US diplomats' letter to Bush

[Klaus]

Dear Mr President:

We former US diplomats applaud our 52 British colleagues who recently sent a letter to Prime Minister Tony Blair criticising his Middle East policy and calling on Britain to exert more influence over the United States.

As retired foreign service officers we care deeply about our nation's foreign policy and US credibility in the world.

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.

This plan defies UN Security Council resolutions calling for Israel's return of occupied territories.

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.

And it undermines the Road Map for peace drawn up by the Quartet, including the US. Finally, it reverses longstanding American policy in the Middle East.

Your meeting with Sharon followed a series of intensive negotiating sessions between Israelis and Americans, but which left out Palestinians.

In fact, you and Prime Minister Sharon consistently have excluded Palestinians from peace negotiations.

Former Palestinian Information Minister Yasser Abed Rabbo voiced the overwhelming reaction of people around the world when he said: "I believe President Bush declared the death of the peace process today".

By closing the door to negotiations with Palestinians and the possibility of a Palestinian state, you have proved that the United States is not an even-handed peace partner.

You have placed US diplomats, civilians and military doing their jobs overseas in an untenable and even dangerous position.

Your unqualified support of Sharon's extra-judicial assassinations, Israel's Berlin Wall-like barrier, its harsh military measures in occupied territories, and now your endorsement of Sharon's unilateral plan are costing our country its credibility, prestige and friends.

It is not too late to reassert American principles of justice and fairness in our relations with all the peoples of the Middle East.

Support negotiations between Palestinians and Israelis, with the United States serving as a truly honest broker.

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.

Because the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is at the core of the problems in the Middle East, the entire region - and the world - will rejoice along with Israelis and Palestinians when the killing stops and peace is attained.

Sincerely,
Andrew I Killgore, Ambassador to Qatar, 1977-1980

Richard H Curtiss, former chief inspector, US Information Agency

Colbert C Held, Retired FSO and author

Thomas J Carolan, Counsel General Istanbul, '88-'92

C Edward Bernier, Counselor of Embassy, Information and Culture, Islamabad, Pakistan

Donald A Kruse, American Consul in Jerusalem

Ambassador Edward L Peck, former Chief of Mission in Iraq and Mauritania

John Powell, Admin Counselor in Beirut, '75-'76

John Gunther Dean, last position held US Ambassador to India

Greg Thielmann, Director, Office for Strategic Proliferation and Military Affairs, Bureau of Intelligence and Research

James Akins, Ambassador to Saudi Arabia

Talcott Seeyle, Ambassador to Syria

Eugene Bird, Counselor of Embassy in Saudi Arabia

Richard H Nolte, Ambassador to Egypt

Ray Close, Chief of Station Jeddah, Saudi Arabia 1971-1979

Shirl McArthur, Commercial Attache, Bangkok

 

[A_Wanderer]

Just like the British Diplomat letter I think we should all seriously question the motives behind it and the fact of this letter being sent so soon after the British one.

There has been some speculation/rumours about business interests in the middle east of these former diplomats being threatened by the arab governments unless they condemned US foreign policy. I would not accept or reject this claim until I see evidence for or against it but I think we should all be sceptical about the motives of some involved parties.

 

[verte76]

Some of these guys served in the Ford Administration. But I really don't care who it is, we should look into who these people are and what they're doing before we say "OK, Big Shot X is right". They're not above exploiting their connections. I think Bush is making a mistake by endorsing the Sharon plan, and indeed the Likud Party in Israel recently voted to reject it. So it's not a big success for him any way you look at it.

 

[Klaus]

A_Wanderer: so you think all the 100 former Diplomats from UK and the USA care more about personal profit than about their country?
I can't (and don't want to) believe that

William Rogers, former Secretary of State for Economic Affairs:

"We're not the good guys any more and our foreign relations have been and are being damaged. We are viewed as hypocritical"

Rogers hasn't decided if he wants to sign the letter

 

[pax]

nobody is ever going to listen about posting huge blocks of text from other sources, are they?

 

[Scarletwine]

Sorry Pax. That just hit me as funny. I've needed a laugh all day.

 

[A_Wanderer]

I am not denying that they may be motivated by legitimate concern but I also think that we should not take peoples opinions at face value, be critical: be safe.

 

[Klaus]

A_Wanderer: they are people who really know what they are talking about, they know US politics for a long time and i think they know foreign countries better than their president.
Of course some of them might have ilegitimate motives but there is also an open letter from Amnesty International to President Bush.

It's mainly about:

Israel's decision to maintain and expand Israeli settlements on occupied territory in the West Bank, including East Jerusalem;

Israel's denial of the right to return to Palestinian refugees, that is those who were expelled or fled their homes in the war which followed the establishment of the state of Israel, and their descendents;

Israel's construction of the fence/wall inside the West Bank;

Israel's policy of extrajudicially executing wanted Palestinians who could be arrested and brought to justice.

And i must admit i don't understand the israeli government at the moment.

If you followed BBC News yesturday, Mohammed Taha (co-founder of the Hamas) was freed after 14 months in detention without trial. And the same day another Hamas leader (Imad Janajra) was killed by the israeli army (and of course the other 2 killed Hamas figures in the last weeks).

So what are they doing down there? No more Justice, the President and the army decide who's guilty and who's not?

And i think a US support of their politics is counterproductive to any peace effort in the mideast. And when i see the letters open letters to president Bush signed by approx. 100 former US and British Diplomats it could be that this is not only my opinion.

 

[A_Wanderer]

In regards to the former diplomats didn't say that they were all corrupt and motivated by self-interest I simply said that their claims must be weighed up against any interests they may have just like everybody else (I also think the connection between the large energy consortiums and the PNAC/neocons must be questioned). I have absolutely no problem with their right to question Bush's poor (but not disasterous, yet) management of the post-war situation and the tactless engagement with the Israel-Palestine conflict. I must reiterate that one would be a fool to accept without questioning the motivations behind actions.

In Regards to other points.

Killing terrorist leaders with proper assasinations saves Israeli lives by upsetting the organisations internal structures. The reduction in suicide bombings reduces the ammount of Israeli retaliatory incursions which saves palestinian civilian lives. These hamas leaders are terrorists and are a key problem for peace in the middle east. Imprisoning them is often counterproductive because it may motivate kidnappings or terrorist attacks to gain their freedom through blackmail. The IDF is engaged in a war with these terrorist organisations and in situations like this the end justifies the means, especially when it saves innocent life on both sides.

As for right of return it is ludicrous to expect right of return for Palestinans and their decendents in light of a two-state solution. The arab nations have attempted to obliterate Israel no less than three times and each of those times Israel has defended itself sucessfully and honourably. Israel deserves to keep any land it retains AFTER a bipartisan two-state solution (note NOT all land conquered in '67) merely as reparation for these unmotivated acts of agression.

I think that by supporting the unilateral withrawl from Gaza and most of the West Bank Bush is laying the ground for a new round of negotiation with a much better potential for sucess (considering that the PA responded to the last offer of all Gaze, 98% of west bank and E-Jeruselum with the Second Intafade I think the only way to make things better is a unilateral action). Actions allways speak louder than words and a show of good faith such as this will increase the potential for a just peace negotiation after the shit storm has died down.

In regards to justics, where is the justice for the victims of terrorism? Why does the world only feel it necessary to draft condemnation of Israel if it kills terrorist leaders but not the murder of an innocent 8 month pregnant mother and her four daughters at point blank range while filming it? Why do we not condemn terrorists for hiding behind innocent civilians, these human shields are as much victims of terrorism as those killed in suicide bombings. Sometimes the only way to avoid the peace of the grave is to fight for peace, it is not a contradictory statement and I believe a lot of people on this forum would agree with me.

Sincerely J.B.B

I may not agree with what you say, but I'll defend to the death your right to say it ? Voltaire

 

[Klaus]

"Imprisoning them is often counterproductive because it may motivate kidnappings or terrorist attacks to gain their freedom through blackmail. "

If a government trades terrorists against kidnapped people you can't help them anymore. It's the mistake of the government. No reason to kill people without a trial because the terrorists could blackmail the government again.

Read the BBC article and the ai article, it's worth it.
They imprisoned that guy (good) but there wasn't any trial, why? don't they know they got a hamas leader, don't they care about justice or what's their problem?

It was israels biggest mistake not to give back the land after the war. Now they have to take care themself about the "hornets" (Palestinensians) now it's their problem. Of course the other arab nations abuse the Palestinensians to raise presure over israel and of course that's not ok. But anyway israel has to care about human rights as any other nation. I hate it to see that Israeli soldiers hide behind Palestinensian kids (they tied them several times on their army jeeps). There is no excuse for such a behaviour like there is no excuse for the behavour of various palestinensians.

Klaus

ps I like Voltaire

 

[STING2]

"Imprisoning them is often counterproductive because it may motivate kidnappings or terrorist attacks to gain their freedom through blackmail. "

If a government trades terrorists against kidnapped people you can't help them anymore. It's the mistake of the government. No reason to kill people without a trial because the terrorists could blackmail the government again.

Read the BBC article and the ai article, it's worth it.
They imprisoned that guy (good) but there wasn't any trial, why? don't they know they got a hamas leader, don't they care about justice or what's their problem?

It was israels biggest mistake not to give back the land after the war. Now they have to take care themself about the "hornets" (Palestinensians) now it's their problem. Of course the other arab nations abuse the Palestinensians to raise presure over israel and of course that's not ok. But anyway israel has to care about human rights as any other nation. I hate it to see that Israeli soldiers hide behind Palestinensian kids (they tied them several times on their army jeeps). There is no excuse for such a behaviour like there is no excuse for the behavour of various palestinensians.

Klaus

ps I like Voltaire

Klaus,

Do you have any pictures showing Israely soldiers tying up Palestinian Kids to their jeeps for the purpose of "protection"? I could definitely see Kids who were throwing rocks and other things at them being tied up in order to restrain them, but if your going to charge them with human rights abuses, I'd like to see the evidence backing that up. We all know what happened at Jenin.

 

[A_Wanderer]

The IDF has clear ROE, it does not mess around and I can say with certainty it is one of the most disciplined armed forces in the world. The millitants (read terrorists) are the ones that hide behind innocents, they are the ones that try to initiate conflict in urban areas and they are the ones that murder without cause (look at little Mohammed al-Dura for an example http://masada2000.org/al-dura.html).

Look at these terrorists as men on a shooting rampage, while they are armed and dangerous and will kill more people they may be killed to stop more death, if they have been arrested and pose no direct threat then they should not be executed.

edit: I know the link is ultra-biased but it does give the facts short and sweet. O recomend the documentary Who killed Muhammed al Dura for more information.

 

[Klaus]

STING2: Yes i saw pictures several times, last time a few weeks ago it's a pitty that i can't google picture content, but you can believe me that i saw a picture where a boy was tied on a army jeep.
And the high court in Israel debated about Soldiers behaviour like that before.

And it were still the palestinensians who killed that boy (that makes me sick too) but i don't think there is any excuse that a grown up soldier with a rifle in his hand hides behind a kid.

 

[STING2]

STING2: Yes i saw pictures several times, last time a few weeks ago it's a pitty that i can't google picture content, but you can believe me that i saw a picture where a boy was tied on a army jeep.
And the high court in Israel debated about Soldiers behaviour like that before.

And it were still the palestinensians who killed that boy (that makes me sick too) but i don't think there is any excuse that a grown up soldier with a rifle in his hand hides behind a kid.

You must realize that simply a picture of a man or boy tied to a jeep does not in fact mean that the person was tied to the jeep in order to protect the soldiers. You would have to have far more evidence than simply a picture of someone tied to a jeep to prove that. Policeman all over the world detain criminals temporarily by hand cuffing them or tying them to a car or other type of structure.

 

[A_Wanderer]

Can somebody please post a link to one of the many many incidents where there is a palestinian "rally" of rock throwing youths with armed men behind them shooting at the Israeli soldiers.

 

[Klaus]

STING2: The israeli High court forbid Israeli soldiers to continue to use Palestinensian boys as human shields, so there must be a evidence.
They wouldn't forbid it if the israel soldiers never did it.
The last time i saw a picture like this there was no proof that it hapened AGAIN and israeli human right groups protested and asked the israeli army to find out wether their soldiers are continuing to use palestinensian boys as human shield or not.