Obama's BFF Iran says any nuclear collaboration beyond NPT requires lifting sanctions

Obama's BFF Iran says any nuclear collaboration beyond NPT requires lifting sanctions. (TaZ).

Iranian parliament speaker, Ali Larijani said Iran would not cooperate with the 5+1 group (the US, UK, France, Russia, China and Germany) beyond the Non-Proliferation Treaty (NPT) unless the powers lift all sanctions on the country’s economy.

He also stated that the Iranian parliament will give its full support to the Iranian diplomatic team negotiating with the six powers, Fars news agency reported March 15.

Larijani also commented on the recent US senators’ letter on the negotiations.

He said “the letter shows how Israeli money can work its way into corrupting political behavior,” noting that the senators’ act in addressing the open letter to Iranian statesmen has brought disgrace on the US.

Earlier this week, 47 US senators addressed an open letter spearheaded by freshman senator Tom Cotton to Iranian leaders, warning them that any deal with the Obama administration on Iran’s nuclear activities will be annuled with the stroke of a pen.

“This group, in fact proved to the world that the US cannot be trusted,” Larijani said. “They created the question for all governments around the world who they are negotiating with when conducting diplomatic relations with the US.”

Iran and the 5+1 group are holding talks on Tehran's nuclear program. They have set an end of March deadline to reach a political understanding, and a July 1 deadline to strike a deal.


Iranian leaders keep saying that any deal would require the lifting of all sanctions.

John Kerry says U.S. Congress can’t change Iran nuclear deal.

John Kerry says U.S. Congress can’t change Iran nuclear deal. (Taz).

The US Secretary of State has blasted an open letter to Iran by Republican senators as “incorrect”, saying Congress cannot revoke a possible nuclear deal with Iran, Press TV reported.

John Kerry, speaking Saturday in Egypt, stressed that US President Barack Obama has the power to implement any agreement reached with Iran, despite intense opposition from Republican lawmakers in Congress.

"As far as we're concerned, Congress has no ability to change an executive agreement," Kerry told a news conference in Sharm el-Sheikh, where he was attending an economic conference.

“From our point of view, this letter is incorrect in its statements,” the top US diplomat said, adding that the American lawmakers were “wrong.”

An open letter signed last week by 47 Republican senators warned Iran that any nuclear deal may last only as long as President Obama remained in office. The move was a highly unusual intervention in US foreign policy.

Iran and the P5+1 countries – the US, Britain, France, China, Russia, and Germany – are holding negotiations to work out a final deal aimed at ending the longstanding standoff over the Islamic Republic’s nuclear program.

Kerry also said that Iran and the P5+1 have made some progress during the nuclear negotiations, but that "important gaps" remain ahead of the July 1 deadline.

At the same time, the senior US diplomat welcomed a formal religious ruling or “fatwa” by Iran’s Leader that bans nuclear proliferation. (The Invisible Fatwa).

The Leader of the Islamic Revolution, Ayatollah Seyyed Ali Khamenei, noted on Thursday that the GOP letter to Iranian officials revealed the collapse of political ethics in the US system.

President Obama has said he is "embarrassed" for the senators who signed the controversial.

"I am embarrassed for them," Obama said in an interview with VICE News, which is scheduled to be released Monday. Hmmmm........Don’t Misunderstand Khamenei’s Nuclear Fatwa.


Related: World Powers Accept Ayatollah Khamenei's Fatwa against N. Weapons as Criteria, please inform Pakistan.

Iran - Fatwa against nuclear weapons political milestone

Iran says Khamenei’s ban of nuclear weapons binding

"Israel's Staunchest Ally": 'Even if Israel doesn’t like it, Palestinians will get state.'

"Israel's Staunchest Ally": 'Even if Israel doesn't like it, Palestinians will get state.' (TOI).

American officials directly involved in the failed Israeli-Palestinian peace process over the last nine months gave a leading Israeli columnist a withering assessment of Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s handling of the negotiations, indicated that Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas has completely given up on the prospect of a negotiated solution, and warned Israel that the Palestinians will achieve statehood come what may — either via international organizations or through violence.

Speaking on condition of anonymity to Nahum Barnea, a prominent columnist from Israel’s best-selling daily Yedioth Aharonoth, the officials highlighted Netanyahu’s ongoing settlement construction as the issue “largely to blame” for the failure of Secretary of State John Kerry’s July 2013-April 2014 effort to broker a permanent peace accord.

They made plain that US President Barack Obama had been prepared to release spy-for-Israel Jonathan Pollard to salvage the talks. And they warned that “the world will not keep tolerating the Israeli occupation.”

One bitter American official told Barnea, “I guess we need another intifada to create the circumstances that would allow progress.”

A third intifada, the Americans made clear, “would be a tragedy. The Jewish people are supposed to be smart; it is true that they’re also considered a stubborn nation. You’re supposed to know how to read the map: In the 21st century, the world will not keep tolerating the Israeli occupation. The occupation threatens Israel’s status in the world and threatens Israel as a Jewish state.”Read the full story here.

Video - Congressman Gohmert "Our Secretary Of State Has Effectively CURSED ISRAEL!"

Video - Sen. Ted Cruz Calls for Secretary Kerry's Resignation, after 'Apartheid state' remarks.

McCain: Obama administration failing to carry “a big stick,”

McCain: Obama administration failing to carry “a big stick,” HT: TheHill.

Sen. John McCain (R-Ariz.) on Tuesday accused Secretary of State John Kerry of presiding over a “trifecta” of foreign policy disasters.

McCain lambasted his former Senate colleague at a hearing in which Kerry faced wide-ranging criticism about the administration’s handling of crises in the Middle East and Ukraine.
“I think you’re about to hit the trifecta,” McCain declared.

“Geneva II [a Syrian peace meeting] was a total collapse, as I predicted to you that it would be. ... The Israeli-Palestinian talks, even though you may drag them out for a while, are finished,” McCain said. “And I predict to you that, even though we gave the Iranians the right to enrich, which is unbelievable, that those talks will collapse too.”

Kerry hit back: “It’s interesting that you declare it dead, but the Israelis and the Palestinians don’t declare it dead,” Kerry said of the Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

“We’ll see,” McCain interrupted.
“Well, yeah, we will see,” Kerry shot back.
“It has stopped. It has stopped. Recognize reality,” McCain retorted.

When McCain said the administration was failing to carry “a big stick,” as President Teddy Roosevelt famously advised, Kerry punched back, “Your friend Teddy Roosevelt also said that the credit belongs to the people who are in the arena that are trying to get things done, and we’re trying to get something done.”

The secretary of State provoked laughter from the packed audience when he began his response to McCain’s long list of grievances by saying calmly, “Let me begin with the place that you began, with your premature judgment about the failure of, uh, everything.”

The tough talk from McCain, a fellow Vietnam War veteran whom Kerry considered asking to be his vice presidential running mate, underscored the difficulties the former senator and 2004 Democratic presidential candidate is now enduring.

Kerry is also taking friendly fire from Democrats. With the Middle East talks teetering on collapse last week, administration officials anonymously sniped at him to the press.

President Obama felt compelled to weigh in, reportedly saying to his national security team, “I see a lot of senior officials quoted about Kerry and Middle East peace, but I’m the most senior official, and I have nothing but admiration for how John has handled this.”Hmmm......As Kerry said on day One as Sec of State: "I will implement Pres Obama's vision of the world".....he owns it.Read the full story here.

Kerry suggests Israeli housing announcement triggered impasse.

Kerry suggests Israeli housing announcement triggered impasse.(Taz).

U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry suggested on Tuesday that Israel's announcement of plans to build about 700 housing units in East Jerusalem was the proximate cause for the near collapse of its peace talks with the Palestinians, Reuters reported.

However, State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki said Kerry was not seeking to blame Israel for the impasse in the talks, which appear close to breaking down ahead of the April 29 date by which Kerry had hoped to reach a peace agreement.

Any hint that the United States was blaming Israel was likely to upset Israeli officials. Both sides are sensitive to suggestions that they are at fault for the talks unraveling and they typically try to shift responsibility to the other side.

Testifying before Congress, Kerry said both sides had taken "unhelpful" steps in recent days and that he hoped they would find a way to resume serious negotiations, noting that they held a lengthy meeting on Monday.

Among the steps were Israel's failure to release a fourth batch of Palestinian prisoners as promised, its announcement of tenders to build 708 new housing units in East Jerusalem, which the Palestinians want as the capital of a Palestinian state, and the Palestinians signing 15 international agreements, including the Geneva Conventions on the conduct of war, last week.

"Both sides, whether advertently or inadvertently wound up in positions where things happened that were unhelpful," Kerry told the Senate Foreign Relations Committee.

"Unfortunately, the (Palestinian) prisoners weren't released on the Saturday *they were supposed to be released, (*LIE) and - and so day (one) went by, day two went by, day three went by, and then in the afternoon, when they were about to maybe get there, 700 settlement units were announced in Jerusalem, and poof, that was sort of the moment," he said.

"My hope is the parties will find a way back. We're working with them to try to do so, but they have to make that fundamental decision, and I hope they will," he said.

"The ... bitter irony is that at this particular moment, this fight is over process, it's not over the substance of the final status agreement, it's over how do you get to the discussion of the final status agreement," Kerry said.

The main issues in the conflict are borders, security, the fate of Palestinian refugees and the status of Jerusalem.

Kerry last week scrapped plans to visit Jerusalem for talks with the parties and said he was returning home for a "reality check" on what might be possible, saying it could not be an open-ended process. He made the point more baldly on Tuesday.

"There are limits to the time the president and I ... can commit to this, given the rest of the agenda, if they're not prepared to commit to actually be there in a serious way," he said. "So, we'll see what happens in the next days."Hmmm.....The good old 'Blame the Jews'

Related:

Israel Radio narrative of 4th release overlooks Kerry lie (release of Israeli Arab terrorists)

Why Did Kerry Lie About Israeli Blame?

Video - Arafat's Bodyguard: He Used to Lie When Denouncing Bombings in Israel

Israel Radio narrative of 4th release overlooks Kerry lie (release of Israeli Arab terrorists)

Israel Radio narrative of 4th release overlooks Kerry lie (release of Israeli Arab terrorists). HT: Imra.Dr. Aaron Lerner Date: 4 April 2014

Fact: Israel never agreed to releasing pre-Oslo Israeli Arab terrorists as part of the 4th round of releases and Secretary of State John Kerry misled the Palestinians and told them that Israel had agreed to release them.

This is not something told to reporters by tertiary sources.

It isn't even something told on background not for attribution.

It is something that senior Israeli ministers have said for attribution. And they have said this in interviews broadcast on Israel Radio over the past week.

And yet. this morning, Israel Radio diplomatic correspondent, Chico Menashe, declined to mention this critical fact in his long report this morning on Israel Radio Reshet Bet's morning news magazine. Instead he opted for a bizarre narrative that the United States was being too generous to Israel and that this created a problem.

Again: the 4th release as far as the Palestinians are concerned includes the Israeli Arabs. And this wasn't going to happen in a vacuum.

PM Netanyahu made this clear from the start.

This is a mess caused by Secretary of State Kerry's decision to apparently make the assumption that he could easily force PM Netanyahu to release the Israeli Arabs.

But PM Netanyahu was absolutely honest in explaining that it would take very special and unique circumstances to make it possible for the Cabinet to approve the release of the Israeli Arab terrorists.

When Chico Menashe opts not to mention this critical fact he fails to serve his audience.

Dr. Aaron Lerner, Director IMRA (Independent Media Review & Analysis) (Mail POB 982 Kfar Sava) Tel 972-9-7604719/Fax 972-3-7255730

Palestinian Authority's only reason for peace negotiations with Israel is to bring about the release of prisoners.

Palestinian Authority's only reason for peace negotiations with Israel is to bring about the release of prisoners.HT: Palwatch.

Fatah spokesman: 

We "blackmailed" Israel

 to release the prisoners

PA's threat to have Israel prosecuted

at the International Criminal Court
is "a weapon... an important card...

We've been waving it around for two years"

Senior PA leader Nabil Shaath:

"Due to the prisoners we haven't stopped negotiations"

by Itamar Marcus and Nan Jacques Zilberdik

The Palestinian Authority's only reason for agreeing to and continuing the peace negotiations with Israel is to bring about the release of prisoners, Fatah's spokesman Ahmad Assaf has indicated. Stating that the PA "blackmailed" Israel to release the prisoners, Assaf explained that by virtue of the PA's membership in the UN, the PA is able to threaten Israel with taking it to the International Criminal Court. Assaf maintains that to prevent the PA from doing so, Israel agreed to release 104 prisoners, most of them serving life sentences for murder.

Senior PA leader Nabil Shaath explained already in November and again in December 2013, that the reason the PA has not "stopped negotiations," is because the PA wants to first fulfill its goal of having all the prisoners Israel arrested before the Oslo Accords released.

Israel agreed to release the 104 terrorists from prison because it was the Palestinian Authority's precondition for starting negotiations at all. But Fatah's spokesman calling the release of the prisoners "blackmail," together with Shaath's statement that they are just waiting for the prisoners to be released before they stop the negotiations, indicates that for the PA, the current round of peace talks may have been a charade.

Israel has already released 78 of the prisoners, and has not yet announced if it will release the remaining 26.

Fatah's spokesman further elaborated that the threat to go to the International Court is "a weapon that's in our pocket... an important card... We've been waving it around for two years now":

Fatah spokesman Ahmad Assaf:  "Our membership in the UN is also a weapon. And that's an important card. It's a weapon that's in our pocket. I didn't use it on day one. I didn't say, as soon as I got membership in the UN, that I want to go to the International Criminal Court - no. We've been waving it around for two years now: We've obtained the release of the prisoners, we blackmailed [Israel], that is, in quotation marks, and we've taken important positions because we have a card that we're waving around."


[Official PA TV, March 19, 2014] Click to view

Nabil Shaath, Fatah MP and Central Committee member and Commissioner of International Relations stated in November 2013 that "due to the prisoners (of whom only half have been released) [parentheses in source], we haven't stopped negotiations and haven't petitioned the UN." [Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Nov. 30, 2013]

He reiterated this again a second time, the official PA daily reported:

"Shaath emphasized that the leadership did not move forward on joining international organizations [until now] for one reason - which is ensuring the release of the remaining veteran prisoners who were arrested by Israel before the Oslo Accords, and that the leadership is awaiting their release." 

[Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, Dec. 2, 2013]

Click to see more statements by PA and Fatah leaders expressing their view on the peace talks.

"Israel's Stauchest Ally" - John Kerry says his sister used to teach in Iran before Islamic Revolution.

"Israel's Stauchest Ally" - John Kerry says his sister used to teach in Iran before Islamic Revolution.(Taz).

The US Secretary of State John Kerry has said he was already exposed to Iranian culture through his sister who used to live and teach in Iran before the 1979 Islamic Revolution, IRNA reported.

Speaking to VOA, Kerry also admired his son-in-law who is of Iranian origin.

This is the first time ever the US state secretary publicly talks about Iranian origin of his son-in-law and his sister's experience in Iran.

Kerry expressed hope that Iran and the United States could solve their differences and find a settlement to the dispute over Tehran's nuclear activities.

When asked to comment about a Fatwa issued by Supreme Leader of Islamic Revolution Ayatollah Ali Khamenei banning the production and use of nuclear weapons, Kerry said he shows a lot of respect for this Fatwa as it is a religious message and is highly respected by people.

Kerry said that he and the US President Barack Obama welcome such a Fatwa.(*Non Existent).

He said that Iran is entitled to pursue its nuclear program for peaceful purposes, but he went on to say that such a program needs to be transparent and under international regulations as it is normal for nuclear programs of other countries.

(*Non Existent).

Don’t Misunderstand Khamenei’s Nuclear Fatwa.

Related:  World Powers Accept Ayatollah Khamenei's Fatwa against N. Weapons as Criteria, please inform Pakistan.

Iran - Fatwa against nuclear weapons political milestone

Iran says Khamenei’s ban of nuclear weapons binding

Hmmm.......Fatwas are issued in response to specific circumstances and can be altered in response to changing conditions. Ayatollah Khomeini modified his position on a number of issues during his lifetime—for instance, on taxes, military conscription, women’s suffrage, and monarchy as a form of government. Thus nothing would prevent Khamenei from modifying or supplanting his nuclear fatwa should circumstances dictate a change in policy.
Shiite tradition permits deception and dissimulation in matters of life and death, and when such tactics serve the interests of the Islamic umma (community).The context surrounding the original, rather expansive, nuclear fatwa and subsequent formulations that only prohibit the use of nuclear weaponsdemonstrates an important point: fatwas arise in response to specific circumstances and can be amended or reversed as circumstances change. Khamenei’s original fatwa was probably issued to deflect international pressure following the revelations regarding the Natanz centrifuge enrichment plant, and in response to concerns that after invading Iraq, the United States might invade Iran. Fatwas are not immutable, and no religious principle would prevent Khamenei from modifying or supplanting his initial fatwa if circumstances were to change.

Video - Former PA Security Chief Mohammed Dahlan: Mahmoud Abbas is a Catastrophe; Negotiations Are "One Big Lie"

Abbas: Jewish history is a "delusional myth"

Abbas: Jewish history is a "delusional myth".HT: Palwatch.

PMW op-ed in Jerusalem Post:
Abbas: Jewish history is a "delusional myth"

"Arafat's recognition of Israel in 1993 [was] a meaningless ornament to a deceptive peace process that is cited regularly by the PA to create a facade of sincerity."

Mahmoud Abbas' adamant rejection of Israel as a Jewish state is more than semantics: It is tied to his mocking Jewish history in Jerusalem as Israel's "delusional myth" and the PA schoolbook's teaching that "Zionist gangs stole Palestine... and created the so-called state of Israel."

The following is PMW's op-ed published today as Mahmoud Abbas is meeting with President Obama in Washington.

Why Abbas thinks Jewish state is a 'delusional myth'By Itamar Marcus

Netanyahu's demand and the PA's refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state are clearly not just a quibble over semantics.

A major obstacle blocking progress toward an agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority is Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu's demand and PA President Mahmoud Abbas's refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. The Jerusalem Post reported this week that US Secretary of State John Kerry thinks Israel's demand is a mistake. The question is: Why are both sides so concerned about that which is already accepted internationally? As early as 1917, the Balfour Declaration supported the establishment of "a national home for the Jewish people."

In 1922, the League of Nations confirmed the British Mandate to establish "a Jewish national home," and UN resolution 181 in 1947 recommended the establishment of "a Jewish state." Since Israel's founding followed directly upon this international process anticipating a Jewish state, why, so many years later, does Israel demand and the PA refuse to restate the obvious? A recent declaration by Abbas sheds light on why PA recognition is essential for authentic peace and why the PA president refuses to grant it. In a speech in Morocco, Abbas defined Jewish history in Jerusalem as a "delusional myth" and claimed that Israel is trying to invent a Jewish history "by brute force." (Official PA TV, January 17, 2014).

Abbas has a long tradition of denying Jewish history. In another talk he described Jewish history in Jerusalem as "illusions and legends" and referred to the Jewish Temple in Jerusalem as the "alleged Temple," a term the PA uses to deny that it ever existed. (Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, August 22, 2012).

Abbas's refusal to recognize the Jewish state is not merely his personal vendetta, but, reflects this fundamental element of PA policy to deny Jewish history - especially in Jerusalem.

On numerous occasions when archeological finds with Jewish symbols and Hebrew texts were uncovered that illustrate aspects of Jewish history in Israel, the PA hastened to tell Palestinians that Israel invented the story, distorted it or even planted the finds. When Israeli archeologists last year displayed gold artifacts with Jewish symbols, such as a menorah and a shofar, found 50 meters from the Western Wall in Jerusalem, former PA prime minister Ahmed Qurei immediately denied its authenticity on official PA TV: "I think all this is a forgery, forgery of the truth. It's all an attempt to make claims. They did not find anything." (Official PA TV, September 11, 2013).

What must therefore be understood is that the PA's refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state is not a mere technicality, but part of an overarching policy of denying thousands of years of Jewish history in Israel, and thereby denying Israel's right to exist. And although in the Oslo Accords in 1993 the PLO recognized the existence of Israel, the PA differentiates between recognizing that Israel exists and recognizing Israel's right to exist.

The PA's ambassador to India, Adli Sadeq, explained that Israelis who believe the PA recognizes Israel's right to exist are deluding themselves: "[Israelis] fool themselves, assuming that Fatah accepts them and recognizes the right of their state to exist... There are no two Palestinians who disagree over the fact that Israel exists, and recognition of it is restating the obvious. But recognition of its right to exist is something else, different from recognition of its existence." (Al-Hayat Al-Jadida, November 26, 2011).

Palestinian children are also educated to distinguish between Israel's existence and right to exist, as an official PA schoolbook teaches: "Palestine's war [in 1948] ended with a catastrophe that is unprecedented in history, when the Zionist gangs stole Palestine... and established the so-called State of Israel." (Arabic Language, Analysis, Literature and Criticism, grade 12, published by the PA Ministry of Education).

And PA TV teaches 8-year-olds that all of Israel is "occupied land" since 1948 - and this situation is only temporary: "We will never forget that we have land that was occupied in 1948 which will return to us one day." (Official PA TV, February 23, 2013).

Abbas's denial of Jewish history and refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state are the ideological foundations for the PA teachings that the existence of the State of Israel constitutes a theft by "Zionist gangs" and that Israel's existence is temporary. This is not PLO rhetoric from the pre-Oslo days. This is current PA education and indoctrination and remains a most severe impediment to a genuine peace process.

Netanyahu's demand and the PA's refusal to recognize Israel as a Jewish state are clearly not just a quibble over semantics, and Netanyahu's demand is in fact a minimalist request. Any PA recognition - if it is to impact at all on peace - must include recognition that Israel is the continuation of thousands of years of Jewish history and therefore Israel has a right to exist. Furthermore, in order for these declarations to be more than mere embellishments to yet another insincere agreement, they must be immediately integrated into PA children's education and public discourse. Without this, Abbas' recognition of the Jewish state would be like Arafat's recognition of Israel in 1993: a meaningless ornament to a deceptive peace process that is cited regularly by the PA to create a facade of sincerity.

PA public recognition and education of its citizens to see Israel as a Jewish state with a history and right to exist are absolute necessities if there is ever to be a Palestinian population that accepts Israel as a neighbor and truly seeks peace. For now, while Abbas' recognition on the diplomatic level would certainly not be enough to affect this change, it is nonetheless a necessary first step in the right direction.

"Israel's Staunchest Ally" pres Obama wades into Palestine-Israel talks.

"Israel's Staunchest Ally" pres Obama wades into Palestine-Israel talks.(AJ).

When President Barack Obama meets Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas on Monday, it will be the next in a string of meetings held in the US capital to develop a "framework" for peace negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians.

Supporters on both sides have been making their case in the court of public opinion, with the American Israel Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC) policy conference in early March celebrating the "special relationship" between the US and Israel, and critics only a few days later suggesting this relationship receives too much favour.

At AIPAC, US Secretary of State John Kerry, whose visit was meant to bolster support for the framework agreement, said he had no illusions about the state of negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian leaders. "This isn't about me," he said of his efforts. "This is about the dreams of Israelis and the dignity of Palestinians."

Obama, who had attended previous AIPAC conferences but was noticeably absent at this year's event, recently expressed frustration with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, and spoke of the consequences should Netanyahu not engage more fully in the process.

"If Palestinians come to believe that the possibility of a contiguous sovereign Palestinian state is no longer within reach," Obama said, "then [the US'] ability to manage the international fallout is going to be limited."

Refusing to be pressured, Netanyahu told Obama during their Oval Office meeting, "Israel has been doing its part, and I regret to say that the Palestinians haven't."

In a closing session Philip Giraldi, a former CIA counter-terrorism specialist, called for an approach to Israel more in keeping with US relations with other nations in the region.

"Nothing relating to Israel is quite like the US interaction with other countries," Giraldi said. "Israel interferes with American elections. It has corrupted our Congress and government members, insults and ridicules John Kerry, and its intelligence officers regularly provide inaccurate briefings for members of Congress on Capitol Hill."

Jacobson not only disputed such allegations, but said they were offensive and damaging.

"These kinds of accusations against Israel are pure fantasy and seem to stem from some kind of malice or bias," he said. Support for Israel in the US is not because of some conspiratorial activity but because of the continuing, overwhelming support of the American people for America's lone democratic ally in the Middle East."Read the full story here.

Video - Obama's 'Peace partners' - Fatah Central Committee Member Abbas Zaki: "Allah Will Gather the Israelis So We Can Kill Them."

American State Dept. Spokesman Psaki: “Palestinians need not recognize the Jewish state”

American State Dept. Spokesman Psaki: “Palestinians need not recognize the Jewish state”(JO).

Despite Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s continued requests of the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state within the framework of negotiations for peace, the American State Department spokeswoman Jen Psaki reportedly stated in an interview with the “Al-Quds” newspaper that the Palestinians need not heed Netanyahu’s request.

The spokeswoman for the American State Department, Jen Psaki, stated in an interview last night (Saturday) with the “Al-Quds” newspaper that the Palestinians do not need to recognize Israel as Jewish state as part of the peace agreement if they do not wish to do so.

In her statements to the Palestinian daily newspaper, Psaki stated that, “There is no need for the Palestinians to recognize Israel as a Jewish state. The American stance is clear in that it recognizes Israel as a Jewish state, but there is no need for the Palestinians to recognize it as such in a final agreement”.

Only yesterday the Chairman of the Palestinian Authority, Abu Mazen, stated that “there is not a chance” that he and the Palestinian nation will recognize Israel as a Jewish state. He continued to explain the statement by presenting historical examples, like the Israeli peace with Jordan and Egypt, which did not recognize Israel as a Jewish state, but still signed a peace agreement with the country. Psaki responded to those comments stating, “The relations between Israel and the Palestinians differ from Israel’s relations with the surrounding Arab nations”.

Psaki threw out this weekend’s reports in “Al-Quds” that the sides had already been presented with an initial copy of the framework agreement drafted by Secretary of State John Kerry.Hmmmm........."I will stand with my Muslim brothers".Read the full story here.

Reading the Obama Interview

Reading the Obama Interview HT: MiddleEastForum. by Alexander H. Joffe
                                                          The Times of Israel March 3, 2014.

Bloomberg columnist Jeffrey Goldberg's interview with President Obama on the eve of his meeting with Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu is highly significant, verging on a turning point in US-Israeli relations.

Several points emerge from the interview.

First is the implied threat that if current peace negotiations with the Palestinians fail, the US will be unable – read unwilling – to defend Israel. Moreover, it is up to the Palestinians to judge: "If Palestinians come to believe that the possibility of a contiguous sovereign Palestinian state is no longer within reach, then our ability to manage the international fallout is going to be limited."

Declaring "our ability to manage the international fallout is going to be limited" is not accidental; indeed, Obama repeats it twice.

Obama's statement that "What we also know is that Israel has become more isolated internationally" is not simply a prediction but a prescription. Similar statements by Secretary of State John Kerry in recent months have given European governments and industry the license to begin quietly exploring ways to boycott Israeli industries and corporations, arguably as part of an American strategy to pressure Israel during negotiations. A statement by the US president will be paradigmatic. This alone is a momentous policy shift.

Part of the rationale for pressuring Israel is spelled out, pursuit of a "potential realignment of interests in the region," the nature of which is unclear, perhaps given that half the Arab states are engaged in civil war. But the key obstacle is: "The only reason that that potential realignment is not, and potential cooperation is not, more explicit is because of the Palestinian issue." That is to say, Israel.

But the goals behind the interview, published during the annual AIPAC convention in Washington, are also significant and provide additional clarity regarding the administration's, and the president's, attitudes towards Israel and much more.

Superficially the president's carefully chosen words appear intended to influence Netanyahu himself. But the mix of praise and condescension (Netanyahu is "smart," "tough", and a "great communicator" but "If not now, when? And if not you, Mr. Prime Minister, then who?") seems more likely to simply humiliate Netanyahu, to degrade him publicly. Either Obama is tone deaf or simply does not care. Both may be the case.

The interview may also appear aimed at the Israeli public, a last ditch call to leave the West Bank and make peace before it is impossible. There is of course a strong case to be made here. But Obama shows no awareness or even interest in Israeli politics, the need or the methods to build the consensus necessary for such a dramatic move.

For Netanyahu it would mean alienating the entire Israel right and constructing a new coalition out of weak components, as well as convincing the Israeli public that this is necessary and wise and not caving to an American diktat. Obama's statement that if Netanyahu were "strong enough that if he decided this was the right thing to do for Israel, that he could do it" defies reality. It is not up to Netanyahu to "decide" then "do" but rather to lead and persuade.

This is characteristic of Obama's larger mindset – he sees himself and his policies as wise, necessary and above politics. He has, after all, a pen and a phone. In the domestic arena Republican opposition and the normal give and take of democratic politics are depicted as betrayal and heresy. His opponents are troglodytes and wreckers who find themselves, like Netanyahu, the victim of personal vilification as well as the occasional IRS audit.

Netanyahu is obviously not a Republican, but he has been characterized in the same terms and the same breath as the president's other political opponents. Of course, this petty mindset has now collided with that of a fully professional dictator, Vladimir Putin, a far more obstinate foe than Netanyahu, one whom Obama cannot afford to call names.

But if Obama's remarks are not aimed at Netanyahu himself or Israel, then who? The answer is specifically non-religious American Jews and the American Left. One clue is Obama's use of the phrase "how Israel survives as a democracy and a Jewish state" juxtaposed with "permanent occupation of the West Bank." This is the paramount concern to non-religious American Jews. For the American Left the concern is "U.S. involvement" which, regarding Syria, "would have had the third, or, if you count Libya, the fourth war in a Muslim country in the span of a decade."

Stoking resentments and calling out enemies are this administration's stock and trade. Netanyahu's humiliations at the hands of this administration are unique – left alone while the president goes to dinner with his family, denied photo opportunities, and subjected to a stream of hostile comments and leaks, including the compromise of a key cyberwarfare program aimed at Iran, Stuxnet. So too is his vilification by the captive American press and the network of party organizations (such as the New American Foundation, J Street and others), which have characterized him as a "settler," an opponent of a Palestinian state, and a warmonger on Iran. One need not be an ally of Netanyahu to recognize these as misrepresentations.

On the one hand these are designed to separate American Jews from their traditional organizations, above all AIPAC. By continually characterizing AIPAC as a right wing, Republican organization rather than a centrist, non-partisan one, and by loudly calling opposition to the administration's opening to Iran as right-wing war-mongering (above all Netanyahu's), the goal has been to isolate Jewish support from anything except the new party line and its approved organs. As Lee Smith points out in Tablet, AIPAC was played and then humiliated by the administration for the purpose of demonstrating the organization's weakness. Confused by this strategy of politicizing support for Israel and subjugating it to a domestic agenda, AIPAC fell into the trap.

More sinisterly, this holds out the threat of labeling Israel and any of its supporters as right-wing war-mongerers. This was the view of the Democratic Party's left wing before and during the Iraq War. Demonizing anything besides the Obama line on Israel may be an effective way of keeping Jewish opposition in line.

The corollary goal is to break American Jewish power, real and perceived, and to harness what remains to the Democratic Party and the administration. The operative theory appears to be the inverse of James Baker's legendary remark, "fuck the Jews, they don't vote for us anyway." American Jews will vote Democrat regardless, but Israel's position has always been exceptional in American politics. This is to be ended.

Syria, Libya, and now Ukraine have shown that the international scene erupts quickly to disrupt domestic agendas. But it is a reasonable prediction that these and other fiascos will prompt Obama to redouble pressure on Israel, particularly by unleashing Europeans, not for the sake of a rare policy success – which Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas has repeatedly assured will not be forthcoming. It will be to punish a vassal state and a domestic minority that refuse to comply fully and cheerfully.

Alex Joffe is a historian and archaeologist. He is a Shillman-Ginsburg Fellow of the Middle East Forum.

receive the latest by email: subscribe to the free mef mailing listThis text may be reposted or forwarded so long as it is presented as an integral whole with complete and accurate information provided about its author, date, place of publication, and original URL.

Video - 'Israel's Staunchest Ally' pres Obama gets lecture on peace talks from Netanyahu in White House meeting.

Video - 'Israel's Staunchest Ally' pres Obama gets lecture on peace talks from Netanyahu in White House meeting. HT: Jpost.

“Israel has been doing its part, and I regret to say that the Palestinians haven’t,” Netanyahu said to Obama, in front of the press. “The people of Israel know that it’s the case.”

“What we want is peace – not a piece of paper,” he said.

Netanyahu called for a “real peace... based on mutual recognition,” and chided his Palestinian counterparts for promoting “incessant violence” against the Jewish state.

“Israel, the Jewish state, is the realization of the Jewish people’s right to self-determination,” Netanyahu said. “I think it’s about time they recognized a nation state for the Jewish people. We’ve only been here for about 4,000 years.”

Netanyahu is the first Israeli prime minister to formally call on the Palestinians to recognize Israel as the Jewish homeland – what he has called the “minimal requirement” for peace.

“The only peace that will endure is a peace that we can defend,” he added.

US Secretary of State John Kerry and Vice President Joe Biden stood in the room as the two leaders spoke. Netanyahu thanked Kerry for his efforts over the past several months, which he called “tireless.”

“When I say tireless,” he quipped, “I mean tireless.”Read the full story here.

"Israel's Staunchest Ally" pres Obama to meet Palestinian leader Abbas on March 17.

"Israel's Staunchest Ally" pres Obama to meet Palestinian leader Abbas on March 17.(Dunyanews).

President Barack Obama will meet Mahmud Abbas on March 17, stepping up Washington's efforts to convince the Palestinian leader to embrace the US vision of a peace deal with Israel.

The meeting will come two weeks after Obama's planned encounter with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on Monday, which will also take place at the White House.

"The President looks forward to reviewing with President Abbas the progress in the Israeli-Palestinian negotiations," White House spokesman Jay Carney said in a statement.

"They will also discuss our continuing effort to work cooperatively to strengthen the institutions that can support the establishment of a Palestinian state."

US Secretary of State John Kerry, who has been mounting an exhaustive diplomatic push, said Wednesday that his quest to seal a full Middle East peace deal will slip beyond an April deadline.
Kerry first hopes to convince both sides to agree a framework to guide the talks.

"Then we get into the final negotiations. I don't think anybody would worry if there's another nine months, or whatever it's going to be... But that's not defined yet," Kerry said in a roundtable discussion with a small group of news organizations, including AFP.

Kerry coaxed the two sides back to the negotiating table in late July, after Obama's initial drive to secure a peace deal foundered in his first term.

Despite Kerry's intense attention, the talks have shown little sign of progress, with each side blaming the other for the stalemate.

But Kerry insisted that both parties were still "in the middle" of the talks. "I laugh at people who say it's not going anywhere. They don't know because we're not talking about where it's at. They have no clue where our negotiations are and whether they could go anywhere."

A Palestinian official told AFP however last week that Kerry's ideas could not be the basis of any framework.

Iran Parliament Speaker: Israel is a ‘Malign Tumor’.

Iran Parliament Speaker: Israel is a ‘Malign Tumor’.HT: Algemeiner.

As Iranian Foreign Minister Mohammad Javad Zarif was in Vienna on Wednesday working to normalize the Islamic Republic’s relations with world powers, Ali Larijani, Speaker of the Iranian Parliament, railed against Israel, calling the Jewish State a “malign tumor,” according to semi-official Iranian state news agency Mehr.

Speaking on the sidelines of a Tehran meeting of the Organization for Islamic Cooperation Inter-Parliamentary Union, Larijani said that Iran had close ties with Israel under the Shah’s regime, before 1979, but, after the Islamic Revolution, the relationship was ended in favor of deeper relations with Muslim countries.

Today, he said, “The West is working to save the Zionist regime as a malign tumor, while the regime has been weaker than ever now.”

“He believed the confrontation between Israel and Palestine was not a bilateral conflict, but it was a confrontation between the Zionist regime and the world of Islam,” Mehr reported, citing Larijani as saying, “Israel takes the benefits of silence by the Muslim countries and I warn on this.”

He also proposed that a meeting of Iran’s special committee for Palestinians be held under the auspices of the “Palestine Authority,” since “it would provide courage to people inside.”

The news agency quoted Salah al-Zewawi, the PA’s ambassador to Iran, as saying about Israel, “The Zionist regime is doomed and we need Syria to continue our battle.”