Giuliani opposes immediate creation of Palestinian state -Associated Press
[P]residential hopeful Rudy Giuliani said he opposes creation of a Palestinian state at this time and would take a tough stand with Iran, including destroying its nuclear infrastructure "should all else fail."
Giuliani said "too much emphasis" has been placed on brokering negotiations between Israel and the Palestinians - an apparent swipe at President Bush and Condoleezza Rice, who have been pushing for final status negotiations despite Hamas's takeover of Gaza in June.
"It is not in the interest 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," the former New York City mayor said.
"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," Giuliani said.
"It is not in the interest 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," the former New York City mayor said.
"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," Giuliani said.
[Jerusalem Post]
[Note from Bruce: Though posts about partisan posturing are generally not my concern, this position may interest MidEast watchers looking at potential policy shifts]
3 comments:
Certainly, snubbing Bush and Rice on any policy is a safe move for any politician these days, and particularly as those positions relate to the mideast, the policies of this Administration have been a total disaster, so it is probably not only safe, but prudent to do so. Nevertheless, the world moves ahead with, or without, the approval of the United States, and we are worse off today because W. Bush has forgotten this, or actually just ignored this. Someday the world may wake up to realizing this is reality, but the US will not be able to go it alone until that date. This seems a reasinable position but the next President will likely have to seem a bit more supportive of a two state solution and fostering it before all the proper seeds are in place. Just as the world has had to sit back and support the US even while we have invaded sovereign nations, things do not always go the way everyone would like. Rudy has some reasonable ideas. His disastrous handling of his personal life, coupled with his dictatorial inability to compromise while holding office in NY, coupled with his monumentally bad choice of locating his disaster command center in the World Trade Center after it had already been targeted once, however means that he will not be a winning candidate for President in 2008. He should take heart in knowing that there will be no winning Republican Presidential candidate in 2008 however!
Actually, i think Rudy has a shot ...despite the negatives that you mentioned he's a smart, articulate sort who is a straight talker. Doesn't change his positions with the political winds...and his sensible security minded positions could land him in the White House.
Well, I admit he doesn't shift with the winds, just when he decides to run for office. He has certainly moved his abortion and same sex marriage rhetoric to the right once he contemplated running for President. As for sensible and security minded positions, it is true that he does not plan on putting his next command center in any really, really tall buildings that have already been targeted by terrorists in the past. In fact, I have heard something about him wanting to put his next office in an out of the way location;I believe his first choice is a bridge in Minnesota.
Post a Comment