Israelis called Trump to weigh in ahead of UN Security Council vote

[NeoConsSuck]

Source: CNN

Washington (CNN)The Israeli government reached out to President-elect Donald Trump for help in pressuring the Obama administration to veto a UN Security Council resolution condemning settlement activity, a senior Israeli official told CNN.

Egypt delayed a potential showdown vote at the Security Council on the resolution after pressure from the Israelis, a Western official said Thursday. That put off a potential standoff between the US and Israel and prompted what some analysts called unprecedented interference from the US President-elect.

But the Israeli official told CNN that his country also approached the Trump campaign after it felt that it had failed to persuade the Obama administration to veto the planned vote. The official said that Israel "implored the White House not to go ahead and told them that if they did, we would have no choice but to reach out to President-elect Trump."

"We did reach out to the President-elect and are deeply appreciative that he weighed in, which was not a simple thing to do," the official said. Publicly, the resolution drew condemnations from Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and Trump, who called on the White House to veto it. Having a President-elect weigh in to influence US policy is highly unusual, analysts said.

Read more: http://www.cnn.com/2016/12/22/politics/un-vote-israel-settlements/index.html?adkey=bn

[elmac]

1. I guess their okay with working with Nazis nowadays

My, how things have changed.

[still_one]

3. not exactly

"President-elect Donald Trump's transition team adviser, Becky Dunlop, joined a group of Republican and European lawmakers in boycotting a meeting with Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely, The Times of Israel reported on Wednesday.

According to the report, Dunlop and other lawmakers boycotted the scheduled briefing with the Israeli official after they learned that Israel refused to allow Kristina Winberg, a member of the European Parliament for the Sweden Democrats, to join the event. Dunlop and the lawmakers are in Israel for three-day Jerusalem Leaders Summit of conservative parliamentarians.

The Israeli officials justified their decision to ban Winberg due to her "neo-Nazi tendencies."

“The Swedish representative is a member of a party with neo-Nazi tendencies and therefore the Foreign Ministry decided not to include her in the meeting with Hotovely,” Emmanuel Nahshon, a spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry, said in a statement, according to the publication.

“Unfortunately the entire group decided to cancel the meeting,” he added."


http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/311315-trump-adviser-boycotts-israeli-official-is-support-of-swedish

[Wellstone ruled]

2. Watched this story evolve all day,

Stupid Con Job stepped into it this time. This is not going to end well for Con Job. And our President Obama will do what is best for the USA. You just knew the Con Job Clown was about break will decades of Protocol. Bush was just plain ignorant,but this Guy is a total different trip.

[still_one]

4. My question is simply, why don't they name who this Israeli official is. I am really tired of

these "unnamed officials"

NY Times reported things differently:

"Trump Urges Obama to Veto U.N. Resolution on Israeli Settlements"

"UNITED NATIONS President-elect Donald J. Trump publicly pressured President Obama on Thursday to veto a United Nations resolution critical of Israel, the newly elected leaders most direct intervention in foreign policy during his transition to power.

Mr. Trump called on the president to use the United States veto in the United Nations Security Council to block the Arab-sponsored resolution, which condemned the construction and expansion of Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank and East Jerusalem. The Obama administration, which vetoed a similar resolution in 2011, had withheld judgment over the latest measure.

With the United States position publicly in doubt, the resolution was pulled by its sponsor, Egypt, on Thursday morning, hours before the council was scheduled to vote, and it was unclear when or even if it would be brought back up. But Mr. Trumps forceful insertion into the matter reflected an unusual public split between incoming and departing presidents and highlighted the stark shift on Middle East policy ahead when the new administration takes over in a month.

Mr. Obama, frustrated by two failed efforts to broker peace between Israelis and Palestinians during his tenure, has been considering an effort to lay out an American framework during his final days in office. Palestinian leaders and their allies had hoped he would allow the anti-settlement resolution at the United Nations to pass as an expression of frustration at Israeli policies he considers unconstructive."

http://www.nytimes.com/2016/12/22/world/middleeast/donald-trump-united-nations-israel-settlements.html?hp&action=click&pgtype=Homepage&clickSource=story-heading&module=first-column-region®ion=top-news&WT.nav=top-news

Then there is this story which isn't getting too much press:

"President-elect Donald Trump's transition team adviser, Becky Dunlop, joined a group of Republican and European lawmakers in boycotting a meeting with Israeli Deputy Foreign Minister Tzipi Hotovely, The Times of Israel reported on Wednesday.

According to the report, Dunlop and other lawmakers boycotted the scheduled briefing with the Israeli official after they learned that Israel refused to allow Kristina Winberg, a member of the European Parliament for the Sweden Democrats, to join the event. Dunlop and the lawmakers are in Israel for three-day Jerusalem Leaders Summit of conservative parliamentarians.

The Israeli officials justified their decision to ban Winberg due to her "neo-Nazi tendencies."

“The Swedish representative is a member of a party with neo-Nazi tendencies and therefore the Foreign Ministry decided not to include her in the meeting with Hotovely,” Emmanuel Nahshon, a spokesperson for the Foreign Ministry, said in a statement, according to the publication.

“Unfortunately the entire group decided to cancel the meeting,” he added."


http://thehill.com/blogs/blog-briefing-room/news/311315-trump-adviser-boycotts-israeli-official-is-support-of-swedish

Keep in mind I am not saying that the story from the OP via CNN is wrong, but frankly, since the media LIED about Comey reopening the "email investigation", and then promply parading every right wing politician on their networks to propagate that LIE, I want more specifics.

When fox news bret baier came out and said, "according to his sources in the FBI, an imminent indictment was going to take place against the Clinton Foundation". That also turned out to be a LIE, and other news outlets spewed that garbage also, even after bret baier two days later came out and said he was "mistaken"

This story just came out today or yesterday:

"Jewish Family Flees County After Fox News, Breitbart Falsely Blame It for Cancellation of A Christmas Carol play."

http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1014&pid=1647115

I will tell you why I call bullshit on this story, unless there is more substance than just "SOME" Israelli official. Trump has NO INFLUENCE on President Obama, and if the Israeli government isn't aware of that, then they are pretty f**king stupid, and while I believe a lot of the Israeli policies are very counter productive, I don't believe they are stupid in that regard.

Also, the vote on the settlements has been delayed temporarily at Egypt's request.

Supposedly, the U.S. was going to abstain on the vote according to this, again by "some unnamed officials:

http://www.reuters.com/article/us-israel-palestinians-un-idUSKBN14B033

This article says Egypt did it because of pressure from Israel? Gee, does Israel have that much influence over Egypt.

Something is getting played on this, and the media is being used I suspect to spew misinformation, with some facts thrown in for good measure.
'
In other words I want to see multiple independent verification

[karynnj]

6. It was also said on MSNBC that Trump called Egypt at Israel's request

Here is a more sinister possibility:

Trump offered Egypt something to withdraw the resolution or threatened something if he didn't -- somethings that Trump could have the power to deliver in February. If this is the case, this sounds like a private citizen actually negotiating for the US -- and that is against the Logan Act, which admittedly has rarely been used. It might be murky because the same positions stated by Trump - on twitter or in the media - as positions he is open to as President would be like the answers to questions made by all incoming Presidents.

I wonder if something sneakier is happening. The State Department in yesterday's briefing refused to state what the Obama vote would have been - stating their consistent policy NOT to have briefers preview UN votes. It may be that Netanyahu, who clearly dislikes Obama and Trump wanted to box Obama in - ASSIGNING a vote to him (abstaining) which they thing the country would dislike and making Trump Israel's protector. Note this takes away the two more active choices - that the US veto it - as it did in Obama's first term or to vote for it. Abstaining, which might have been as far as Obama intended to go is the weakest of the three positions. Not to mention, it appeared that Kerry intended to speak after the vote. I assume his intent was to speak of the need to do this to peserve any possibility of a two state solution. If there is no vote, Obama is labeled with a vote as defined by Netanyahu and Trump -- and some in the media blaming it on Obama's frustration that HIS peace efforts failed. ( I like the perspective of a British Jewish friend that Israel always blames the mediator.)

One source indicated that 4 other countries on the Security Council will call for a vote "Friday" (which I assume is today )-
http://www.i24news.tv/en/news/israel/diplomacy-defense/133324-161223-security-council-members-say-they-will-push-anti-settlement-draft-if-egypt-won-t (This is a French source that was credible when things happened in France, but I do not see any other sources - though this was from 6 minutes ago.) Reuters does say the US was prepared not to veto - so you would imagine that France, which has led on getting a resolution earlier this year might be motivated to keep this window open.

[still_one]

7. There is something strange about how this whole situation is being reported. Even though MSNBC

Last edited Fri Dec 23, 2016, 01:24 PM - Edit history (1)

reported that "trump called Egypt at Israel's request", that is a slight variation of the CNN story. All I am saying is something does not ring with this story. The NY Times reported that "Trump Urges Obama to Veto U.N. Resolution on Israeli Settlements"

Your sinister speculation is a real possibility.


There was a story yesterday on both national and local networks about a lancaster, Pennsylvania family being pressured to go out of the county because they were falsely accused by fox news and bretbart accusing them of being responsible for stopping a Christmas play at the local school where their child attends. The ADL is not reporting that story was false"

http://www.democraticunderground.com/10028394503

At least the part about the family fleeing the county

http://theweek.com/speedreads/669083/antidefamation-league-calls-viral-tale-jewish-family-fleeing-pennsylvania-untrue-damaging

It is as simple as I am very skeptical of the American media

[karynnj]

8. Haartetz is now reporting there will be a vote today as well

I can think of no reason that the actions of Trump or Netanyahu should lead Obama to change his decision. I hope that Kerry gives a speech explaining the decision - probably that the resolution is consistent with US policy over at least the Obama and Bush Presidencies and that the liberal Zionist position, that the US, including most US Jews subscribe to, becomes impossible if there is no possibility of two states. (Arguing that Jordan is the other state ignores the nearly 50 plus year occupation of the West Bank and Gaza.) The fundamental problem is that without a two state solution, the choice between all the land, a democratic state with equal rights for all and a forever Jewish state - where you can only choose two - reduces to a choice between a democracy for all in both the Green line defined Israel and the (then) formerly occupied territories and a state that is for the foreseeable future dominated by Jews.

Without the option of a two state solution, it is impossible to be both liberal and Zionist. In Ari Shavit's book, he lists 4 possibilities - and rules out three. The three ruled out are ethnic cleansing where the Palestinians are sent elsewhere, and appartheid state, and a binational state that gives no preference to the Jewish population. The remaining possibility was a two state solution, which he says the current Jewish and Palestinian leadership is not capable of achieving. The increasing settlements are rendering that less and less feasible - even in the future. (Even back in 2014, Kerry objected to the idea that most settlements would be carved out, referring to what was left as a "Swiss cheese" like state. )

Though Savit ruled out a binational state with the same wave of hands he used to rule out ethnic cleansing and appartheit state, in my opinion as someone who is both liberal and Jewish, the best option if Israel takes more and more of what could have been a Palestinian state. (Kerry in his Saban talk notes that only 1 or 2 Palestinian construction requests in Area c, which is 60% of the West Bank have been approved in the last couple of years - while extensive settlement expansions and creations have been approved.)

While I agree completely that Obama and Kerry need to stand by their moral values on this, it is a sad situation for many US liberal Jews -- and the problem is NOT the US, the resolution, but Israel taking actions that we absolutely can not support. I have seen articles referring to the 2 state solution as a veil to ignore that there has been a nearly 50 year occupation. Consider there are people in the West Bank who have never been part of a free country.

[still_one]

9. I am for a two state solution, and without going into depth, I believe a two state solution is

definitely achievable. It appears though with trump administration it will take a back seat, much in the same way when bush took over from the Clinton administration in 2000; only this time it will be far worse under trump and his gang of deplorables.

I disagree that the 2 state solution is a veil to ignore a 50 year occupation. That point of view is usually expressed by those who are against Israel's existence.

As to the thread's subject, if the vote does take place, I believe the U.S. will abstain.

The biggest risk the world faces with a trump administration is major war, and it isn't just the middle east. Asia, the middle east, Cuba and South America are right on the precipice

[karynnj]

10. The illusion to the two state solution being a veil that I referred to were in Haaretz and

to a lesser degree in the liberal Jewish community. The context is that those lands are kind of in limbo - not occupied or part of Israel - awaiting a time when a peaceful Palestinian state could be created.

The settlements directly challenge this because as they take more and more land and become more and more permanent, there is no contiguous land that could ever become the Palestinian state. What is left is something that looks like Swiss cheese where roads from one place in Palestine to another cross land that is claimed by Israel and where there are places where Palestinians are stopped for long periods of time. Raising the issue of settlements is an action that attempts to freeze the lines making it possible in some better future time to create a Palestinian state. The fact that many settlements have grown or started in the last few years, while almost all Palestinian construction was rejected in areas that are NOT adjacent to Israel proper is a problem.

By the way, George W Bush was in favor of two states and some in his administration even tried to claim he was the first to call for a Palestinian state - which was not true. http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2005/10/04/AR2005100401410.html In Bush's second term, Condi Rice did work on Israel/ Palestine.

[still_one]

11. The settlements are absolutely an issue that hinders any peace process. My point regarding the bush

administration, was not that they did not adopt the two state solution, but the fact that when Bill Clinton left office, he left the Israeli/Palestinian negotiations ready for the next administration to take over, and they essentially ignored it. They did nothing. Just like the Hart/Rudman report that the Clinton administration handed to the bush administration on terrorism. They threw that report in the garbage can, with the lame excuse that they would do their own report. Of course we all know what happened then, in spite of repeated warnings, 9/11. The Hart/Rudman report addressed that very issue.

Yes, in Bush's second term some movement to the Israeli/Palestine issues were done, but that should have been addressed almost from the beginning of his first term, and they should have continued the negotiations where Bill Clinton left off.

They were an arrogant bunch, not unlike the group that is going to assume power, and I am really concerned that there is a real possibility for a major war

[still_one]

5. Here is another take on the story, which cnfirms nothing is as it appears

Trump May Have Thwarted Obama’s Final Move On The Israeli-Palestinian Conflict With One Phone Call

"WASHINGTON ― A Thursday phone call between President-elect Donald Trump and Egyptian President Abdel Fattah al-Sisi may have undermined the Obama administration’s final effort to speak out against Israeli settlement building in the occupied Palestinian territories.

After months of negotiations, the United Nations Security Council was scheduled to vote at 3 p.m. Thursday on a resolution sponsored by Egypt to condemn Israeli settlements. The U.S., which typically blocks resolutions that are critical of Israel, had vetoed a similar measure in 2011.

But following years of growing frustration with Israeli settlement expansion, the U.S. was expected to abstain from the vote this time, which would have likely allowed the measure to pass. After the vote, Secretary of State John Kerry was prepared to deliver remarks about the Middle East peace process, State Department spokesman John Kirby said in a briefing on Thursday."

But none of that happened.

On Thursday morning, Trump slammed the draft resolution as “extremely unfair to all Israelis” and urged the U.S. to veto it. Hours later, Egypt postponed the vote indefinitely.

Initial media reports cited anonymous Western diplomats blaming pressure from the Israelis for Egypt’s sudden reversal. By Thursday evening, however, Reuters had confirmed from a Trump transition official that Trump and Sisi spoke by phone about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. CNN reported that the Israeli government privately asked Trump to intervene on their behalf.

From the start, the idea that Egypt would have reversed itself because of pressure from the Israelis didn’t pass muster among those who closely follow Middle East politics."

http://www.huffingtonpost.com/entry/trump-obama-israeli-settlements-egypt_us_585c6f00e4b0eb586485eabc

[sakabatou]

12. Trump once again fucks around with the US

[still_one]

13. He hasn't even assumed office, and he is already destabilizing the world

[cstanleytech]

14. I get the feeling that Israel wants to just deport all the muslims and take their land

which smacks of intense hypocrisy on their part as the same happened to many Jews in Nazi Germany.