(New York Daily News) Robert Satloff - Launching a shot across Israel's bow, Obama aides told reporters that a new U.S. policy might include endorsing a UN Security Council resolution that would, against the wishes of Israel's democratically elected government, define terms of a final settlement. For Obama, such an act would leave a dangerous legacy of having ended 40 years of principled U.S. effort to promote direct negotiations between the parties. No one in the administration seems to have called up the prime minister to ask what he meant by his statements - namely, was he foreswearing forever the possibility of territorial compromise or was he saying that further concessions now, while Palestinians are pursuing their effort to vilify Israel in the International Criminal Court, are out of the question? If officials had telephoned Jerusalem, they would have heard what Netanyahu told MSNBC's Andrea Mitchell the very next day. "I don't want a one-state solution; I want a sustainable, peaceful two-state solution, but for that, circumstances have to change." The writer is executive director of The Washington Institute for Near East Policy.
2015-03-23 00:00:00Full ArticleBACK Visit the Daily Alert Archive