Giuliani Breaks With Bush On Palestinian State Issue
Former New York Mayor Giuliani has now made it clear he differs from the Bush administration on the idea of a Palestinian state:
Republican 2008 White House front-runner Rudolph Giuliani warned Tuesday it was not in the interest of the United States to help create a Palestinian state that would “support terrorism.”
President George Bush has repeatedly said the U.S. will work to help create a stable Palestinian state.
In an article in the journal Foreign Affairs, the former New York mayor also said too much emphasis had been placed on Israeli-Palestinian peace talks which he said just brought up the same issues “again and again.”
Giuliani renamed the US “war on terror” as “the Terrorists’ War on US” in his hawkish article in the September/October issue of the magazine, and predicted a long battle against “radical Islamic fascism.”
In the latest of a series of essays in Foreign Affairs by presidential candidates, Giuliani also predicted US troops would still be in Iraq and Afghanistan when the next president takes office in January, 2009.
He argued that the problem for Palestinians since the Islamist movement Hamas won parliamentary elections last year, was not a “lack of statehood” but good governance.
“Too much emphasis has been placed on brokering negotiations between the Israelis and the Palestinians — negotiations that bring up the same issues again and again,” he wrote.
“It is not in the interests of the United States, at a time when it is being threatened by Islamist terrorists, to assist the creation of another state that will support terrorism,” Giuliani wrote.
“Palestinian statehood will have to be earned through sustained good governance, a clear commitment to fighting terrorism, and a willingness to live in peace with Israel.”
This is one of several Giuliani statements (written or verbal) that increasingly show where he is to Republican voters with just enough continuity with the kind of toughness many Republican base voters demand while distancing himself in approach just enough from the Bush administration so voters won’t think that a vote for him is for Bush 44.
His biggest task will be in the general election — if he indeed gets the nomination.
He’ll be walking a political tightrope, trying to keep won-over Republican voters while peeling off some DLC-type Democrats and some independent voters. It will require more than talking points or nuance: it’ll also require communicating a sense of sincerity, consistency and trustworthiness.
Senator John McCain had to walk this same kind of tightrope as he tried to maneuver himself from the one-year-ago-perceived GOP establishment favorite to nominee.
But McCain fell off the tightrope with a thud, crushing to the ground as he left GOP stalwarts unconvinced (despite efforts to woo them), furious at him on immigration (he has since adjusted his stance while insisting he hasn’t), and found that independent voters and even DLC-type Democrats distrust him due to his having to shift (while insisting he wasn’t) his position on some key assertions he made in 2000. His campaign is now literally on political life support — and it’s easy to bet the plug will be pulled after the few first primaries (at the latest).
Look for Giuliani to keep projecting this aura of offering Republican voters just enough continuity if they vote for him but not offering them a clone of the Bush administration — which means he may even take a tougher stance on some issues, as recently did on immigration.
And since he knows he can’t just win with the GOP base — which has now shrunk — look for him to increasingly try to win over non-progressive voters who aren’t Republicans by showing he won’t take orders from Crawford if he wins.
UPDATE: Another take on this via Ed Morrissey.
opinions powered by SendLove.to
14 Responses to “Giuliani Breaks With Bush On Palestinian State Issue”
I’m pretty shocked to find myself agreeing with Bush on something. Insofar as I don’t see there being peace in Israel any time soon under any realistic circumstances I think that some sort of Palestinian State is needed. Either that or Israel must be willing to give full citizenship to all Palestinians, with all the rights and obligations of any other Israeli. Still, their own state is probably a better bet.
Rudy is correct of course. We have seen as an example in Gaza just what kind of a state this would be. Perhaps when the Palestinians prove they can be civilized, end incitement and terror, negotiations can take place.
LL,
How can you remove all the prerequisites for a functioning society and expect there to be civility in Gaza or the West Bank?
Israel/US has restricted the supply of of food, water, jobs, security, infrastructure while adding in a good supply of weapons to bolster friendly but unpopular regimes (like Fatah, currently). And you have the gall to ask why they are civilized. Amazing.
Just how will abandoning the idea of a Palestinian state foster the good governance Giuliani is talking about? The Palistinians have dug in their ideological heels, and no amount of punishment will make them change their ways. I’m not sure at all there is anything at this late stage, to mellow the extremists, but a Palistinian state could at least offer an alternative to the status quo of suffering and violence.
‘Not talking’ hasn’t proved to be an effective mechanism to foster reform, has it?
LL,
You sound like an honest enough person, so what do you call a country that buys people off Afghan warlords, ships them to prisons all over the world where they are tortured, and then keeps them imprisoned without trial even when those charged with their interrogations acknowledge most are probably innocent?
I’d turn down the volume on that ‘mightier than thou’ tone if I were you.
Giuliani: No Palestinian State Without Recognition Of Israel…
Rudy Giuliani took a hard turn to the right on foreign policy yesterday in an essay published in Foreign Affairs magazine. As Eli Lake reports for the New York Sun, Giuliani eschewed almost two decades of American efforts towards a……
Palestine is the way it is because the people allow the bad eggs rule the roost. Hamas, Fatah. All terrorist organizations. The Godfathers of terror. The masters of disaster. Yet we should give them what they want.
Well what they want is the demise of Israel. NOTHING else will suffice. Once Israel is gone they want the demise of the USA.
I for one would encourage the palestinian people to throw off their shackles and seize control of their future. Or not. Their life is in their hand.
If they lay down their arms there will be peace. If Israel lays down its arms there will be genocide.
First off, it really, really shouldn’t be a surprise to thinking people that the Republican candidates will vary from Bush. After all, I thought it was only the Democrat POTUS candidates that believe George Bush is a candidate in 2008.
Perhaps this is one of the less subtle deliveries in that regard, but the nuance has already been there for months from all of the major R candidates. After all, how does one know that when a R candidate says nothing more specific than “stay in Iraq”, that that is somehow light years different than what you will get out of HRC?
As far as the Palestine state comment, the part that registered most with me is the idea that Giuliani will not be all consumed with intervening/brokering/pushing/shooting bullets for this particular regional struggle……because, as you guys say everyday, the US should not be meddling in other people’s affairs.
There is the great ASSUMPTION that a more relatively isolationist posture is not going to work to our advantage. However, how many decades has it been since we tried it?
As if anyone here is advocating for Israel to dismantle their military. All I’m saying is that they should stop using their weapons offensively.
Chris stop making excuses for the palestinians barbarity. They were given Gaza and have turned it into a terror state.
Chris, all weapons by their nature are used OFFENSIVELY. I don’t know how you use weapons defensively. How does one act in self-defense unless you strike at your attacker. If you ask me, Israel is far too restrained. Nothing is being done to stop the qassams being fired at Sderot.
Giuliani’s position is NOT in Isreal’s best interest. As a Jew with 3 dozen relatives in the West Bank, I have a long on site involvement in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. The settlers have a 5 year game plan supported by the Likud, parts of Kadima and other right wing parties to keep growing the settlements to the point the Palestinians will be confined to 5 “reservations”.
They honestly believe the world will allow this (unlike South Africa) because of the “war on Terror”. Right now there are 500,000 Jews living beyond the Green line(including East Jerusalem). With the orthodox birth rate, and the little known fact that most people making aliya are moving to the West Bank settlements. The plan is by 2012 to have 1,000,000 Jews living beyond the green line, including a major push into the Jordan Valley. The settlers and the politicians who support them figure at that point a viable Palestinian state will be impossible.
Giuliani’s hard line position means that no progress will be made on a peace agreement. Netanyahu as the probable next prime minister will turn Giuliani’s position into reality. Without a viable 2 state solution, eventually the world will force Israel to abandon the Palestinian reservations policy. This will force a one state solution that means the demise of Israel as a Jewish hoimeland. That is something that deep in my soul, I lament.
Jd
I think many people envision a solution to this problem somewhere about 50 years into the future in which the Jews and the Palestinians merge and have ONE nation.
When that happens the population needs to be nearly identical so that one race does not become the dominant race. That we dont end up with a Sunni/Shia type mix like we have in Iraq today.
This requires the Jews to fire up the ole birthing ovens and get busy.
Because I am a one state solution type guy. If In America we can live side by side with Blacks and Jews and Hispanics and Asians and American Indians and have a peaceful society then its possible in the ME as well.
If we do not try. If we continue to say “no its too hard” then we will always be assured of failing.
Somebody said:
“….solution to this problem somewhere about 50 years into the future”
The 50 year time line may turn out to be true, but it would be dangerous to just sit still for 50 years to see what emerges. Things will not remain what they are today for 50 years, and in my estimation, they will worsen for Israel’s Jews with evey year. The Palwstinian/Israeli confict is not happening in a vacuum; It is happening in the middle of a very volatile ME, almost all of it antagonistic to the Jews.
For their survival as a coherent group, there needs to be movement towards a solution, a continuous effort, even if progress is incremental.at times.
If the one state solution is ever to become viable, the two state solution has to precede it. Enemies have to separate before they can even conceive of unifying.
No, it isn’t possible to live in peace with muslims. Muslims are in conflict everywhere in the world with everyone, including each other.
It is in Israel’s best interests not to create a palestinian terror state.