Most Read
Image 01 Image 02 Image 03

John Kerry’s Middle East Policy Speech – Analysis

John Kerry’s Middle East Policy Speech – Analysis

An angry speech, and most of that anger directed at Israel.

John Kerry’s speech today setting forth his and Obama’s vision of a final status for the Israeli-Palestinian conflict was expected to be a first step towards another UN Security Council resolution.

(UPDATE) My quick take on the speech:

It was an angry speech, and all of that anger was directed at Israel. In that sense, it fit the Obama paradigm precisely — the Palestinians may not be helpful, but the Israelis are to blame. There were so many contradictions in the speech, it was a model of Kerry’s lack of seriousness — being serious takes more than a serious tone of voice.

Kerry’s defense of the abstention was pretty pathetic. Completely missing was the recognition that Resolution 2334 and the way in which it was passed have made any resolution more, not less, difficult. This Resolution was dropped on the Israelis with almost zero notice. While Kerry’s voice rose over the accusations of collusion, he never really disputed that the U.S. supported and encouraged the Resolution. Indeed, much of his speech was devoted to defending what happened.

For a supposedly big picture speech, it got very far down in the weeds, such as the number of building permits and a draft Knesset bill that isn’t even law yet. Never mentioned was the core of the dispute — the Arab Muslim world does not accept a Jewish entity in any form or any boundary in the heart of the Arab Muslim world. Speaking that truth would have been a breath of fresh air – but instead we received stale condemnation of settlements as if there was no history of Palestinian rejectionism and Israeli offers to leave over 95% of the land area.

Kerry seemed to suggest there would be no attempt to impose his solution, but that doesn’t mean there will be no more UN action. A resolution adopting or approving Kerry’s 6 principles of a resolution without imposing them, still is a possibility. Those principles were nothing new, and principles Israel has mostly accepted in prior offers. But one of those principles, a non-militarized Palestinian state, likely is a non-starter, and would be ineffective anyway since without Israeli military control of the border with Jordan, there would be nothing to stop Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran from sneaking weaponry into the area.

So, this speech was a bitter and sad end to John Kerry’s tenure as Secretary of State, one which left people farther apart than before he got involved.

Earlier:

That goal appears to have suffered a potential blow, as reports indicate that Russia is opposed to the idea of imposing a solution, Russia Rejects Kerry’s Proposal for Quartet to Adopt U.S. Principles on Israeli-Palestinian Conflict. That doesn’t rule out further U.S. action at the U.N., but it may reflect that passing such a resolution would not go as smoothly as the December 23 resolution.

https://twitter.com/K_AminThaabet/status/814150219612950532

https://twitter.com/JayCostTWS/status/814152990835740673

https://twitter.com/OrenKessler/status/814153964790960129

DONATE

Donations tax deductible
to the full extent allowed by law.

Comments

22 days 12 hours and 30 minutes…

    alaskabob in reply to Kaffa. | December 28, 2016 at 11:40 am

    “Seven Days in May” now becomes “Three Weeks in January”.

    Saratoga in reply to Kaffa. | December 28, 2016 at 1:51 pm

    January 20, 2017, 12:00:00 EST You seem to be short by 12 hours,by my reckoning.

      DieJustAsHappy in reply to Saratoga. | December 28, 2016 at 3:46 pm

      Yes, however, remember when we were facing four long years and then four more long, long years. This is all shades of Carter declining and Reagan rising!

    Milhouse in reply to Kaffa. | December 28, 2016 at 6:39 pm

    Here’s a handy counter to put on your web page:
    ============================================================

    :::

    DaysHrMinSec

    var tdd = document.getElementById (“dd”),
    thh = document.getElementById (“hh”),
    tmm = document.getElementById (“mm”),
    tss = document.getElementById (“ss”),
    endtime = ‘Jan 20, 2017 17:00:00 GMT’;

    function updateClock () {
    var t = Date.parse(endtime) – Date.parse(new Date());
    if (t <lt; 0) t = -t;
    t = (t/1000) |0;
    var ss = t % 60,
    mm = ((t/60)|0) % 60,
    hh = ((t/3600)|0) % 24,
    dd = (t/86400)|0;

    tdd.innerHTML = dd;
    thh.innerHTML = ('0' + hh).slice(-2);
    tmm.innerHTML = ('0' + mm).slice(-2);
    tss.innerHTML = ('0' + ss).slice(-2);
    }

    updateClock(); // run function once at first to avoid delay
    setInterval (updateClock, 1000);

    Milhouse in reply to Kaffa. | December 28, 2016 at 6:41 pm

    Oops, that didn’t come out right. Trying again
    Here’s a handy counter to put on your web page:
    ============================================================
    <table style=”color:#fffdd0; background-color:black; font-family:Verdana, Arial, Helvetica, serif; font-weight:bold; text-align:center; border-spacing:0″ cellpadding=0>
    <tr style=”font-size:11.9pt”>
    <td id=dd></td><td>:</td><td id=hh></td><td>:</td><td id=mm></td><td>:</td><td id=ss></td></tr>
    <tr style=”font-size:7.1pt”>
    <td>Days</td><td></td><td>Hr</td><td></td><td>Min</td><td></td><td>Sec</td></tr></table>
    <script type=”text/javascript”>
    var tdd = document.getElementById (“dd”),
    thh = document.getElementById (“hh”),
    tmm = document.getElementById (“mm”),
    tss = document.getElementById (“ss”),
    endtime = ‘Jan 20, 2017 17:00:00 GMT’;

    function updateClock () {
    var t = Date.parse(endtime) – Date.parse(new Date());
    if (t < 0) t = -t;
    t = (t/1000) |0;
    var ss = t % 60,
    mm = ((t/60)|0) % 60,
    hh = ((t/3600)|0) % 24,
    dd = (t/86400)|0;

    tdd.innerHTML = dd;
    thh.innerHTML = (‘0’ + hh).slice(-2);
    tmm.innerHTML = (‘0’ + mm).slice(-2);
    tss.innerHTML = (‘0’ + ss).slice(-2);
    }

    updateClock(); // run function once at first to avoid delay
    setInterval (updateClock, 1000);
    </script>

      Milhouse in reply to Milhouse. | December 29, 2016 at 3:04 am

      What possible objection could anyone have had to that? Whoever down-dinged it is just trying to harass me, and should drop dead. Now.

How interesting that the ‘Palestinians’ put so much hope in a man of recent Jewish heritage. John Forbes (Kohn) Kerry’s Jewish grandparents spun a globe and put their finger on a random spot. That finger landed on Kerry, Ireland; so guess what, they claimed the name ‘Kerry’. His gaming of the Navy Regulations in Vietnam, the Winter Soldier Campaign, consulting with the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong during the Paris Peace Talks prove his traitorous motives.

    LindaK in reply to SeniorD. | December 28, 2016 at 5:25 pm

    Not to forget how Obama and Kerry sold the US out in their secret deals with Iran, enabling them to soon become nuclear armed – the largest terrorist funding nation in our world. This admin has been all about supporting terrorists and destroying our relationships with previous allies. Glad we soon will see America return to being a real ally to Israel.

I have been wondering if Russia woupd step up to the plate.

Kerry has been a know quantity since his glorious time in Vietnam. It’s hard for me to decide who is the greater traitor, Kerry or Fonda. Of course neither of them can beat Obama out. This January 20 will be a happy day and I pray that it should hurry.

    SeniorD in reply to Bob00. | December 28, 2016 at 3:15 pm

    Hanoi Jane is a poor, deluded actress making an anti-war statement. John Kerry smeared the honor of wounded sailors, Marines, soldiers and airmen in his reprehensible “3 Strikes and you’re out” farce. When he led the Winter Soldier Campaign he knowingly raised blatant lies to the level of ‘eye witness accounts’. His best act came when he colluded with the North Vietnamese and Viet Cong in Paris.

    Oh, he did all that as a serving member of the U.S. Navy Reserve then in a time of conflict.

So… Israel can either be non-existent or Palestinian….

buckeyeminuteman | December 28, 2016 at 12:21 pm

How does Kerry keep his innumerable lies and half-truths straight?

    He doesn’t. He can’t.

    It’s fine with me if you have a low opinion of Sailors. There’s nothing I can do about that. Just, not this low.

    I would hate to imply any threat to John Kerry’s life. Far from it. I sincerely hope he has a long and interesting life. In fact, I hope he lives forever.

    I wish him. Every. Second. Of. It.

      Mike H. in reply to Arminius. | December 28, 2016 at 7:17 pm

      I have a problem watching him build his legacy.

      But I’ll enjoy it more when he gets to see the finished product. He should be put on suicide watch when that happens.

    Practice.

It looks like he’s had further work on his face. No longer “mashed potato face”, now, “baked potato face”

    murkyv in reply to rayc. | December 28, 2016 at 10:51 pm

    Think…”Clutch Cargo” from the 60’s

    So full of botox, the only thing that still moves on his face is his mouth

A typical Obama speech if ever there was one.

It is a shocking speech and the only thing more shocking is that too many can’t and/ or won’t recognize false equivalences and strawmen fallacies even this obvious or frequently given.

And it isn’t even over!!!

The consequences of electing communists and traitors are far reaching, and will extend far beyond January 20.

Kerry’s 1.5hrs distilled: “We can have lasting peace if we force Israel to commit suicide.”

Why is there a United Nations? What purpose does it serve? Why do we continue to fund it? If these questions can’t be answered satisfactorily, then time to close shops and go home. Kerry wants to make the UN Great Again and it will never be. It is a vestige of the Cold War.

    Milhouse in reply to natdj. | December 28, 2016 at 6:48 pm

    John Bolton can explain at length (and often has) why the UN is one of our most valuable diplomatic tools, and we need to continue supporting it — but we have to remember that it works for us, not we for it. It’s not a world government, as so many people seem to imagine it to be. Just like any tool, we have to measure its performance by how well it’s advancing our goals, not by how well we’re advancing its.

Obama supports the Palestinians because he is an ideologue.
Hillary supports the Palestinians because she’s been bribed.
Kerry supports the Palestinians because he is an idiot.

Since when does an administration announce a major foreign policy change with less than a month left before the end of their term?

    Since the incoming administration promises to undo everything the outgoing one has “accomplished”.

    They’re just trying to throw down speed bumps for Trump.

    Trouble is, Israel objects to being used as a speed bump.

Same old same old hatemonger. Thank heaven he and John Edwards rode off into the sewer, even tho Juan Williams insisted we should believe the exit polls rather than the actual vote.

The Obama/Kerry/Clinton foreign policy team wants you to know that no American Administration has been more concerned then they have been with issues regarding Israel’s back, because that’s where the knives have to go.

John Kerry is so badass that I’m even too afraid of him to buy his wife’s ketchup 😉

    I know you’re joking, but his wife has no connection to the Kraft-Heinz corporation; she’s not even a shareholder.

      SeniorD in reply to Milhouse. | December 28, 2016 at 3:19 pm

      To be sure, she enjoys the financial rewards of marrying a Heinz.

        Milhouse in reply to SeniorD. | December 28, 2016 at 6:50 pm

        Of having married. Her fortune was originally generated by ketchup, but that was a long time ago. As far as anyone knows she has no shares in Kraft Heinz, and certainly no influence on its board.

Excerpt from Kerry’s speech:
“…If the choice is one state, Israel can either be Jewish or democratic. It cannot be both. And it won’t ever really be at peace.”
Israel, which was established in 1947 as the Jewish homeland, would have to become a non-Jewish state or never have peace according to this quote.
How can American Jews continue to support the LibDem party when it’s leaders say these kinds of things?

    “If the choice is one state, Israel can either be Jewish or democratic. It cannot be both. And it won’t ever really be at peace.”

    Why must they be mutually exclusive?

    That’s like saying, “John Kerry must be either a blithering idiot or a vile traitor.” Why must it be an either/or, and not a both/and?

    Besides which, if the choice is the “one-state solution”, there is no Palestinian nation, and people who call themselves Palestinians can either relocate to any of the dozens of surrounding Muslim nations or accept Israel’s authority. It’s worth noting that the latter option would be infinitely fairer to them — and offer better opportunities and living conditions — than living under Hamas or Hezbollah rule ever could or would.

      Milhouse in reply to Archer. | December 28, 2016 at 7:12 pm

      The theory here is that if Israel were to annex the “territories” then it would soon have an Arab majority, or close to it; if the newly annexed Arabs were made voting citizens then they’d take over its government and change its fundamental nature, but if they were not then it would be an apartheid state. This is why Begin didn’t annex the “territories” in ’77.

      But the fundamental assumption that an enemy population must be made citizens is in error. The US constitution makes citizenship an automatic right of having been born somewhere, but that is not a principle accepted by most countries, and there’s no reason Israel should have to accept it. It could annex the areas in question, and allow their inhabitants to apply for citizenship, which would require them to swear loyalty to Israel as a Jewish state. Those who chose not to do so could remain as permanent residents, with the same rights that Israeli citizens have in the USA; and like Israeli citizens in the USA, if they committed crimes they could be deported. Israel could also encourage and subsidize non-Jewish emigration, just as it does for Jewish immigration. If the definition of “apartheid” is so loose as to include that, then there’s nothing wrong with “apartheid”.

        Yackums in reply to Milhouse. | December 29, 2016 at 2:51 am

        This is roughly the annexation/non-citizen rights plank of the platform of Moshe Feiglin’s Zehut (“Identity”) party, a new party that will be running in the next Israeli elections, and which internal polling suggests may win as many as 15 seats, or 12.5% of the Knesset, making it anywhere from the fourth to the second largest party.

          Milhouse in reply to Yackums. | December 29, 2016 at 3:10 am

          Interesting that Feiglin, whose enemies paint him as some sort of dangerous fascist maniac, and whom I fully expect the High Court to ban from the next elections, was in fact the only libertarian in the last Knesset, and perhaps the only real libertarian ever to serve there.

        Yackums in reply to Milhouse. | December 29, 2016 at 2:54 am

        Also, you’ve pointed again to the Left’s favorite vocabulary game: extend and smear. Take a word, like “Apartheid” or “racist”, extend its definition so broadly as to make it meaningless, and tar your opponents with the brush of the word, leading people to associate your opponents with the truly evil narrow definition of the word, when they are nothing of the kind.

There will NEVER be a “two state solution” no matter how much those in power push the idea. No matter how much Israel offers to give up for peace, it will NEVER be enough for the Arabs. They will not be happy until every last Jew is pushed into the sea and drowned.

    mailman in reply to Granny. | December 29, 2016 at 4:12 am

    There can be a two state solution BUT for that to happen it would require the arab world to WANT to live in peace with jews and for Palestinians to also want to live in peace with Jews.

    Oh wait…you are right…it will never happen!!!

Has there ever been a more shameful statement from a Secretary of State to an ally than this: “Israel Can Either Be Jewish or Democratic — It Cannot Be Both.”

horseface is in trouble and knows it, this isn’t like the frech allowing him to violate US laws and speak at a peace talks regarding vietnam.
people now pay more attn and don’t allow malingerers to get away with it as often.

I want all federal law enforcement officers to listen up. I would pee on John Kerry if someone set him on fire. It might take a while, as I’d have to wait until he stopped thrashing about as I don’t want to risk a flaming John Kerry harming the wedding tackle.

But eventually, after he calmed down, I’d get around to it.

I will definitely NOT drive to DC or even worse Taxachussets and hit him with an oar, like he so richly deserves. So no worries there, Mr. Federal LEO.

Of course, just about everyone understands that John Kerry is a total dick.

Oh, sorry – can I say “John Kerry” here?

Those principles were nothing new, and principles Israel has mostly accepted in prior offers.

And that is a big part of the problem. One can’t be more Catholic than the Pope, nor more zionist than the Israeli government. Until an Israeli government will gather up the guts to officially reject the legitimacy of these principles, and thus of Israeli policy since at least the Madrid talks, one can’t expect outsiders to behave any differently.

So long as Netanyahu supports a “Palestinian” state, at least in principle, how can anyone else oppose it? So long as he is expelling Jews from their homes, how can anyone else maintain that to do so would be a horrible crime? Remember that Netanyahu is the one who created the situation in Chevron in the first place; his first official act when he was first elected in 1996 was to give it away, when he could easily have kept it.

“..One can’t be more Catholic than the Pope…”

Yes you can be. These days. Even the Baptists have noticed. I realize, “Who is moar Catholic than the Pope” is supposed to be rhetorical question, like, “Does a bear **** the woods?”

Ha ha.

With Francis it’s just not so funny any more.

Recall him to Active Duty and Court Martial his treasonous a**. Treason is a Capital Offense under the UCMJ

Does this donkey butt really think he has a future in politics? As a presidential candidate? Since when has Israel NOT been democratic?

The U.S. should NEVER leave the U.N.
Kick it out of this country.
Defund it completely.
Veto EVERYTHING the Security Council tries to pass, unless it is in our national interest not to veto.
That’s all.

As for Kerry…to call him a scumbag would be to insult honest, hard-working self-respecting bags of scum.
And his boss is even worse.

“Israel Can Either Be Jewish or Democratic — It Cannot Be Both.”

I wonder if Kerry has the balls (and the security) to say, “Iran (or insert your favorite Islamic state) can either be Islamic or democratic…it cannot be both”.

How about Spain can either be Christian or democratic…it cannot be both”.

How would he carry that?

    DieJustAsHappy in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2016 at 4:45 pm

    He couldn’t. I view him and BHO out of the same cloth, cowardly men who, when they find themselves in a position of power, turn into bullies.

    Milhouse in reply to Ragspierre. | December 28, 2016 at 7:28 pm

    Iran can be both Islamic and democratic, because it does not have a large and growing minority, let alone a majority, that opposes its Islamic nature. Spain, you may have noticed, isn’t particularly Christian these days. But for instance parts of the Netherlands no longer have a Dutch majority, and thus can’t be both Dutch and democratic; hence Geert Wilders. The problem Kerry is talking about is that if Samaria, Benjamin, and Judaea are annexed, and their Arab inhabitants made Israeli citizens, Israel would face the prospect of an Arab majority, which would vote to turn it into an Arab state. It’s no an imaginary problem, but it’s not nearly as serious as its proponents claim.

So, who’s planning on traveling to Germany for the now traditional Muslim mauling of the women?

I’m lining up lawyers. Like it will do any good.

CAIR has a statement already drafted, decrying next Monday’s “Islamophobic” backlash following this weekend’s terror attack.

    DaveGinOly in reply to Arminius. | December 28, 2016 at 6:59 pm

    Bill has probably spent the last two weeks in a tanning booth, dyed his hair black, and bought a keffiyeh, and will soon be on a private plane bound for Germany.

I think you could legitimately call Obama a pyromaniac. I guarantee he is having a great time this evening just watching as this thing burns.

JFK is good at at least two things… recommending himself for military awards and convincing rich widows to marry him.
Oh, and a third, getting his daughters to become muslims.

If you want peace, the Arabs must disarm.
If you want annihilation then Israel must disarm.

I think Kerry’s ego was such he really thought he’d be the one to finally broker a genuine and lasting peace between Israel, ‘Palestine’, and the rest of the Middle East. Having won the love and admiration of the world, Kerry believed he’d cruise to the 2020 Democrat nomination and then on to the White House. And then that bastard Netanyahu went and ruined his dream.

Kerry’s speech today was pure adolescent stompy-foot over having his dream destroyed by some dick with no more connection to Israel than, well, having been born and raised there, having fought its battles in the Israeli military, and having attained the office of Israel’s prime minister, facts and achievements that ultimately are meaningless to an ego like Kerry’s.

Even if Israel was destroyed and no longer existed in the Middle East, does anyone really believe that the Palestinian problem would go away and peace would break out all over? Nope for the reality is that the Palestinians and other Muslims was violence and strife and the Israel argument is simply the latest and most convenient excuse. And to think that Obama is importing these poeple as quickly as he can….

Font Resize
Contrast Mode
Send this to a friend