Jimmy Carter: 'The desire of leaders in Israel to occupy and colonize the land in the West Bank, that's been the key problem.'
It looks like the realists are growing weary. The venerable Landrum Bolling has produced a new video, New Hope for Peace: What America Must Do To End The Israel-Palestine Conflict, that looks aimed directly at the Obama White House. In it Bolling interviews Jimmy Carter, James Baker, Brent Scowcroft and Zbigniew Brzezinski, all of whom offer their advice for the current Obama efforts. There seems to be tinge of concern that the administration isn't willing to do what needs to be done. Scrowcroft says we have to change the way we have been doing things, while Brzezinski says frustration is widespread. Jimmy Carter takes the cake with the quote that became the title of this post. The message is clear - the US needs to speak clearly about Israel and apply pressure to change conditions on the ground.
All speakers agree that things will not move forward without US leadership. Most specifically they point towards opening dialog with Hamas in the belief that everyone has to be at the table. Does this video represent a sign of despiration that Obama is getting weak in the knees? Not sure, but I'd feel better if one of these old hands were whispering in Obama's ear on the subject and not Dennis Ross.
**
Read Mondoweiss here.
I'm less concerned about what Ross is trying to whisper in Obama's ear. He's heard it all before.
There was quite a bit of speculation at the time of the move about the reasons for changing Ross's job description. I think that many of the reasons Ha'aretz suggests have merit, especially on the differences Ross's book and the Obama administration policy on Iran. However, I think it's also possible that Ross was kicked upstairs because of disgruntlement expressed about National Security Advisor Jones (playing his cards too close to his vest) by the Israel Lobby, including an unnamed administration source. Since Obama can't fire Ross without giving offense, perhaps he's decided to keep his "discontented" closer. I haven't heard from any disgruntled leakers lately.
July 24, 2009 6:16 PM | Reply | Permalink
RE: "US needs to speak clearly about Israel and apply pressure to change conditions on the ground"
MY COMMENT: Judging from all of the newly constructed "Israelis only" highways in the West Bank, Israel has no intention of giving up Judea and /or Samara.
July 25, 2009 1:56 AM | Reply | Permalink
If a guy builds a home in the West Bank, from whom does he get the title for that land? Did he pay someone, or is he a homesteader in land considered to be "vacant"? Just wondering.
July 25, 2009 2:16 AM | Reply | Permalink
RE: 'The desire of leaders in Israel to occupy and colonize the land in the West Bank, that's been the key problem.'
MY COMMENT: What about the similar desires of the ZOA, AIPAC, The Israel Project, John Hagee & CUFI, Pat Robertson, Jon Voight, "Pricky Dick" Cheney, George Will, El Rusbo, Dennis Miller, Elliott Abrams, Norman Podhoretz, John Podhoretz, "Commentary Magazine" , Mort Zuckerman, Alan Dershowitz, Mort Kondracke, Fred Barnes, "The National Review", Roger Ailes & Fox News/Disiformation, Irving Kristol, William Kristol & "The Weakly (Sub)Standard", Marty "Macho Man" Peretz & "The New Republic", Abe Foxman & the ADL, Irving Moskowitz, Sheldon Adelson & "Freedom's Watch", and on, and on, and on, ad infinitum?
July 25, 2009 2:49 AM | Reply | Permalink
The question posed above by GregorZap is an important one; the answer would be an integral part of any public discussion. Who can answer it?
July 25, 2009 6:47 AM | Reply | Permalink
I'm open to correction by someone with more expertise or direct knowledge, but I believe most West Bank land used for settlements, roads or infrastructure goes through a first stage of being declared "state land" by Israeli officials.
Sometimes it's used as a military post or base before being converted for development.
A plan for its use is drawn up, after which individual properties are leased to settlers.
Some people acquire land directly -- often by just occupying it, often by buying it from Palestinians. Those purchase claims frequently end up in Israeli courts.
Sometimes an alleged deed from the 1800s or 1900s is produced; these also end up in court.
Sometimes a settlement expands by harassing neighboring Palestinians off their farmland. If the legal owners fail to farm a property for a certain number of years, it's declared vacant, and the settlement can make a claim to it.
In East Jerusalem right now, eminent domain is being used to evict Palestinians from their homes. The routine denial of building permits and revocation of residency status also opens up Arab areas for "redevelopment."
My impression is that most West Bank settlers lease their homes from the Israeli government.
July 25, 2009 12:23 PM | Reply | Permalink
My relatives living in the settlements lease the land for a period of 49 years. The government of Israel declares the land either abandoned (that is how Israel took ownership of the Shepard Hotel that they later sold to Moskowitz) or state lands that were previously "owned" by either the British or Jordanian government. A similar approach applies to just about all the land within Israel proper.
July 25, 2009 7:41 PM | Reply | Permalink
"If a guy builds a home in the West Bank, from whom does he get the title for that land?"
Titles? Titles, you want? Listen, schmuck, we don't need no farshtinkener titles, already!! So nue, so sue!
And didn't I see you in that picture of the Grand Mufti and Hitler? Are you a Nazi-at-heart?
Did I mention that Rachel Corrie ended up like a pancake, or latke? It could happen to you!
July 26, 2009 8:59 PM | Reply | Permalink