iPhone app iPad app Android phone app Android tablet app More

Clinton Moderates Settlements Statement After Palestinian Anger

ROBERT BURNS   11/ 2/09 09:32 PM ET   AP

Clinton

MARRAKECH, Morocco — Trying to mute Arab criticism that the Obama administration had retreated from its tough stance on Israeli settlements, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Monday softened her praise for Israel's offer to restrain new housing in Palestinian areas.

While Israel was moving in the right direction in its offer to restrict but not stop the settlements, Clinton said, its offer "falls far short" of U.S. expectations.

Clinton said her earlier praise of Israel's offer, during a stop in Jerusalem, had been intended as "positive reinforcement." But her comment drew widespread criticism from Persian Gulf ministers who interpreted it as a U.S drawback on settlements, which have been the main obstacle to a resumption of Israeli-Palestinian peace talks.

In a sign of U.S. eagerness to calm Arab concerns, Clinton is extending her trip by one day to fly to Cairo to meet with President Hosni Mubarak on Wednesday, her staff announced. She had been scheduled to return to Washington on Tuesday.

Clinton's comments in Jerusalem on Saturday appeared to reflect a realization within the Obama administration that Netanyahu's government will not accept a full-on settlement freeze and that a partial halt may be the best lesser option. Her appeal on Saturday seemed designed to make the Israeli position more palatable to the Palestinians and Arab states.

Clinton had traveled to the region only reluctantly, concerned her visit might be seen as a failure, according to several U.S. officials. She agreed to meet Israeli and Palestinian leaders after pressure from the White House, according to the officials, who spoke on condition of anonymity to discuss internal administration thinking.

During a photo-taking session Monday with her Moroccan counterpart, Clinton was asked by a reporter about the Arab reaction, and she responded by reading from a written statement that appeared designed to counter the skepticism about the Obama administration's views on settlements.

"Successive American administrations of both parties have opposed Israel's settlement policy," she said. "That is absolutely a fact, and the Obama administration's position on settlements is clear, unequivocal and it has not changed. As the president has said on many occasions, the United States does not accept the legitimacy of continued Israeli settlements."

Clinton's tweaking of her earlier remarks appeared to satisfy at least some of the Morocco meeting attendees. Palestinian Foreign Minister Riad Malki said Monday that "we have heard her say something completely different from that statement in line with previous statements, so we are happy that such a position was highlighted and brought back to the right line and right now we will see how things will go."

Malki added that "we completely appreciate the sincere efforts made by President Barack Obama and his team to take this issue as a top priority and to try to deal with it from day one."

In her recalibrated comments Monday, Clinton also called on the Israelis to do more to improve "movement and access" for Palestinians and on Israeli security arrangements.

She added, however, that Israel deserved praise for moving in the right direction.

"This offer falls far short of what we would characterize as our position or what our preference would be," she added. "But if it is acted upon, it will be an unprecedented restriction on settlements and would have a significant and meaningful effect on restraining their growth."

In her statement to reporters, Clinton also stressed that the Palestinian authorities deserved credit for what she called "unprecedented" steps to improve security in the West Bank and praised the Palestinians for progress in training their security forces.

On Monday evening, Clinton met with representatives of the Gulf Cooperation Council, plus officials from Egypt, Jordan, Iraq and Morocco. Clinton also flew Monday to the south-central city of Ouarzazate for an audience with King Mohammed VI, then returned to Marrakech for talks with foreign ministers of several Persian Gulf nations.

Clinton was expected to meet separately with Saudi Foreign Minister Prince Saud al-Faisal, who has rejected U.S. appeals for improved Arab relations with Israel as a way to help restart Middle East peace talks.

After taking office in January, Obama buoyed Palestinian hopes for progress toward establishing a Palestinian state with his outreach to the Muslim world and an initially tough stance urging a full freeze to all settlement construction.

But after making little headway with the Israelis in recent months, Clinton urged Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas in a face-to-face meeting in Abu Dhabi on Saturday to renew talks, which broke down late last year, without conditions. Abbas said no, insisting that Israel first halt all settlement activity in the West Bank and east Jerusalem – lands the Palestinians claim for a future state.

Then, at a joint news conference with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu late Saturday in Jerusalem, Clinton praised Netanyahu's offer to curb some settlement construction, saying it was an unprecedented gesture.

That statement provoked a chiding by Palestinian government spokesman Ghassan Khatib. Jordan and Egypt also issued statements Sunday critical of the latest U.S. approach.

___

Associated Press writer Matthew Lee in Washington contributed to this report.

FOLLOW HUFFPOST WORLD

MARRAKECH, Morocco — Trying to mute Arab criticism that the Obama administration had retreated from its tough stance on Israeli settlements, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Mon...
MARRAKECH, Morocco — Trying to mute Arab criticism that the Obama administration had retreated from its tough stance on Israeli settlements, U.S. Secretary of State Hillary Rodham Clinton on Mon...
Filed by Hanna Ingber Win  | 
 
 
  • Comments
  • 58
  • Pending Comments
  • 0
  • View FAQ
Comments are closed for this entry
View All
Favorites
Recency  | 
Popularity
Page: 1 2  Next ›  Last »  (2 total)
02:22 AM on 11/05/2009
Hillary Clinton is the Lindsay Lohan of the international diplomatic community. No one cares what she says. And that depends on what audience she is addressing.
09:06 PM on 11/04/2009
We give Israel billions of dollars directly and in aid every year. If Obama would be willing to use this as leverage we would see the change in the Israel's position regarding peace. Why does our government continue to kiss Israel's ass.
08:31 AM on 11/03/2009
Lots of folks out there just don't seem to understand how committed the USA is to peace and a just "settlement".

The USA is working hard behind the scenes to secure the Palestinians free entry to Jerusalem one day a month after the final peace agreement is reached.

That's right you heard it here first.

After the peace "settlement" (which will be preceded by more settlements, of course), Palestinians will have to pay $10,000 per head each time they visit Jerusalem.

But one day a month entry will be free. (For children under 1 year and seniors).

Entrants are advised to bring their own water, though.
photo
SEQUOIABISON
President of the Sequoia Bison Society a non profi
08:23 AM on 11/03/2009
Netanyahu is the real problem in the settlement issue. He knows that he is backed up by the strongest support imaginable from the US Congress and both democrats and republicans will not go up against the powerful Israeli lobbyists.

I truly believe we must entertain sanctions against Israel or tie our support to progress at the peace table.

Israel is laughing at our attempts to bring dignity to the Palestinian people, they know we will not interfere with their imperialistic pursuits of obtaining all former biblical land, which they believe was once owned by Israel.

So long as Israel maintains a strong lobby in Congress, they know they can do whatever they please in the middle east without suffering any adverse consequences.
photo
HUFFPOST SUPER USER
FACTISFACT
A war veteran. Finally retired
02:45 AM on 11/03/2009
The comments from high ups particularly from Washington need to be modest but firm to solve the dispute more so to avert the ugly criticism that American political administration is controlled by the JEWISH Lobby group AIPAC meaning ISRAEL.
photo
soldiergirl
Friends don't let friends vote republican
12:19 AM on 11/03/2009
Still don't see why we are always going out on a limb for Isreal. They aren't always right in the way that they do things, but yet, we still continue to support them regardless. Even when they pretty much tell us where to get off, we still offer our full fledge support. Nope, I still don't get it.
03:13 AM on 11/03/2009
I hear you , any other country that did what Israel did/does would be called a rouge out of control regime and bully by our government. But for some reason Israel gets a pass. Why? because The US thinks that having an ally in the middle of Persian gulf will one day reap rewards for our oil interests.

The funny/sad thing about this is by the time we think we will be ready to cash in the chips for that oil interest, oil will no longer be a factor in energy. We would have wasted 100 years of poor judgment influence and lives for a resource that we will end up not needing anyway.

Israel looks out for itself only and conveniently uses the US to further its agenda. We are their bodyguards. I'm not exactly sure what the US has gotten back out of this relationship other than trouble and the wrath of many.

Is the secret intelligence and strategic location worth all this trouble?

Believe me if Israel had to defend themselves without the US protection they would be a lot more compromising.
08:21 AM on 11/03/2009
me neither soldier girl . . .
11:12 PM on 11/02/2009
Too late Hillary, you let the cat out of the bag the first time.
10:17 PM on 11/02/2009
Clinton had traveled to the region only reluctantly, concerned her visit might be seen as a failure, according to several U.S. officials.

Well they got that right.
07:53 PM on 11/02/2009
Good luck stuffing that cat back in the bag.
07:03 PM on 11/02/2009
It did not take Israel long to put Obama in his place.
06:10 PM on 11/02/2009
Oh no, Hillary isn't going to hand over Israel to the Palestinians on a silver platter. How dare she? The Arab world, which has no intention of ever compromising with Israel, wants Obama to dictate terms, their terms, to the Israelis and force Israel to give up everything for empty promises they have no intention of keeping.

Hillary has a better idea, sit down immediately with the Israelis and begin negotiations. You tell them Hillary. Just like you told the hustlers in Pakistan to stop hiding Bin Laden, tell the Palestinians to stop acting like spoiled children and get to the negotiating table. And don't expect Obama to force Israel into concessions before negotiations begin.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
photo
10:43 PM on 11/02/2009
misaacm, do you want peace or not? Since land is what is in dispute, Israel must stop building settlements before peace talks can resume. I wouldn't call a settle frieze a concession--it's more like common sense if Israel is serious about wanting a two-statement solution.
10:32 AM on 11/03/2009
I hope that I have the opportunity to negotiate with you sometime. I will tell you to make a unilateral upfront concession before we can start negotiations. If you say yes, I will ask for another one.

Also, I disagree that the dispute is about land, it is about Arab pride. The Arabs have 99+% of the land in the middle east, more than enough to resettle the refugees of their failed wars. Arab pride is harder to assuage.
This user has chosen to opt out of the Badges program
04:54 PM on 11/02/2009
talking like Bushco makes it sure that she will never be elected president
03:43 PM on 11/02/2009
more empty words from yet another inept member of our morally bankrupt and heavily funded (read-bought off) government
01:31 PM on 11/02/2009
When we subsidize Isael's military they have more money left to build settlements. Cut off aid to israel untill they hear us again and i do mean All aid. If we cut aid and abstain from vetos in the security council until israel freezes settlements and removes the outposts that grow into settlements maybe this right wing government will get the message or fall (either one would be a good thing)
12:27 PM on 11/02/2009
In Morocco, Clinton said- "Successive American administrations of both parties have opposed Israel's settlement policy,"

So, why are we subsidizing the illegal land grad by pumping tax payer money to build these settlements. Actions speak louder than the words. Who are they fooling?
12:42 PM on 11/02/2009
How are we subsidizing settlements?? America's aid to Israel goes for very specific military R&D purposes, primarily because we want Israel to sell us their latest military technology. Rightly or wrongly, it's very much a mutually-beneficial relationship.
02:11 PM on 11/02/2009
you left out the interest free loans that the American taxpayer ends up paying.
03:41 PM on 11/02/2009
This is from pro Israeli newspaper-

http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2009/03/25/AR2009032502800.html

You bring up a whole new angle I stayed away from in my original post. Our "military aid" subsidized the killing of innocent civilians in Gaza. If any other country was involved in such crimes International community will be taking their leaders to the war crime tribunal.