http://www.nytimes.com/2011/09/22/world/obama-rebuffed-as-palestinians-pursue-un-seat.html?_r=1&ref=global-home&pagewanted=all
Obama Rebuffed as Palestinians Pursue U.N. Seat
 
Damon Winter/The New York Times
The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, listened Wednesday as President Obama 
spoke at the United Nations. 

By HELENE COOPER and STEVEN LEE MYERS
Published: September 21, 2011 
UNITED NATIONS — A last-ditch American effort to head off a Palestinian bid for 
membership in the United Nations faltered. President Obama tried to qualify his 
own call, just a year ago, for a Palestinian state. And President Nicolas 
Sarkozy of France stepped forcefully into the void, with a proposal that 
pointedly repudiated Mr. Obama’s approach. 

Multimedia
 
TimesCast | Obama Speaks at U.N.
 
Obama's United Nations Address
 Multimedia Feature 
Challenges in Defining an Israeli-Palestinian Border
Enlarge This Image
 
Doug Mills/The New York Times
President Obama addressed the United Nations General Assembly on Wednesday, 
saying, “Peace will not come through statements and resolutions at the U.N.” 

Readers’ Comments
  Share your thoughts.
  a.. Post a Comment » 
  b.. Read All Comments (350) »
The extraordinary tableau Wednesday at the United Nations underscored a stark 
new reality: the United States is facing the prospect of having to share, or 
even cede, its decades-long role as the architect of Middle East peacemaking. 

Even before Mr. Obama walked up to the General Assembly podium to make his 
difficult address, where he declared that “Peace will not come through 
statements and resolutions at the U.N.,” American officials acknowledged that 
their various last-minute attempts to jump-start Israeli-Palestinian 
negotiations with help from European allies and Russia had collapsed. 

American diplomats turned their attention to how to navigate a new era in which 
questions of Palestinian statehood are squarely on the global diplomatic 
agenda. There used to be three relevant players in any Middle East peace 
effort: the Palestinians, Israel and the United States. But expansions of 
settlements in the West Bank and a hardening of Israeli attitudes have isolated 
Israel and its main backer, the United States. Dissension among Palestinian 
factions has undermined the prospect for a new accord as well. 

Finally, Washington politics has limited Mr. Obama’s ability to try to break 
the logjam if that means appearing to distance himself from Israel. Republicans 
have mounted a challenge to lure away Jewish voters who supported Democrats in 
the past, after some Jewish leaders sharply criticized Mr. Obama for trying to 
push Israel too hard. 

The result has been two and a half years of stagnation on the Middle East peace 
front that has left Arabs — and many world leaders — frustrated, and ready to 
try an alternative to the American-centric approach that has prevailed since 
the 1970s. 

“The U.S. cannot lead on an issue that it is so boxed in on by its domestic 
politics,” said Daniel Levy, a former Israeli peace negotiator in the 
government of Ehud Barak. “And therefore, with the region in such rapid 
upheaval and the two-state solution dying, as long as the U.S. is paralyzed, 
others are going to have to step up.” 

Mr. Obama himself seemed to forecast this back in May when, speaking to the 
American Israel Public Affairs Committee, he warned that events in the Middle 
East could lead to a challenge to the status quo if the Israelis and 
Palestinians did not move quickly toward a peace deal. 

“There’s a reason why the Palestinians are pursuing their interests at the 
United Nations,” Mr. Obama said then. “They recognize that there is an 
impatience with the peace process, or the absence of one, not just in the Arab 
world, in Latin America, in Asia, and in Europe. And that impatience is 
growing, and it’s already manifesting itself in capitals around the world.” 

The Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, delivered on the threat. He announced 
last Friday his plans to go to the Security Council in a quest for Palestinian 
membership in the United Nations and international legal recognition of 
statehood, putting Mr. Obama in the position of having to stand in the way. 
Israel and its allies in Congress, where Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of 
Israel enjoys broad influence, were sharply opposed. 

So on Wednesday, Mr. Obama “did exactly what he had to do,” said David 
Rothkopf, a former Clinton administration official and a visiting fellow at the 
Carnegie Endowment for International Peace. “He made a clear statement for what 
is a clear U.S. position and put himself squarely as a champion of the status 
quo.” 

Mr. Netanyahu, Mr. Rothkopf said, “has managed to read the U.S. political 
situation perfectly, making Obama acutely aware that he could be losing part of 
his base, and that, I think, in turn is what has locked Obama in.” 

The Palestinians have never fully trusted the United States to serve as an 
honest broker with Israel. But its credibility with the Palestinians has 
crumbled with the recognition that Mr. Obama may not have the clout to press 
the Israelis into a peace deal that requires significant compromises. 

“The president in his speech at the U.N. today admitted that the U.S. somehow 
failed in bridging the gap between the two sides,” the Palestinian 
representative in Washington, Maen Rashid Areikat, said in an interview on 
Wednesday. “He said that he feels frustration and he understands the 
frustration of everybody. That’s good, but I think it goes much deeper. I think 
what the U.S. administration needs to say is why it failed.” 

He acknowledged the administration’s efforts — with the appointment of George 
J. Mitchell Jr. as special envoy to the region and Mr. Obama’s own speeches, 
especially in Cairo — but said the momentum of his early presidency flagged as 
the administration bound itself so closely to the Israelis and their supporters 
in the United States, especially Congress. The Palestinians ultimately decided 
that the best hope for breaking an impasse with the Israelis rested with making 
their case to a larger international forum. 

“One big reason for losing that momentum,” he said, “was the failure of the 
administration to use its leverage with an Israeli government that adamantly 
was opposed to the efforts of the United States to bridge the gap in the Middle 
East.” 

After Mr. Obama laid out his defense of the peace process, Mr. Sarkozy took to 
the same podium in a forceful disavowal of Mr. Obama’s position. “Let us cease 
our endless debates on the parameters,” he said, calling instead for a General 
Assembly resolution that would upgrade the Palestinians to “observer status” as 
a bridge toward statehood. “Let us begin negotiations, and adopt a precise 
timetable.” 

The outcome of the Palestinian bid for membership remains uncertain. The 
administration still hopes that the process of considering the Palestinian bid 
at the Security Council could provide a fresh opportunity for new talks. The 
move puts new pressure on Mr. Netanyahu’s government, reeling from setbacks to 
its security from the turmoil of the Arab Spring, with results that analysts 
say are hard to forecast. But a quick return to the status quo, when the United 
States dictated the terms of talks, seems unlikely, given strong Russian and 
French support for a new approach by the Palestinians. 

Alain Juppe, the French foreign minister, told reporters after Mr. Sarkozy’s 
speech that the United States “cannot do it alone” in negotiations for a Middle 
East peace, and that a collective approach was needed. Mr. Juppe said he 
thought this time that the five permanent Security Council members should have 
a direct role in shepherding talks. 

Somewhat incongruously, Mr. Sarkozy visited Mr. Obama’s hotel on Wednesday 
afternoon for a previously scheduled meeting with the president, and was 
effusive, in front of the cameras before the meeting, in his praise for Mr. 
Obama. Mr. Obama, for his part, refused to engage with reporters assembled for 
the photo op. “Do you support the French one-year timeline?” one reporter 
asked. Mr. Obama responded, “I already answered a question from you before.” 

Another reporter asked Mr. Obama if he agreed with the French position on 
Palestine. Mr. Obama smiled and replied, “Bonjour.” A third reporter queried if 
that response constituted a “no comment.” The president’s response: “No 
comment.” 


Neil MacFarquhar contributed reporting. 

Related
  a.. Obama Says Palestinians Are Using Wrong Forum (September 22, 2011) 
  b.. France Breaks With Obama on Palestinian Statehood Issue (September 22, 
2011) 
  c.. Man in the News: Taking a Stand, and Shedding Arafat’s Shadow (September 
22, 2011) 
Related in Opinion
  Ehud Olmert: Peace Now, or Never (September 22, 2011)
  a.. Interactive Map: Mapping Mideast Peace 
  b.. Room For Debate: Can Israel Survive Without a Palestinian State? 

[Non-text portions of this message have been removed]



------------------------------------

Post message: [email protected]
Subscribe   :  [email protected]
Unsubscribe :  [email protected]
List owner  :  [email protected]
Homepage    :  http://proletar.8m.com/Yahoo! Groups Links

<*> To visit your group on the web, go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/

<*> Your email settings:
    Individual Email | Traditional

<*> To change settings online go to:
    http://groups.yahoo.com/group/proletar/join
    (Yahoo! ID required)

<*> To change settings via email:
    [email protected] 
    [email protected]

<*> To unsubscribe from this group, send an email to:
    [email protected]

<*> Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to:
    http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/

Kirim email ke