16 june 2016
White House prepared to augment renewed aid package to Israel with funds intended to increase missile defense; Following Obama's apparent rejection, anonymous official says US 'prepared to make an unprecedented multi-year missile defense commitment.'
The Obama administration is prepared to incorporate missile defense funds in a new long-term agreement on military aid for Israel, a US official said on Wednesday, accommodating in principle a key request by its ally in the ongoing talks.
Disputes over the scope and fine print of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) have clouded already difficult ties between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama during the latter's final months in office.
The current MOU, signed in 2007 and due to expire in 2018, allocated to Israel around $30 billion in so-called foreign military financing. Israel has been seeking an increase of around $10 billion for the next decade hoping that the additional aid be earmarked for missile defense projects that were hitherto funded ad hoc by the US Congress.
US negotiators previously proposed a total of $3.5 billion to $3.7 billion annually for Israel under the new MOU, but did not say whether this might include missile defense funds. A senior US official was more forthcoming on Wednesday.
"We are prepared to make an unprecedented multi-year missile defense commitment as part of a new memorandum of understanding with Israel on military assistance," the official, who requested anonymity, said.
"This commitment, which would amount to billions of dollars over 10 years, would be the first long-term pledge on missile defense support to Israel, affording Israel robust support for its missile defense, as well as predictability and facilitating long-term planning."
US lawmakers have, in recent years, given Israel up to $600 million in annual discretionary funds for missile defense, well beyond the $150 million requested by the Obama administration.
On Tuesday, the White House opposed a proposal to include $600 million for Israeli missile defense to an appropriations bill for the fiscal year starting on Oct. 1.
Netanyahu came out with a rare statement on the MOU talks, in the face of Israeli opposition accusations that he is endangering American largesse by feuding with Obama over Iran's nuclear program and Palestinian peace talks.
Netanyahu's office said on Twitter that the White House's move on Tuesday was part of an "internal debate" with Congress about supplementary missile defense funding for Israel.
"There has been no cut in American assistance," it tweeted. "Prime Minister Netanyahu is working to anchor this supplement as part of the discussions on the assistance agreement for the next ten years. Not only will security assistance for missile defense not be cut, it will be increased."
However, Netanyahu's acting national security adviser, Jacob Nagel, made clear that an agreement had not yet been reached. Israeli officials have hinted that, if the disputes persist, they might await the next US president in hope of getting a better MOU.
Netanyahu's government was working to wrap up the talks with the Obama administration, Nagel told reporters. But he added: "When we conclude that we have arrived at the final (US) offer, we will decide if we want it or not."
Another sticking point has been a US demand to reduce the amount of aid money - now 26.3 percent - that Israel can spend on its own military industries rather than on American products.
Visiting Israel for strategic talks, US Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Wednesday said it had received $8.5 million a day from the Obama administration in defense aid.
In a speech to the annual Herzliya Conference, Blinken did not give details on the MOU talks, but he said Washington was ready to give Israel "the largest single pledge of military assistance from the United States to any country in our history, cementing an unparalleled security relationship all the way to 2029".
The Obama administration is prepared to incorporate missile defense funds in a new long-term agreement on military aid for Israel, a US official said on Wednesday, accommodating in principle a key request by its ally in the ongoing talks.
Disputes over the scope and fine print of the memorandum of understanding (MOU) have clouded already difficult ties between Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and US President Barack Obama during the latter's final months in office.
The current MOU, signed in 2007 and due to expire in 2018, allocated to Israel around $30 billion in so-called foreign military financing. Israel has been seeking an increase of around $10 billion for the next decade hoping that the additional aid be earmarked for missile defense projects that were hitherto funded ad hoc by the US Congress.
US negotiators previously proposed a total of $3.5 billion to $3.7 billion annually for Israel under the new MOU, but did not say whether this might include missile defense funds. A senior US official was more forthcoming on Wednesday.
"We are prepared to make an unprecedented multi-year missile defense commitment as part of a new memorandum of understanding with Israel on military assistance," the official, who requested anonymity, said.
"This commitment, which would amount to billions of dollars over 10 years, would be the first long-term pledge on missile defense support to Israel, affording Israel robust support for its missile defense, as well as predictability and facilitating long-term planning."
US lawmakers have, in recent years, given Israel up to $600 million in annual discretionary funds for missile defense, well beyond the $150 million requested by the Obama administration.
On Tuesday, the White House opposed a proposal to include $600 million for Israeli missile defense to an appropriations bill for the fiscal year starting on Oct. 1.
Netanyahu came out with a rare statement on the MOU talks, in the face of Israeli opposition accusations that he is endangering American largesse by feuding with Obama over Iran's nuclear program and Palestinian peace talks.
Netanyahu's office said on Twitter that the White House's move on Tuesday was part of an "internal debate" with Congress about supplementary missile defense funding for Israel.
"There has been no cut in American assistance," it tweeted. "Prime Minister Netanyahu is working to anchor this supplement as part of the discussions on the assistance agreement for the next ten years. Not only will security assistance for missile defense not be cut, it will be increased."
However, Netanyahu's acting national security adviser, Jacob Nagel, made clear that an agreement had not yet been reached. Israeli officials have hinted that, if the disputes persist, they might await the next US president in hope of getting a better MOU.
Netanyahu's government was working to wrap up the talks with the Obama administration, Nagel told reporters. But he added: "When we conclude that we have arrived at the final (US) offer, we will decide if we want it or not."
Another sticking point has been a US demand to reduce the amount of aid money - now 26.3 percent - that Israel can spend on its own military industries rather than on American products.
Visiting Israel for strategic talks, US Deputy Secretary of State Antony Blinken on Wednesday said it had received $8.5 million a day from the Obama administration in defense aid.
In a speech to the annual Herzliya Conference, Blinken did not give details on the MOU talks, but he said Washington was ready to give Israel "the largest single pledge of military assistance from the United States to any country in our history, cementing an unparalleled security relationship all the way to 2029".
13 june 2016
A group of American Palestinians from the West Bank have filed a lawsuit in a Washington court against a string of US-based tycoons, companies and organizations supporting settlement construction on Palestinian land.
The suit was filed in the Federal District Court of Washington DC last Monday, June 6, 2016, according to Israeli newspapers.
Brought by Washington lawyer Martin McMahon on behalf of Basem Attamimi, a resident of the West Bank village of Nabi Saleh, and about 35 others, the suit says that the respondents contravened American law against money laundering, in terms of which the transfer of money for the purposes of committing a crime is illegal.
According to the plaintiffs, the establishment of settlements in the occupied territories has been accompanied by violence, death and injury, the destruction of houses and the burning of trees and is thus criminal.
The suit also includes other accusations against the respondents.
Among those named in the suit are casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, sponsor of settler groups in Jerusalem Irving Moskowitz, evangelist John Hagee, Israeli businessman Lev Leviev, media mogul and film producer Haim Saban, and former diplomat Elliot Abrams.
The American organizations named in the suit include Friends of the IDF in the US, Friends of Ariel, Honenu, the Hebron Fund, the Karnei Shomron Fund and the Falic Family Foundation as well as a group of pro-settlements lawyers.
Among the businesses named in the suit are Bank Leumi, Bank Hapoalim, Volvo (whose vehicles are allegedly used in house demolitions,) Africa-Israel, Motorola, Hewlett Packard and RE/MAX real estate.
Tamimi is a long-time anti-settlement activist. The current suit complements one he brought in December against the US Treasury for allowing tax-free donations to settlements. The federal court accepted the lawsuit and will convene a hearing on this case in early October.
The suit was filed in the Federal District Court of Washington DC last Monday, June 6, 2016, according to Israeli newspapers.
Brought by Washington lawyer Martin McMahon on behalf of Basem Attamimi, a resident of the West Bank village of Nabi Saleh, and about 35 others, the suit says that the respondents contravened American law against money laundering, in terms of which the transfer of money for the purposes of committing a crime is illegal.
According to the plaintiffs, the establishment of settlements in the occupied territories has been accompanied by violence, death and injury, the destruction of houses and the burning of trees and is thus criminal.
The suit also includes other accusations against the respondents.
Among those named in the suit are casino mogul Sheldon Adelson, sponsor of settler groups in Jerusalem Irving Moskowitz, evangelist John Hagee, Israeli businessman Lev Leviev, media mogul and film producer Haim Saban, and former diplomat Elliot Abrams.
The American organizations named in the suit include Friends of the IDF in the US, Friends of Ariel, Honenu, the Hebron Fund, the Karnei Shomron Fund and the Falic Family Foundation as well as a group of pro-settlements lawyers.
Among the businesses named in the suit are Bank Leumi, Bank Hapoalim, Volvo (whose vehicles are allegedly used in house demolitions,) Africa-Israel, Motorola, Hewlett Packard and RE/MAX real estate.
Tamimi is a long-time anti-settlement activist. The current suit complements one he brought in December against the US Treasury for allowing tax-free donations to settlements. The federal court accepted the lawsuit and will convene a hearing on this case in early October.
7 june 2016
New York Governor Andrew Cuomo signed an executive order, on Sunday, that will penalize people and businesses in support of the non-violent movement to boycott of Israel.
In a speech to The Harvard Club, Cuomo said that New York would “lead by example.”
“We are also a place of action,” he continued: “We want to take immediate action because we want Israel to know that we’re on their side. If you boycott against Israel, New York will boycott you.”
After completion of the process, executive-branch companies will be required to distance themselves from any organization or person on the list.
“The State of New York will not permit its own investment activity to further the BDS campaign in any way, shape or form, whether directly or indirectly,” the order states.
Legal organizations have previously labeled attempts to push forward anti-BDS legislation “21st Century McCarthyism,” and warned that it would create a “blacklist” of human rights advocates, mirroring the treatment of those who campaigned against Apartheid in South Africa.
The Center for Constitutional Rights, National Lawyers Guild, the New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestinian Legal have continuously called anti-BDS pressure politically motivated and an attack on the freedom of speech.
The New York legislature attempted to push through an anti-boycott motion for months due to pressure from pro-Israel lobby groups, but was unsuccessful.
The latest move by Cuomo has widely been seen as an attempt to sidestep the legal process and implement the policy on his own, Salon reports, according to the Palestine News Network (PNN).
In a speech to The Harvard Club, Cuomo said that New York would “lead by example.”
“We are also a place of action,” he continued: “We want to take immediate action because we want Israel to know that we’re on their side. If you boycott against Israel, New York will boycott you.”
After completion of the process, executive-branch companies will be required to distance themselves from any organization or person on the list.
“The State of New York will not permit its own investment activity to further the BDS campaign in any way, shape or form, whether directly or indirectly,” the order states.
Legal organizations have previously labeled attempts to push forward anti-BDS legislation “21st Century McCarthyism,” and warned that it would create a “blacklist” of human rights advocates, mirroring the treatment of those who campaigned against Apartheid in South Africa.
The Center for Constitutional Rights, National Lawyers Guild, the New York Civil Liberties Union and Palestinian Legal have continuously called anti-BDS pressure politically motivated and an attack on the freedom of speech.
The New York legislature attempted to push through an anti-boycott motion for months due to pressure from pro-Israel lobby groups, but was unsuccessful.
The latest move by Cuomo has widely been seen as an attempt to sidestep the legal process and implement the policy on his own, Salon reports, according to the Palestine News Network (PNN).
26 apr 2016
After 83 US senators send a letter to the White House, urging President Obama to sign a military aid deal with Israel, White House official says, 'We are prepared to sign an MOU with Israel that would constitute largest single military pledge' in US history.
The United States plans to offer Israel the largest military assistance package in US history, according to an Obama administration official.
"We are prepared to sign an MOU (memorandum of understanding) with Israel that would constitute the largest single pledge of military assistance to any country in US history," a White House official told Reuters.
The statement came hours after 83 US senators sent a letter to President Obama, urging him to reach a military assistance deal with Israel.
"In light of Israel's dramatically rising defense challenges, we stand ready to support a substantially enhanced new long-term agreement to help provide Israel the resources it requires to defend itself and preserve its qualitative military edge," said the letter.
The US and Israel have been engaged in intense negotiations in recent months to outline US military aid to Israel for the next 10 years.
In February, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he will wait for the next US president to take office, if the military package offered by the Obama administration does not sufficiently address Israeli security concerns, according to Israeli media.
However, Yedioth Ahronoth reported on Tuesday that Netanyahu would like to reach a military deal with Obama, fearing the uncertainty of the next US president's positions.
The United States plans to offer Israel the largest military assistance package in US history, according to an Obama administration official.
"We are prepared to sign an MOU (memorandum of understanding) with Israel that would constitute the largest single pledge of military assistance to any country in US history," a White House official told Reuters.
The statement came hours after 83 US senators sent a letter to President Obama, urging him to reach a military assistance deal with Israel.
"In light of Israel's dramatically rising defense challenges, we stand ready to support a substantially enhanced new long-term agreement to help provide Israel the resources it requires to defend itself and preserve its qualitative military edge," said the letter.
The US and Israel have been engaged in intense negotiations in recent months to outline US military aid to Israel for the next 10 years.
In February, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said he will wait for the next US president to take office, if the military package offered by the Obama administration does not sufficiently address Israeli security concerns, according to Israeli media.
However, Yedioth Ahronoth reported on Tuesday that Netanyahu would like to reach a military deal with Obama, fearing the uncertainty of the next US president's positions.
25 apr 2016
More than 80 percent of American senators signed a letter addressed to US President Barack Obama urging him to reach an agreement on an increased military aid package to Israel.
"In light of Israel's dramatically rising defense challenges, we stand ready to support a substantially enhanced new long-term agreement to help provide Israel the resources it requires to defend itself and preserve its qualitative military edge," news agency Reuters quoted the letter as saying.
A reported 83 of the 100 Senators in US Congress signed the letter, including aspiring Republican presidential nominee Ted Cruz, but excluding Senator Bernie Sanders, who is running in the Democratic presidential primaries.
Discussions regarding a new aid agreement have been ongoing for the past several months.
Israel reportedly requested at least $5 billion in annual military aid from the US that would be fixed for the ten years to follow, far surpassing the $3 billion per year currently received by Israel through a military aid agreement set to end by 2018.
After the terms of the agreement became unclear in February, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said during a cabinet meeting that he would wait for the next US president to sign a deal, if the current administration was “unable to meet Israel’s security needs.”
Earlier this month, Netanyahu reportedly backtracked, telling Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who led the letter, that he would prefer to have a deal signed before Obama leaves office.
According to Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the United States government has offered up two possible ten-year military aid packages for when the current one expires: one which would increase the total amount of aid given between 2018 and 2028 to $40 billion, on the condition that Israel not lobby the US Congress for more money during that time period; and another in which the US commits to giving $34 billion over ten years, but without the aforementioned lobbying restrictions.
The Israeli government has reportedly been unhappy with both options, despite them representing a $4 to $6 billion increase from the previous ten-year deal.
While US-Israel relations have seen a series of diplomatic disputes during Obama’s administration, Israel remains the number one long-time recipient of US military aid, and US representatives have largely neglected efforts to hold Israel accountable for violations of Palestinian rights and international law.
More than 90 percent of the United States House of Representatives signed earlier this month letter urging Obama to veto “any resolution at the United Nations that sets parameters for Israeli-Palestinian talks.”
"In light of Israel's dramatically rising defense challenges, we stand ready to support a substantially enhanced new long-term agreement to help provide Israel the resources it requires to defend itself and preserve its qualitative military edge," news agency Reuters quoted the letter as saying.
A reported 83 of the 100 Senators in US Congress signed the letter, including aspiring Republican presidential nominee Ted Cruz, but excluding Senator Bernie Sanders, who is running in the Democratic presidential primaries.
Discussions regarding a new aid agreement have been ongoing for the past several months.
Israel reportedly requested at least $5 billion in annual military aid from the US that would be fixed for the ten years to follow, far surpassing the $3 billion per year currently received by Israel through a military aid agreement set to end by 2018.
After the terms of the agreement became unclear in February, Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu said during a cabinet meeting that he would wait for the next US president to sign a deal, if the current administration was “unable to meet Israel’s security needs.”
Earlier this month, Netanyahu reportedly backtracked, telling Republican Senator Lindsey Graham, who led the letter, that he would prefer to have a deal signed before Obama leaves office.
According to Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the United States government has offered up two possible ten-year military aid packages for when the current one expires: one which would increase the total amount of aid given between 2018 and 2028 to $40 billion, on the condition that Israel not lobby the US Congress for more money during that time period; and another in which the US commits to giving $34 billion over ten years, but without the aforementioned lobbying restrictions.
The Israeli government has reportedly been unhappy with both options, despite them representing a $4 to $6 billion increase from the previous ten-year deal.
While US-Israel relations have seen a series of diplomatic disputes during Obama’s administration, Israel remains the number one long-time recipient of US military aid, and US representatives have largely neglected efforts to hold Israel accountable for violations of Palestinian rights and international law.
More than 90 percent of the United States House of Representatives signed earlier this month letter urging Obama to veto “any resolution at the United Nations that sets parameters for Israeli-Palestinian talks.”
16 apr 2016
More than 90 percent of the United States House of Representatives have signed a letter urging Obama to veto “any resolution at the United Nations that sets parameters for Israeli-Palestinian talks.”
Release of the letter comes as Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to present a draft resolution condemning Israeli settlements to the UN Security Council in New York later this month.
The resolution will be the first to directly condemn Israeli settlements as illegal under international law since the United States vetoed a similar resolution in 2011.
The congressional letter -- signed by 394 members of the total 435 -- expressed support for a two-state solution and voiced concern that “one-sided initiatives may arise at the UN in the coming months. [...] Such efforts dangerously hinder the prospects for resuming direct negotiations.”
In a press release Thursday, the UN said the viability of the internationally-backed two-state solution is “in danger,” citing Israel’s expansions of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank as a main threat to negotiations.
The construction of Jewish-only settlements on occupied Palestinian land has long been considered a violation of international law by the UN, although Israel contests this and has yet to be held accountable by the international community.
The forthcoming UN resolution will mark the latest attempt by the Palestinian leadership to counter ongoing Israeli violations in the international arena, brought on in part by decades of failed negotiations.
Members of the United States Congress in March delayed a payment of $159 million in aid allocated for the Palestinian Authority in effort to pressure the PA to relaunch negotiations with Israel.
In spite of this most recent move by US lawmakers to boost ties with Israel, there has been growing criticism among some American politicians of Israel's violations of human rights.
In a departure from mainstream American political discourse, during the Democratic debate Thursday US senator and presidential candidate Bernie Sanders condemned Israel for killing Palestinian civilians in Israel’s offensive on the Gaza Strip in 2014 and said “There comes a time when if we pursue justice and peace, we are going to have to say that (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu is not right all of the time.”
The US's annual report of global human rights abuses was published Thursday that highlighted numerous allegations of Israeli rights abuses, including the arbitrary arrest and torture of Palestinians, as well as restrictions on their freedom of movement and speech, and accused Israel of an "excessive use of force" against Palestinians, amounting to a violation of human rights.
A joint letter published last month by senior Democrat Patrick Leahy and 10 other congressmen suggested that some US military aid to Israel should be suspended if reports of "gross violations of human rights," including "extrajudicial killings," should be proven true.
While US-Israel relations have seen a series of diplomatic disputes during Obama’s administration, Israel remains the number one long-time recipient of US military aid, and discussions regarding a new aid agreement have been ongoing.
Release of the letter comes as Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas is expected to present a draft resolution condemning Israeli settlements to the UN Security Council in New York later this month.
The resolution will be the first to directly condemn Israeli settlements as illegal under international law since the United States vetoed a similar resolution in 2011.
The congressional letter -- signed by 394 members of the total 435 -- expressed support for a two-state solution and voiced concern that “one-sided initiatives may arise at the UN in the coming months. [...] Such efforts dangerously hinder the prospects for resuming direct negotiations.”
In a press release Thursday, the UN said the viability of the internationally-backed two-state solution is “in danger,” citing Israel’s expansions of illegal settlements in the occupied West Bank as a main threat to negotiations.
The construction of Jewish-only settlements on occupied Palestinian land has long been considered a violation of international law by the UN, although Israel contests this and has yet to be held accountable by the international community.
The forthcoming UN resolution will mark the latest attempt by the Palestinian leadership to counter ongoing Israeli violations in the international arena, brought on in part by decades of failed negotiations.
Members of the United States Congress in March delayed a payment of $159 million in aid allocated for the Palestinian Authority in effort to pressure the PA to relaunch negotiations with Israel.
In spite of this most recent move by US lawmakers to boost ties with Israel, there has been growing criticism among some American politicians of Israel's violations of human rights.
In a departure from mainstream American political discourse, during the Democratic debate Thursday US senator and presidential candidate Bernie Sanders condemned Israel for killing Palestinian civilians in Israel’s offensive on the Gaza Strip in 2014 and said “There comes a time when if we pursue justice and peace, we are going to have to say that (Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin) Netanyahu is not right all of the time.”
The US's annual report of global human rights abuses was published Thursday that highlighted numerous allegations of Israeli rights abuses, including the arbitrary arrest and torture of Palestinians, as well as restrictions on their freedom of movement and speech, and accused Israel of an "excessive use of force" against Palestinians, amounting to a violation of human rights.
A joint letter published last month by senior Democrat Patrick Leahy and 10 other congressmen suggested that some US military aid to Israel should be suspended if reports of "gross violations of human rights," including "extrajudicial killings," should be proven true.
While US-Israel relations have seen a series of diplomatic disputes during Obama’s administration, Israel remains the number one long-time recipient of US military aid, and discussions regarding a new aid agreement have been ongoing.
15 apr 2016
Presidential candidate Bernie Sanders upheld his previous comments condemning Israel for its disproportionate killing of Palestinian civilians in Israel’s offensive on the Gaza Strip in 2014, while rival candidate Hillary Clinton maintained unwavering support for Israel at the Democratic debate in New York on Thursday.
“As somebody who is 100% pro-Israel, in the long run [...] if we are ever going to bring peace to that region which has seen so much hatred and so much war, we are going to have to treat the Palestinian people with respect and dignity,” Sanders said.
He pointed to the some “10,000 civilians who were wounded and 1,500 who were killed,” correcting his former assertion in a recent, widely-criticized interview with the New York Daily News that misrepresented the death toll as “over 10,000” innocent Palestinians.
When asked if Israel should end its disproportionate response to Palestinian attacks, Clinton first flaunted her involvement with cease-fire negotiations between Israel and Hamas in 2012 and said: “I can tell you right now... (Israel) do not seek this kind of attacks. They do not invite the rockets raining down on their towns and villages.”
Sanders criticized her for evading the question, and Clinton responded by saying, “of course there have to be precautions taken but even the most independent analyst will say the way that Hamas places its weapons, the way that it often has its fighters in civilian garb, it is terrible.”
She went on to condemn Hamas for turning the Gaza Strip into a terrorist haven after “Israel left Gaza” and “turned the keys over to the Palestinian people.”
Sanders also took Clinton to task for her speech before AIPAC when she said she would "vigorously oppose" any attempts by outside parties to "impose" a peaceful solution between Israel and Palestinians if elected president.
“I heard virtually no discussion at all about the needs of the Palestinian people. Almost none in that speech,” Sanders said. “Long term there will never be peace in that region unless the United States plays an even-handed role trying to bring people together and recognizing the serious problems that exist among the Palestinian people.”
To this Clinton responded saying, “describing the problem is a lot easier than trying to solve it,” again crediting her diplomatic experience in her roles as first lady, senator, and secretary of state.
Sanders also spoke out against the Israeli Prime Minister: “There comes a time when if we pursue justice and peace, we are going to have to say that Netanyahu is not right all of the time.”
During Clinton’s AIPAC speech, she said that inviting Netanyahu to the White House would be "one of the first things I'll do in office."
Analysts have said that Sanders comments mark a distinct seachange in mainstream American political discourse that typically shies away from any criticism of Israel.
However, a recent public opinion poll conducted by Ramallah-based Palestinian Center for Survey and Research shows that the majority of Palestinians believe the political affiliation of the future US president “makes no difference” when it comes to advancing the peace process.
“As somebody who is 100% pro-Israel, in the long run [...] if we are ever going to bring peace to that region which has seen so much hatred and so much war, we are going to have to treat the Palestinian people with respect and dignity,” Sanders said.
He pointed to the some “10,000 civilians who were wounded and 1,500 who were killed,” correcting his former assertion in a recent, widely-criticized interview with the New York Daily News that misrepresented the death toll as “over 10,000” innocent Palestinians.
When asked if Israel should end its disproportionate response to Palestinian attacks, Clinton first flaunted her involvement with cease-fire negotiations between Israel and Hamas in 2012 and said: “I can tell you right now... (Israel) do not seek this kind of attacks. They do not invite the rockets raining down on their towns and villages.”
Sanders criticized her for evading the question, and Clinton responded by saying, “of course there have to be precautions taken but even the most independent analyst will say the way that Hamas places its weapons, the way that it often has its fighters in civilian garb, it is terrible.”
She went on to condemn Hamas for turning the Gaza Strip into a terrorist haven after “Israel left Gaza” and “turned the keys over to the Palestinian people.”
Sanders also took Clinton to task for her speech before AIPAC when she said she would "vigorously oppose" any attempts by outside parties to "impose" a peaceful solution between Israel and Palestinians if elected president.
“I heard virtually no discussion at all about the needs of the Palestinian people. Almost none in that speech,” Sanders said. “Long term there will never be peace in that region unless the United States plays an even-handed role trying to bring people together and recognizing the serious problems that exist among the Palestinian people.”
To this Clinton responded saying, “describing the problem is a lot easier than trying to solve it,” again crediting her diplomatic experience in her roles as first lady, senator, and secretary of state.
Sanders also spoke out against the Israeli Prime Minister: “There comes a time when if we pursue justice and peace, we are going to have to say that Netanyahu is not right all of the time.”
During Clinton’s AIPAC speech, she said that inviting Netanyahu to the White House would be "one of the first things I'll do in office."
Analysts have said that Sanders comments mark a distinct seachange in mainstream American political discourse that typically shies away from any criticism of Israel.
However, a recent public opinion poll conducted by Ramallah-based Palestinian Center for Survey and Research shows that the majority of Palestinians believe the political affiliation of the future US president “makes no difference” when it comes to advancing the peace process.
