Casual Observation

19 Comments

1. 

   MNPundit on December 23, 2016 at 4:10 pm

   What happened? I thought Egypt pulled their resolution after Trump talked to them and Israel. Did they resubmit or is this a different resolution?

   And what role did Trump showing up Obama in the original situation do in this? Did Obama get mad that Trump is already trying to conduct foreign policy as if hes in charge?

   • 

     netjunki on December 23, 2016 at 4:29 pm

     I’m pretty shocked at this as well. Apparently is was re-sponsored by New Zealand, Malaysia, Venezuela and Senegal (from the article).

   • 

     curtadams on December 23, 2016 at 4:55 pm

     I’d read this more as a slap on Israel. Netanyahu was pretty actively supporting Trump, so Obama lets through this (eminently reasonable) resolution which can be used against Israel’s ethnic cleansing indefinitely. This is one thing Trump can’t roll back.

2. 

   TarheelDem on December 23, 2016 at 5:21 pm

   Still not enough to pay back for the Congressional Bibi-Diss about dealing with Iran’s reported nuclear program.

3. 

   boran2 on December 23, 2016 at 5:26 pm

   Nothing frees one’s outlook like not having to get reelected.

4. 

   BooMan on December 23, 2016 at 5:37 pm

   Two plus two equals four.

   • 

     Shaun Appleby on December 23, 2016 at 9:48 pm

     Yet “a man once convicted of trying to sell stolen biotech material to the Russian KGB espionage agency” = “Man With Alleged KGB Ties” in the headline. I think we are in for a bumpy ride.

5. 

   seabe on December 23, 2016 at 5:38 pm

   Jennifer Rubin and David Frum and the rest of the neocon #NeverTrumpers are going to find some serious religion if Trump moves the embassy to Jerusalem. They’re already apocalyptic at language that already mirrors State Dept policy, calling for the UN office to be moved out of NY in response.  

   • 

     seabe on December 23, 2016 at 5:40 pm

     Is no Democratic senator going to support this decision?  

     • 

       BooMan on December 23, 2016 at 7:45 pm

       Feinstein did.

6. 

   Salunga on December 23, 2016 at 7:59 pm

      Abstaining is wonderful. Obama could have given Bibi a real kick in the nuts by having the U.S. vote for it. Let the world know we are equally repulsed by the Israeli religious wackos.

7. 

   shan on December 23, 2016 at 8:07 pm

   About time.  Think this was for our European friends.  They desperately want to cut back on their financial support of Israel since the donald plans to abandon them.  I think the donald and Bibi just got played by Egypt.  Obama is clearing space for the donald to do his thing out in the open for all to see.

   Don’t you wonder why Putin did not veto.  

   • 

     The Voice In The Wilderness on December 23, 2016 at 8:34 pm

     Don’t you wonder why Putin did not veto.  

     Russia has always been antisemitic.

     • 

       seabe on December 23, 2016 at 10:12 pm

       Netanyahu and Putin are besties.

8. 

   LosGatosCA on December 23, 2016 at 9:21 pm

   Impressed? That must be a low bar to clear.

   28 days until the end of the administration on a symbolic measure that will be ignored both in Israel and the US after Jan 20, 2017.

   The gesture may not be stupid, but it’s certainly futile.

   And really, really brave at this point when there are chances or consequences of retaliation. LOL

   • 

     LosGatosCA on December 23, 2016 at 9:22 pm

     Zero chances of consequences/retaliation.

   • 

     oaguabonita on December 24, 2016 at 10:27 am

     So not so inconsequential as you paint it.

     U.S. had always vetoed to prevent this becoming official position of UNSC.

     Now it IS official position. Including the part condemning Palestinian wrongdoing, too, which U.S. insisted be included (as it had not been in previous resolutions U.S. had vetoed, as I understand it), as the condition for withholding veto.

     So, yes, impressive.

     But hey, it didn’t instantaneously bring global peace and harmony, end ecological devastation, simultaneously solve both population and hunger problems, and usher in the Golden Age of Aquarius. So, yeah, I get your point.

9. 

   Oui on December 23, 2016 at 9:44 pm

   Conference of Presidents Welcomes Postponement of Security Council Vote on One-Sided Palestinian-Israeli Resolution New York, N.Y.

   Leaders of the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations today welcomed the decision to postpone consideration by the Security Council of a one-sided condemnatory resolution on the Palestinian-Israeli issue.

   Stephen M. Greenberg, Chairman, and Malcolm Hoenlein, Executive Vice Chairman and CEO, of the Conference of Presidents said, “The draft resolution, promoted by the Palestinians, and backed by the Arab League, that was presented to the UN Security Council last night was ill-conceived and ill-timed.  We are pleased it will not be voted on today in the Security Council and hope the resolution will be withdrawn completely.

   We appreciate the efforts that led to the postponement and hope the resolution will be withdrawn completely.  In particular, we recognize the efforts of President el-Sisi of Egypt who instructed his delegation, that sits on the Security Council as the representative of the Arab League, to postpone the vote that had been scheduled for 3:00 pm today.

   Many people worked behind the scenes to prevent the resolution from coming up, including officials in the current and incoming administrations and Members of Congress.

   The Conference of Presidents and our member organizations have been working continuously on this issue for many weeks.  In our discussions with U.S. officials, as well as diplomats at the UN and leaders in foreign capitals, we expressed concerns about the content and timing of the resolution.  

   This measure would have been a further blow to the chances for peace and was yet another Palestinian maneuver to avoid direct negotiations, which is the only true path to a meaningful peace process.

   We hope the Palestinians will finally halt their repeated efforts to utilize the UN and other international bodies as a weapon against Israel and to avoid the responsibilities inherent in direct negotiations.

   ○ Pro-Settler House Members Engel, Nadler, and Hoenlein Provoke Muslim Violence Touring Disputed Jerusalem Holy Places
   ○ Trump Saves the Day on Obama-Backed Anti-Settlements UNSC Resolution | Jewish Press |

   Posted earlier in my diary on this very topic – Obama Won’t Veto Anti-Israel Resolution @UN.

10. 

    Oui on December 24, 2016 at 2:46 pm

    That ‘Shameful’ UN Resolution Actually Blasts the Settlements — Not Israel  Opinion by J.J. Goldberg in The Forward

    In the United States, the vote was condemned by congressional leaders from both parties and by heads of the best known Jewish organizations. The Anti-Defamation League said it was “outraged over the U.S. failure to veto this biased and unconstructive UNSC resolution.” The American Jewish Committee was “deeply disappointed.”

    Organizations on the left took the other side. Americans for Peace Now welcomed the U.N. vote, saying the resolution “is pro-Israel in the deepest sense of the term, supporting Israel’s existence and security, and standing against those who would sacrifice both at the altar of settlements, for an ideological, expansionist agenda.” J Street praisedthe U.S. decision to abstain rather than veto, claiming the U.N. resolution “reaffirms the need for a two-state solution and calls for a halt to actions by both sides that serve to undermine the prospects for peace.”

    In fact the resolution didn’t say much that hasn’t been said countless times before. It condemned Israeli settlements in the West Bank — “including East Jerusalem” — as illegal “under international law” and “a major obstacle to the achievement of the two-State solution and a just, lasting and comprehensive peace.”

    If there was any change in tone, it was in the swipes it took at the Palestinians for their contributions to the stalemate. The resolution said that the imperatives to combat terrorism and to “clearly condemn all acts of terrorism” are “obligations under international law,” effectively putting Israel’s complaints about Palestinian behavior on the same legal plane as the Palestinian complaint about Israeli settlements.
    It also cited “international law, including international humanitarian law” as bases for the obligation to “observe calm and restraint” and “refrain from provocative actions, incitement and inflammatory rhetoric.”

    Products from Occupied Territory not “Made in Israel”

    Israel was particularly stung by a provision in the resolution that called on “all States” to “distinguish, in their relevant dealings, between the territory of the State of Israel and the territories occupied since 1967.”

    The provision was a scarcely veiled endorsement of measures that seek to deny to settlements benefits that are granted to Israel. These range from European requirements that settlement products be labeled as such, not “made in Israel,” as well as duty-free import rights granted to Israel but denied to settlement products and scientific and academic programs available to Israelis and Israeli institutions but not to West Bank facilities. Israel claims that legitimizing boycotts of the settlements opens the door to boycotts of Israel.

    ○ Interpretative Notice on indication of origin of goods from the territories occupied by Israel since June 1967 | EU Commission | [pdf]
    ○ Scarlett Johansson’s Image As SodaStream Ambassador

    Posted in my latest diary – PMO Seething Mad at ‘Anti-Semites’ After UN Vote.