News
Top Bush advisor validates Israeli claim there was agreement on settlements
Yitzhak Benhorin
Published: 25.06.09, 18:00
Comment Comment
Print comment Print comment
Back to article
22 Talkbacks for this article
1. Israel should abandon all previous uynderstandings as they..
Bernard Ross ,   st anns bay jamaica   (06.25.09)
...all failed. seize the saudi oilfields and then israel wont have to listen to EU, US or UN again.
2. The truth floats to the surface, once again
Jake   (06.25.09)
Despite Obamist and Clintonian denials, there were indeed agreements between the US and Israel regarding the natural growth of settlements, which Sharon relied on to sell the disengagement plan to his constituents. By denying such an agreement ever existed, Obama is sending the message to Israel that an agreement is nothing more than a piece of paper, which tomorrow may not be binding. Israel will surely learn this lesson next time Syria offers to sign a "peace agreement" with Israel.
3. Abrams clearly doesn't understand international law
Tarik ,   Boston, MA USA   (06.25.09)
An agreement between the United States and Israel is irrelevant from a legal perspective. The West Bank is considered occupied territory under international law, reaffirmed repeatedly and most recently in the 2004 ICJ ruling. It is not subject to "agreements" between the occupying power (Israel) and a foreign power (US). An agreement between the US and Israel over land that belongs to neither of them has no meaning in law; it would be roughly analogous to an "agreement" between Senegal and Ethiopia over who has the rights to build settlements in Portugal. If Abrams finds the reason for Obama's stance "unclear" then he clearly knows nothing about international law.
4. News Flash - Bush is no longer US President
Joseph Blough ,   NY, USA   (06.25.09)
GW was a horribly inept president, so if he mistakenly gave the impression that settlement construction was OK, just add that to the long list of mistakes GW made while in office. Given Abrams dual citizenship and Zionist connections, his opinions must be taken with a grain of salt..
5. Obama & Clinton are liers!
Wise Saba ,   Netivot   (06.25.09)
We will build on our land without anyones permission. Israel is a sovereign nation!
6. Failed memmory or anti-Semite?
Lioness ,   Israel   (06.25.09)
I believe that Clinton is both, senile and anti-Semetic and as for Hussein Obama. Need I say any more?
7. In response to #3
Ron ,   BC, Canada   (06.25.09)
By the same logic, there is no legal basis for the Obama government to insist on a freeze of settlements, since it is not their land to begin with. However, while it may not be legally binding, it is possible for a third party to attempt to help both sides reach a compromise in a conflict, and expect said parties to stand by what is agreed. Otherwise, why bother to try? Abrams was not discussing International Law, he was discussing reality.
8. Abrams is a lier!
Jack ,   Paris, France   (06.25.09)
Abrams is not a credible person. He is the lier! He pleaded guilty in 1991 to withholding information from Congress in the Iran-contra affair!
9. Hillary is doing her best
Arie ,   BaGolan   (06.25.09)
to do to us what her husband did to Monica Lewinsky
10. Another liar from Bush administration !!
(06.25.09)
11. well said Tarik
observer   (06.25.09)
12. Obama and Clinton are wrong to break the US word.
The Doc ,   Haifa, Israel   (06.26.09)
...by doing so, they are losing all the credibility and will require ALL their allies to regard them with suspicion and mistrust. Is this how the Obama Administration hopes to get the ME parties to talk and achieve a durable Peace? By proving that every American promise can be denied, broken or rejected by the next Administration? My suggestion to all future governments: get everythng the US gov commits to, in writing. If they refuse, it means that you've got nothing - just empty words. Clinton and Obama single-handedly will ruin the position of the US as a trusted partner and bring it back to the desastrous situation it was during the Carter era. From now on, BEWARE OF THE AMERICAN BEARING EMPTY PROMISES! As the saying goes: "Fool me once, shame on YOU. Fool me twice, shame on ME!
13. You will miss Bush era! It is a past.
Tayfun_Turkey ,   Istanbul   (06.26.09)
It is not Bush era anymore, now USA will pay heavily the Bush era, during which muslims decimated fierecly and therefore sprit of USA now elected Obama, a muslim mimicker in name and past. In order to heal hate Bush gathered for USA in Muslim nations, now USA should yield more to Muslim and Arab demands, that is including any demand against Israel, Therefore Obama term will be just a period of back stepping for Israel.
14. #7 WELL SAID, RON from BC, Canada!
The Doc ,   Haifa, Israel   (06.26.09)
15. where is Bush the war criminal??
joy ,   ny   (06.26.09)
I hear he is hiding.
16. 1 too muchJamaican ganga makes U stupid
lydia ,   Brisbane   (06.26.09)
The US is the only thing stopping the Arabs from throwing their lot behind Ahmadinejad and the Shiites. The US needs the Saudis more than they need a bunch of cantankerous Israelis, so who do you think they would support if you pick a fight with the Saudis to steal their oilfields. Put the weed down, man, and used your few brain cells.
17. Tarik, Tayfun, and Observer
Yaron ,   USA   (06.26.09)
You all have valid points absent of the fact of acknowledging the fact that the Israelis are dealing with a lawless belligerent population that insists on violence as the method for resolving disagreements. Had the Arabs accepted the many offers the world made, the Pals would not be in the situation they are in. Without at least acknowledging that all the International Law in the world does not refute that the Pals never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity. While you guys are at it.....your silence in the face of the fascist Iranian regime is astoundingly deafening.
18. #3, you actually read what the ICJ wrote?
Danny   (06.26.09)
The ICJ was only judging on the construction of the wall. The non-muslim judges thought the ICJ had no jurisdiction and the only people who made any comments about settlements were the arab judges who despite the case not being about the settlements decided wisely to obey orders from home and comment anyway. Maybe you were going to quote the UNHCR instead?
19. #3 and "Tarik" a and others impostors obviousy do! LOL!
The Doc ,   Haifa, Israel   (06.26.09)
This is NOT about international law you fool! It is about how will the American WORD be regarded from now on! It is IRRELEVANT to ANY "ruling' of ANY cangoroo court you may cite. BTW, ICJ has NO JURISDICTION OVER ANYTHING - the UN which has a "bit" more weight that your pathetic ICJ, defines the West Bank and Gaza as "DISPUTED TERRITORIES" Now, muslim claim to understand the meaning of the word "honor", right? (as in "honor killing" or "word of honor") Then I also assume you being a devout muslim understand that at this moment, this Administration has wasted the honor of the American Word. Now NOBODY will trust the American word, and will still suspect foul-play even if that word is written and meets legal scrutiny. How can US provide "guarantees" to ANYONE - Israel or Arabs - now that they broke their word? And YOU do not understand the law: verbal agreements are considered as valid agreements and can be challenged in a court of law, if enough witneses can come forward and PROVE that there was such a verbal understanding. So much for a pathetic attempt to whitewash the Clinton scam. Now scram and hide your ignorant face and post in Haaretz forums, where you can socialize with more weekend "jurists" just as yourself and bore each other to death with racist rants.
20. #4 Given most of the posters here are impostors...
The Doc ,   Haifa, Israel   (06.26.09)
... we should take THEIR rants with a TON of salt as well, eh? What about YOU "Joseph Blough" from "NY"? What motivates YOU to post your pathetic and RACIST slurs in an Israeli forum? I bet we all know that answer - no need to pour more venom here. Try Al-Jazeera or NYT - which BTW also has ties to the "Zionists" but doesn't fall from your own hatred and racism against Israel one bit!
21. To Tarik
PW ,   Virginia USA   (06.26.09)
first the ICJ has no authority to determine the legality. The only legal authority is the Treaty of Sevres adopted by the League of Nations...It is the Arabs of the Palestine Mandate that are the occupying power. The Jordanian army was the one that illegally occupied the lands of Judea and Samaria. If you are a lawyer and think you know the law I suggest you hire a good Jewish lawyer...
22. Are the settlements worth peace?
Michael Blair ,   Texas, USA   (06.26.09)
Stopping the building in the west bank atleast for afew months could help be the start for peace. Israel is very strong now but in 10 or 15 years Iraq and Iran could team up and could become a nightmare for israel. It is better to try and make peace now while israel is strong and holds most the cards.
Back to article