When is a peace settlement not a peace settlement? When it is met with demands and not guarantees.
I was a bit surprised at the leveled criticism by Mr. Satterfield. Isreal doesn't need to be told what to do. The PA needs to be told what to do, but, in the bigoted world of Bush whereby Palestinians receive grants and Israel is denied loan guarantees nothing should be a surprise.
U.S. gov't official: Israel must stop building in the settlements
By Nathan Guttman, Haaretz Correspondent and Reuters
WASHINGTON - U.S. Deputy Assistant Secretary of State David Satterfield on Thursday called on Israel to stop all construction and development in the settlements, saying such activity damages Israel's own interests.
CAN THE BUSH WHITE HOUSE SAY THE SAME THING about Iraq? Of course not, but, yet it will demand Israel to give up all sense of security to 'attempt' to settle a peace by 'BOLD' moves and not guarantees that Palestinian Extremists are under control. Quite the contrary. In making demands on Israel the USA through Satterfield demanded the release of 'JAILED' Palestinian extremists. Prime Minister Sharon tried releasing people of this nature before when 'The Infamous Road Map' was first attempted. The result was increased attacks on Israelis and the resumed tensions between the PA and Israel. Gunships returned to the skies and tanks rolled into refugee camps with killings of members of Hamas including it's new leadership after the death of the Sheik. That. After Israel was abandoned by the USA when it was The Road Map that was the problem in the first place and the release of 500 jailed Palestinian extremists.
The above article goes on to state: "Satterfield condemned Russia's recent activity aimed at relieving Syria from the debt it has toward Moscow and said the American government regrets all international activity that relieves the pressure on Damascus. Speaking on the nuclear threat in Iran, the official said the U.S. is very doubtful over whether Iran is ready to fulfill its commitments to freeze its plans of uranium enrichment."
Much of what is going on between countries 'fearing' an invasion from the USA is compensation from Russia to prepare a defense of soverign countries with a right to exist. The USA doesn't like it. Russia sees stronger borders without danger. After all if Russia is to respect all countries, those that it does business, with needs to understand Russia is still bigger and stronger than they are and although many would see my view as naive as I sometimes see myself, the evidence is stacked in Russia's favor as an equitable ally and not the USA.
As outrageous as this sounds, I would see Russia as a more suitable ally to Israel than the USA while the Neocons are in political prominence. One has to realize that Bush has an agenda based in prejudice and not good sound foreign policy. Bush has a silent agenda of hate rather than peace. Bush has plans for and with Israel, regardless of what any Israeli authority might consider reasonable.
A gross example of The Bush Silent Agenda is that of Iraq. Iraq had no consequence to the USA. For as offensive as Saddam Hussein was on a regular basis it has been proven time and again that Iraq had no ties to al Qaeda, was not a terrorist state and was completely disarmed. At the time Bush/Powell tangoed at the United Nations the inspectors were coming back with reports of empty findings. There was absolutely no reason for Bush to lose his 'cool' stating Saddam wasn't cooperating when all they were getting was cooperation. At question were inventories. It was being proven daily that regardless of Saddam's inability to prove the inventories were destroyed there was absolutely no evidence of them anywhere in Iraq. So, therefore, Saddam was guilty of bad bookkeeping. Hardly a reason to invade an country killling hundreds of thousands of people; UNLESS that reason was based in self-serving personal gain on the part of Cheney who was mentoring Bush and harassing Powell. And let's face it, a Secretary of Defense also a Neocon, Rumsfeld is always ready for war. So, with a willing Franks convinced 'Shock and Awe' would scare every Iraqi weasel to death they proceeded, instead of listing to Gen. Eric K. Shinseki and his statements of troop shortages that would later be realized as profound.
The point is, with the advent of Neocon dominance in the USA, a new aggression, a propagandized media; what kind of ally does Israel have? I propose, not a good one.
In the Jerusalem Post appeared an article regarding a missile sale to Syria.
Putin tells 'Post': Missile deal with Syria possible
Russian President Vladimir Putin, in an exclusive interview with The Jerusalem Post on Thursday, refused to rule out his country's sale of anti-aircraft missiles to Syria, insisting that such missiles serve "defensive" purposes only and would not affect the balance of forces in the region.
The article continues in a congenial manner with a great deal of openness from the Russian President regarding his obligation and responsibility to a greater community than just Isreal but he was willing to put any missile sales on hold while the issue was discussed with Prime Minister Sharon in the following days. As threatening as all that seems to Israel I see this as an opportunity to work with Russia and Syria in securing mutual respect and trust to eliminate the need for missiles in Syria while allowing Israel a role in an alliance to protect Syrian borders. The historic love of the land that is Syrian in Shaba Farms can only bring the two countries closer to the understanding there 'can' be little difference between them.
I wrote on January 27th, the above article regarding Shaba Farms appeared on the 29th.
"The Russian Missiles in the Area is due to Bush’s aggression against Iran. Bush is making the USA a permanent fixture in the region and Russia feels every country should be armed to protect their sovereignty. Those missiles are most likely not for aggression against Israel so much as defense from the USA. In placing the missile sales to Syria on hold following a phone conversation between Putin and Sharon, would Israel be willing to provide a treaty with an understanding an alliance between Israel and Syria also include a defense of Syria if needed? Are these two countries capable of that level trust and compassion? I think Israel is capable of providing missile defense for Syria is the need arose through an alliance. Why can’t that happen? The two countries need to settle border disputes and be better neighbors. It is upto Israel to resolve it’s security issues. I know the Prime Minister is capable."
Since, those articles, the 'Rememberance of the 60th year since Auschwitz has occurred and the profound 'pleading' of Russia's President is more than compassionate but an accounting of events that Russia held as a responsibility for the suffering of so many Jews that lead them to ultimately free them. I was impressed to say the least. Nowhere in history has a head of state purged his country's history to make a lasting impression on Israel and every Jew that would find comfort in realizing they have a homeland. Putin's compassionate extention of good will and reverence to those dead and those living the scars of being Jewish was to put on notice the maniacal and silent agenda of Bush who may very well be a victimizer to Israel rather than a peacemaker.
Following Satterfield's ridicule of Israel, Prime Minister Sharon again stepped to the occassion and acted in the best of faiths opening the gates to the Palestinians and moving aside to allow the Palestinian expression of 'good faith.'
The proclamations are that relations between the PA and Israel are improving beyond anyone's wildest imaginations. However, while all this embellishment of good will and cooperation by be as true as well as good as it seems; there is Hamas who is all to eager to confront questionably old enemies without regard for politics or proprieties; and while the USA insists on questionalby helping having a USA authority within the borders of Israel is a sovereignty issue as well as one of increased insecurity for the burgeoning good relations between Palestine and Egypt as well as a potential to settle with Syria since the fate of Shaba Farms is decided.
With the USA intelligence on sovereign Israel soil, can an invasion into Syria or Iran be far in the offing? I think not and Prime Minister Sharon should be cautious to realize he may not have an ally in Bush at all, so much as he does in Putin.
