Leaving to one side the return to office of the Iranian President - and the fall out from that, both internally and prospectively externally - the Israel PM's address to his nation last night, billed as a major one, hasn't really thrown up anything new. Lots of words, which at first blush might be seen as somewhat positive, but on closer analysis are really duds!
Reactions? Haaretzs' Akiva Eldar writes:
"The prime minister's speech last night returned the Middle East to the days of George W. Bush's "axis of evil." Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a patriarchal, colonialist address in the best neoconservative tradition: The Arabs are the bad guys, or at best ungrateful terrorists; the Jews, of course, are the good guys, rational people who need to raise and care for their children. In the West Bank settlement of Itamar, they're even building a nursery school.
No empathy for the refugees from Jaffa who lost their entire world, not a word for the Muslim connection to Jerusalem neither a fragment of a quote from the Koran, nor a line of Arabic poetry."
And:
"It's hard to believe that a single Palestinian leader will be found who will buy the defective merchandise Netanyahu presented last night."
The Guardian's take?
"Netanyahu's message was mixed. On the one hand, he finally mentioned the prospect of a Palestinian state, although he said that could come only under strict conditions. On the other hand, he refused to meet US demands for a halt to settlement activity and insisted Palestinians must accept Israel as a Jewish state if a deal was to be achieved.
His words left some on both sides frustrated and still may not have done enough to prevent Israel sliding towards a serious diplomatic confrontation with Washington. "Netanyahu did not make any tangible concessions in his speech, nor pose any threat to his coalition," wrote Aluf Benn, a correspondent with the Ha'aretz newspaper."
Finally, the TimesOnLine [from its Middle East site]:
"Binyamin Netanyahu threw down the gauntlet to the US last night, grudgingly agreeing to a limited Palestinian state that would be demilitarised and not in control of its airspace or borders.
The hawkish Prime Minister insisted that Israel would never give up a united Jerusalem as its capital, and said that established Jewish settlements in the West Bank would continue to expand — despite explicit objections from Washington."
Reactions? Haaretzs' Akiva Eldar writes:
"The prime minister's speech last night returned the Middle East to the days of George W. Bush's "axis of evil." Benjamin Netanyahu delivered a patriarchal, colonialist address in the best neoconservative tradition: The Arabs are the bad guys, or at best ungrateful terrorists; the Jews, of course, are the good guys, rational people who need to raise and care for their children. In the West Bank settlement of Itamar, they're even building a nursery school.
No empathy for the refugees from Jaffa who lost their entire world, not a word for the Muslim connection to Jerusalem neither a fragment of a quote from the Koran, nor a line of Arabic poetry."
And:
"It's hard to believe that a single Palestinian leader will be found who will buy the defective merchandise Netanyahu presented last night."
The Guardian's take?
"Netanyahu's message was mixed. On the one hand, he finally mentioned the prospect of a Palestinian state, although he said that could come only under strict conditions. On the other hand, he refused to meet US demands for a halt to settlement activity and insisted Palestinians must accept Israel as a Jewish state if a deal was to be achieved.
His words left some on both sides frustrated and still may not have done enough to prevent Israel sliding towards a serious diplomatic confrontation with Washington. "Netanyahu did not make any tangible concessions in his speech, nor pose any threat to his coalition," wrote Aluf Benn, a correspondent with the Ha'aretz newspaper."
Finally, the TimesOnLine [from its Middle East site]:
"Binyamin Netanyahu threw down the gauntlet to the US last night, grudgingly agreeing to a limited Palestinian state that would be demilitarised and not in control of its airspace or borders.
The hawkish Prime Minister insisted that Israel would never give up a united Jerusalem as its capital, and said that established Jewish settlements in the West Bank would continue to expand — despite explicit objections from Washington."
Comments