U.S. expected to abstain from UN vote on deportation of Arafat

[Nottingham]

U.S. expected to abstain from UN vote on deportation of Arafat
http://feeds.bignewsnetwork.com/redir.php?jid=0f6ee62e7298ef56

By Shlomo Shamir, Aluf Benn, and Amos Harel, Haaretz Correspondents, Haaretz Service and Agencies



The United States is expected to abstain from
Monday's scheduled United Nations Security Council
vote on a resolution to forbid Israel from
deporting Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser
Arafat from the territories, according to Israeli
and other diplomatic sources in New York.
According to these sources, the
Security Council resolution is
moderate and restrained, and
includes nothing the Americans
"cannot live with."

The resolution, drafted by Arab
states with the support of
non-aligned nations, includes a
clause saying "the Council
demands that Israel, the occupying power,
immediately cease deportation steps and halt
all threats against the elected president of
the Palestinian Authority."

The resolution does not mention Arafat by name,
but another clause states emphasizes that the
president of the PA is chosen democratically
and his deportation is thus forbidden.

snip...
The United States reiterated its warning to
Israel over the weekend not to exile Arafat for
fear this would complicate the peace efforts
and inflame the region.
But senior Israeli sources said they believed
American objections were merely tactical, and
related to the timing and circumstances of
expelling Arafat

more....

Even the world realizes US insincerity over Arafat
This is a very Big Mess! :bounce:

[beanball]

1. America

is being had by a bunch of Sharonist thugs.Wake up America.

[loudnclear]

8. What does the Sharon government and Bush administration have in common?

They both keep standing in that "hole" that Clinton was talking about and they keep on digging. Pretty soon the mounds of removed dirt will come toppling down on both of them suffocating them both!

[The Zanti Regent]

10. Another fine mess the Neocons and TV Preachers made

Well, the Neocons are true fifth columnists; their loyalty is not to America but to Likud. AND they are marching in lockstep with their TV Preacher allies who want noting more than total Armageddon so Jesus will come back. Those TV Preachers are pitiching tents and anxiously awaiting the slaughter of 2/3 of the Jews as written in Revelation...

I hate to tell the TV Prechers this, but Jesus remembered what happened to him the first time he was here. He's not coming back!

[0007]

11. Assassinations are a speciality

John Negroponte was ambassador to Honduras from 1981-1985 now is the UN ambassador. John can tell ya about assassinating folks.

Where's Henry Kissinger, but hanging out with all his buds of the olden days close to the White House! Ol' Henry can tell us about Allende in Chile.

These and and other folks have plenty of good ideas on how to handle Arafat, 'eh?

[tinnypriv]

2. When you've got this on front pages, is it REALLY a good idea to abstain?

Red section: "Shabak (General Security Service) Chief: Better to liquidate Arafat"

--

If the U.S. is really opposed to killing Arafat, it needs to vote IN FAVOR of this resolution, not abstain.

Israel will not take the U.S. position seriously otherwise, and will kill Arafat - no question about it.

[Nottingham]

4. You Have One Helluva point there Abstaining isn't gonna help

US! We might as well say GO ISRAEL

Its Pretty Sad! I never thought I would see the day America would support this kinda stuff.

[Paschall]

6. Really?

Wasn't the ShrubCo policy of ousting Saddam with military force the same "kinda stuff"?

And hasn't Congress, since Jan. 2001, once again made it "legal" for the US to assassinate foreign heads of state?

[Big_Mike]

13. Pardon me, but...

it was never written by Congress, but rather an Executive Order. The actual order, Executive Order 12333 was signed by President Reagan (imagine that!) on Dec. 4, 1981, and addded to Code of Federal Regulations of that year.

This is the pertinent section:

2.11 Prohibition on Assassination. No person employed by or acting on behalf of the United States Government shall engage in, or conspire to engage in, assassination.

The Executive Order has the force of law, but is vastly easier to amend, as all it takes in another EO to repeal it, or a Presidential Finding granting an exception.

I don't know exactly how limited the order was anyway.The way that Section 2.11 is written, it would preclude the military from planning or executing an ambush, or trying a decapitation stroke on a target.

Big Mike

Edit for forgetting to close HTML tag

[newyawker99]

15. Hi Big_Mike!!

Welcome to DU!! :toast:

[JNelson6563]

9. not to mention

how the Arab world views our involvement in the I/P conflict. This will only fuel that fire which is just what our troops in Iraq and Afghanistan do not need.

Team Bush is not very smart. When you stand on the world stage and do the *wink wink* thing to other world leaders everyone else can see you, not just those on the receiving end of the winks.

This oughta kick things up a notch or two.

Julie

[Tinoire]

3. This is the sort of thing the US considers "even-handed" n/t

[Resistance Is Futile]

7. "Fair and balanced," you mean.

[IndianaGreen]

5. The US has seldom abstained from a vote critical of Israel

Democrats and Republicans both share the blame for having created this out-of-control monster in the Middle East. Had our political leaders shown a hint of moral backbone, they would have pulled the rug from the money machine that keeps Israel's rightwing in power.

Let the Israeli taxpayer bear the full cost of the settlements and the occupation and you will see that they will hate it as much as Americans hate the $97 billion price tag for our occupation of Iraq.

[Julien Sorel]

14. Very well said (NT)

[CWebster]

12. The US NEVER crosses Israel

if it doesn't vote with israel it abstains, they--that is BOTH PARTIES know they have to pay the piper.

[MaineDem]

16. Any news on the outcome of the vote yet?

Has it taken place? I can't seem to find anything on it.

[tinnypriv]

17. Vote hasn't taken place yet - the UN envoy is briefing beforehand

Here is the draft resolution though:

"The Security Council,

"Reaffirming its resolutions 242 (1967) of 22 November 1967, 338 (1973) of 22 October 1973, 1397 (2002) of 12 March 2002, 1402 (2002) of 30 March 2002, 1403 (2002) of 4 April 2002, 1405 (2002) of 19 April 2002 and 1435 (2002) of 24 September 2002,

"Reiterating its grave concern at the tragic and violent events that have taken place since September 2000 throughout the Occupied Palestinian Territory and in Israel and the recent dangerous deterioration of the situation, including the escalation in extrajudicial executions and suicide bombings,

"Reaffirming the illegality of the deportation of any Palestinian by Israel, the occupying Power, and affirming its opposition to any such deportation,

"Reiterating also the need for respect in all circumstances of international humanitarian law, including the Geneva Convention relative to the Protection of Civilian Persons in Time of War, of 12 August 1949,

"1. Reiterates its demands for the complete cessation of all acts of violence, including all acts of terror, provocation, incitement and destruction;

"2. Demands that Israel, the occupying Power, desist from any act of deportation and cease any threat to the safety of the elected President of the Palestinian Authority;

"3. Expresses its full support for the efforts of the Quartet and calls for increased efforts to ensure the implementation of the road map by the two sides;

"4. Decides to remain seized of the matter."