The United States has taken the surprisingly stern step of threatening to adjust down their support for Israel at the United Nations, following comments from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu that now was not the right circumstances for a two-state online viagra non prescription solution to the Israel-Palestinian conflict. CNN reported that in response the Obama administration would reevaluate the US backing of Israel at the UN, where the Americans have wielded their veto and diplomatic support to squash anti-Israel resolutions.
On Wednesday, White House Press Secretary Josh Earnest stopped short of mentioning UN support by name, but multiple media outlets managed to learn of the intent anyway. By Thursday, State Department spokesperson Jen Psaki was trying to tip-toe around the dramatic UN issue. “We’re currently evaluating our approach, but that doesn’t mean that we’ve made a decision about changing our position with respect to the UN or what specific steps we would take,” said Psaki in comments released by the State Department. This came after Netanyahu has already tried to clarify his comments aren’t permanently opposed to a Palestinian state, and a US legislator has strongly criticized Obama’s threat.
In an interview with MSNBC, excerpts of which were posted to their website, Netanyahu told Andrea Mitchell that the circumstances have changed since he publicly backed a two-state solution with the Palestinians earlier in his time as Prime Minister. He noted that the Palestinians have joined forces with the Hamas terrorist group and that that needs to change before a two-state solution could happen.
This clarifies comments he made to the NRG website that were picked up by The New York Times. There he spoke against creating a Palestinian state today, as it would give extremists territory to strike against Israel.
US Congresswoman Ilena Ros-Lehtinen concurred with Netanyahu’s stance in denouncing the UN threat from the Obama administration. “The reason for the lack of progress on a two-state solution between Israel and the Palestinians is because of the destructive actions of the Palestinian Authority that have undermined the peace process,” said Ros-Lehtinen in a statement posted to her website.
She cited the Palestinian unity government with Hamas, joining the International Criminal Court to try Israel for trumped up war crimes, and trying to force the creation of a Palestinian state outside of negotiations with Israel. “The President’s time would be better spent using his bully pulpit to leverage a change in the Palestinian leadership than to press our ally into a bad and dangerous situation,” she said.
In an effort to clarify the American position, Psaki said on Thursday she believed they hadn’t changed their stance of opposition to ICC prosecution of Israel and that they would still squelch UN resolutions that are “unfair or biased” against Israel. But she wasn’t interested in predictions.
“Obviously there are a range of options in the UN Security Council. I’m not going to prejudge it further… I think what we’re going to look at is what the content of a resolution would be. I’m not going to prejudge what that will be, and we haven’t made a decision.”
When asked if their definitions of “unfair or biased” had changed, Psaki refused to discuss it further.
(By Joshua Spurlock, www.themideastupdate.com, March 19, 2015)