...Sam's Market

Actually we have a network of Mom and Pops...some Christian, all Palestinian..Sam and his crew are Muslim

LOVED IT!

Dismissed Israeli, Republican and Hamas critiques as "the same old sh-t"

The Koran refs and The Prophet (PBUH)" big hit

Warning though...our President has given even the most cynical Palestinian I know (the Jews control everything..yada..yada) a new spring of hope in their step