This is quite amusing considering that many of the former diplomats that wrote a similar to Tony Blair critical of his Iraq and Israeli/Palistinian positions have turned out to be paid by Arab governments or other Arab interests.
Regardless, I hardly consider this news to begin with. How is a letter from former diplomats considered newsworthy. I'm sure you could find just as many former diplomats supportive of George W. Bush's policies but the BBC doesn't consider that newsworthy and I can imagine that it wouldn't print the text of such a letter.
The letter repeats the same tired lines typically critical of Israel:
We also are deeply concerned by your April 14 endorsement of Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's unilateral plan to reject the rights of three million Palestinians, to deny the right of refugees to return to their homeland, and to retain five large illegal settlement blocs in the occupied West Bank.The authors of this letter of course ignore the fact that Bill Clinton had talks with Arafat discussing all of these matters and Arafat responded with the second intifada. Does history not mean anything to these people? They also give us this piece of wisdom:
This plan defies UN Security Council resolutions calling for Israel's return of occupied territories.
You have placed US diplomats, civilians and military doing their jobs overseas in an untenable and even dangerous position
It ignores international laws declaring Israeli settlements illegal.
It flouts UN Resolution 194, passed in 1948, which affirms the right of refugees to return to their homes or receive compensation for the loss of their property and assistance in resettling in a host country should they choose to do so.
A return to the time-honored American tradition of fairness will reverse the present tide of ill will in Europe and the Middle East - even in Iraq.Once again Clinton couldn't have been more fair to Arab interests and look where that got them.
No comments:
Post a Comment