politicalevent:council vote

  • Israel lobby billionaire praises Kushner for collusion with Netanyahu | The Electronic Intifada | Ali Abunimah Power Suits 4 December 2017
    https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/israel-lobby-billionaire-praises-kushner-collusion-netanyahu

    President Donald Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner received public praise on Sunday from a billionaire Israel lobby financier for his possibly illegal attempts to derail a UN Security Council vote condemning Israel’s settlements a year ago.

    This came as news broke that Kushner failed to disclose in government ethics filings his role as director of a family foundation that funded Israeli settlements.

    Kushner, a senior adviser to Trump, is in charge of efforts to revive the so-called peace process.

    New details of Kushner’s Saudi-backed plan reported Sunday confirm that it would require nothing less than a complete capitulation by the Palestinians to Israel’s demands, leaving them with a state in name only.
    “Nothing illegal”

    On Sunday, Kushner appeared at the Saban Forum, an Israel lobby conference at Washington’s Brookings Institution, financed by Israeli-American billionaire Haim Saban.

    Saban and Kushner sat on stage for what was billed as a “keynote conversation.”

    “You’ve been in the news the last few days, to say the least. But you’ve been in the news about an issue that I personally want to thank you for, because you and your team were taking steps to try and get the United Nations Security Council to not go along with what ended up being an abstention by the US,” Saban said in the exchange in the video at the top of this article.

    “As far as I know there was nothing illegal there but I think that this crowd and myself want to thank you for making that effort.”

    “Thank you,” Kushner responded.
    (...)

    “Peace” plan

    Given the systematic lack of accountability for senior US officials, dating back decades, there is little reason to expect that anything short of an indictment will remove Kushner from his role.

    And the more that is known about the “peace plan” he is helping forge, the clearer it is that Kushner and his colleagues are simply mouthpieces for Netanyahu.

    On Sunday, The New York Times characterized the as yet unpublished plan in the following terms: “The Palestinians would get a state of their own but only noncontiguous parts of the West Bank and only limited sovereignty over their own territory. The vast majority of Israeli settlements in the West Bank, which most of the world considers illegal, would remain. The Palestinians would not be given East Jerusalem as their capital and there would be no right of return for Palestinian refugees and their descendants.”

    These were the elements reportedly conveyed to Palestinian Authority leader Mahmoud Abbas by Saudi Crown Prince Mohammad bin Salman last month with an ultimatum that he accept them or resign.

    These ideas are so far below what any Palestinian could ever accept that even Abbas was “alarmed and visibly upset” by the Saudi proposal, according to an official from his Fatah party cited by the Times.

    The White House has denied that its plan has been finalized, and Saudi Arabia denied it supported such positions, according to the Times.

    But the newspaper provides ample reason to doubt those denials, noting that: “the main points of the Saudi proposal as told to Mr. Abbas were confirmed by many people briefed on the discussions between Mr. Abbas and Prince Mohammad, including Mr. [Ahmad] Yousef, the senior Hamas leader; Ahmad Tibi, a Palestinian member of the Israeli Parliament; several Western officials; a senior Fatah official; a Palestinian official in Lebanon; a senior Lebanese official; and a Lebanese politician, among others.”

    The Saudis have been pressuring the Palestinians to capitulate to Israel evidently to clear the Palestinian cause out of the way so that the growing Saudi-Israeli alliance aimed at Iran can be brought fully into the open.

    One element of the plan reportedly includes giving Palestinians a capital in the village of Abu Dis, instead of Jerusalem.

    This is a revival of a 1990s fantasy in which the small village would be renamed “al-Quds” and declared the “capital of Palestine,” while the real city of Jerusalem is swallowed up by Israel.

    Israel currently uses part of Abu Dis as an illegal garbage dump.

    #Flynn #Kushner #Mueller

    • L’étrange cas de Jared Kushner et du lobby israélien
      Richard Silverstein | 4 décembre 2017
      http://www.middleeasteye.net/fr/opinions/l-trange-cas-de-jared-kushner-et-du-lobby-isra-lien-1758255038

      Il était clair que l’objectif de toute la hiérarchie, à commencer par Netanyahou et Trump, était de détruire la résolution, qui bénéficiait du soutien tacite de l’administration Obama.

      Bien que les États-Unis se soient finalement abstenus, l’administration Obama n’a manifestement rien fait pour arrêter la résolution – ce qui signifie qu’elle l’a tacitement soutenue. Par le passé, elle avait en réalité opposé son veto à des propositions pratiquement identiques du Conseil de sécurité.

      L’abstention était alors une initiative assez audacieuse de la part des États-Unis. Par conséquent, en intervenant pour tuer la résolution, Kushner a franchi la ligne entre le fait d’utiliser son droit de s’exprimer librement sur la politique du gouvernement garanti par le Premier Amendement et le fait de subvertir la politique étrangère officielle des États-Unis. Il s’agit là d’un terrain juridique encore inexploré.

      L’inclusion de la loi Logan dans une liste d’accusations contre Kushner ne serait pas seulement un fait nouveau : cela avertirait en effet le lobby israélien qu’une ligne rouge a été franchie. Et qu’une fois que cette ligne est franchie, on a affaire à un comportement criminel. Ce serait là une première. Un coup de semonce choquant qui ferait vaciller le lobby.

      Cependant, on peut douter que Mueller fasse de la loi Logan un élément clé de sa stratégie juridique. Lorsque l’on poursuit un président des États-Unis, on préfère ne pas s’essayer à des théories juridiques non éprouvées ou ésotériques.

  • A Tweet from Trump and pressure on Egyptians: How Israel blocked UN vote on settlements

    - Israel News - Haaretz.com
    http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.760827

    After a 15-hour political drama Thursday, Israel succeeded in deflecting, if only temporarily, a United Nations Security Council vote on a draft resolution against the settlements.
    Pressure from the Prime Minister’s Bureau on Cairo, which proposed the resolution, requests for assistance and coordination from President-elect Donald Trump and contacts at the UN and in several world capitals caused Egypt to retract its request for a snap vote.
    Nevertheless it was made clear to the participants in a meeting of the security-diplomatic cabinet last night that the crisis is ongoing and the possibility remains that a vote will still be held in the next few days.
    The saga began on Wednesday night, when the Egyptian delegation to the UN distributed copies of its draft resolution against the settlements to the members of the Security Council and requested that it be brought to the vote on Thursday at 10 P.M. Israel time.
    Israel had operated over the past few months on the assumption that a resolution on Israel-Palestine would be brought to the council before the end of President Barack Obama’s term on January 20 next year.
    Israel’s focus was on an Israel-Palestinian resolution and a resolution from New Zealand, but it was not expected to happen this week.

  • France to Push for UN Security Council Resolution on West Bank Settlements - Diplomacy and Defense - Haaretz
    French FM Laurent Fabius told Quartet meet 10 days ago that France intends to advance resolution and hopes to convene follow-up conference in Paris on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
    Barak Ravid Oct 11, 2015 4:53 AM

    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.679785

    The French government intends to advance a United Nations Security Council resolution on Jewish settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem, according to senior officials in Jerusalem and Western diplomats.

    French Foreign Minister Laurent Fabius made a comment to that effect 10 days ago, at a meeting in New York of the foreign ministers of the Middle East Quartet. Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu made use of the comment to convince right-wing members of his cabinet that new construction in the settlements in response to the recent wave of terrorism would cause Israel severe diplomatic damage.

    The September 30 meeting in New York was due to include the foreign ministers of the Quartet countries — the United States, European Union, Russia and the United Nations — as well as those from Jordan, Egypt and Saudi Arabia. The French foreign minister had other plans, however. Two Western diplomats and two senior officials in Jerusalem said Fabius demanded to participate in the meeting as well and exerted strong pressure on the Americans and on EU foreign policy chief Federica Mogherini.

    In the wake of the pressure, it was decided initially that France, Britain and China, all of which are permanent members of the Security Council, would also be invited, even though they are not direct members of the Quartet. The prospect of their participation, however, led other countries, such as Germany, Norway, Japan, Italy, Spain and others, to demand a place at the table as well. It turned into a conference of 30 foreign ministers from around the world, discussing the Israeli-Palestinian conflict without a single Israeli or Palestinian representative.

    A statement in summation of the meeting — mainly ceremonial and with short statements by each of the participants — was agreed upon in advance. Fabius again surprised the gathering by presenting a French diplomatic plan with steps that he said would break the deadlock in the peace process.

    According to Western diplomats present and the meeting as well as senior Israel officials briefed on the details, Fabius said he was interested in convening a follow-up conference in Paris to which countries interested in advancing a solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be invited, but not the two sides themselves.

    Immediately afterwards, he uttered a sentence which has caused a lot of nervousness in Jerusalem over the past ten days. According to the diplomats, Fabius said there were many parties pressing for a vote on a Security Council resolution on the settlements and the subject was being explored. Reports of Fabius’ statement reached Israeli diplomats and Netanyahu, who was in New York at the time, within a few hours.

    Like most of the participants at the Quartet meeting, Netanyahu and his advisers were surprised by the process Fabius proposed in his remarks. The Israeli leader’s advisers were quick to speak to associates of U.S. Secretary of State John Kerry and others who were present at the Quartet parley.

    The following day, Netanyahu raised the issue at a meeting with Kerry and expressed great concern. The Americans said they do not know what Fabius intends and had no additional information on the subject. A senior Israeli official noted that from inquiries made in subsequent days, it turned out that it was apparently a process that was only in its initial stages.

    Fabius’ short, vague sentence regarding a Security Council resolution on Jewish settlements became a central element of a meeting of the Israeli inner cabinet last Monday, a day after Netanyahu’s return from New York. In the face of pressure that was applied by Education Minister Naftali Bennett, Justice Minister Ayelet Shaked and Immigrant Absorption Minister Ze’ev Elkin to announce construction in settlements in response to the wave of terrorist attacks, Netanyahu and his adviser Isaac Molho presented information about the French plans.

    Despite the fact that there is no draft or proposed text of a French resolution, Netanyahu, Molho and other participants at the meeting contended that it would state that the settlements are not legal. They presented Fabius’ initial idea as a highly dangerous process that could bring about a wave of boycotts and withdrawal of investment from any Israeli entity operating directly or indirectly in the settlements; serious international isolation; and a risk of a trial at the International Court in The Hague against any entity connected to the settlements. They argued that construction in the settlements at this time would provide backing for Fabius’ initiative and cause Israeli serious diplomatic damage.

    Channel 2 reported that Netanyahu and Molho also told the ministers that they had received an American ultimatum that an announcement of new construction in the settlement would cause President Barack Obama to refrain from vetoing the French resolution if it would come to a UN Security Council vote. According to several ministers who attended the inner cabinet meeting, Molho said that Kerry had left him threatening voice-mail messages. Senior American officials denied both the existence of an ultimatum and Molho’s story about Kerry’s threatening messages.

    Even if Fabius’ plan does take shape, it would not be the first time that the Security Council adopted a resolution on the settlements. Resolution 465 in 1980, which was passed unanimously without an American veto, stated that the settlements built beyond the 1967 borders, including East Jerusalem, were not legal. The resolution also called for all countries to refrain from providing any form of assistance to construction in the settlements.

  • How Crimea Plays in Beijing » CounterPunch: Tells the Facts, Names the Names
    http://www.counterpunch.org/2014/03/21/how-crimea-plays-in-beijing

    Pepe Escobar,

    ... again the West misinterpreted China’s abstention from the UN Security Council vote on a US-backed resolution condemning the Crimea referendum. The spin was that Russia – which vetoed the resolution – was “isolated”. It’s not. And the way Beijing plays geopolitics shows it’s not.

    Prison Planet.com » China Takes Sides: Sues Ukraine For $3bn Loan Repayment
    http://www.prisonplanet.com/china-takes-sides-sues-ukraine-for-3bn-loan-repayment.html

    It is widely known that Russia is owed billions by Ukraine for already-delivered gas (as we noted earlier, leaving Gazprom among the most powerful players in this game). It is less widely know that Russia also hold $3b of UK law bonds which, as we explained in detail here, are callable upon certain covenants that any IMF (or US) loan bailout will trigger. Russia has ‘quasi’ promised not to call those loans. It is, until now, hardly known at all (it would seem) that China is also owed $3bn, it claims, for loans made for future grain delivery to China.It would seem clear from this action on which side of the ‘sanctions’ fence China is sitting.

    #Chine

  • Europeans discuss terms for Israel’s return to UN human rights council

    Comment la France et les Etats-Unis agissent en faveur d’Israël

    By Barak Ravid | Oct. 24, 2013
    Haaretz
    http://www.haaretz.com/news/diplomacy-defense/.premium-1.554088

    Israel may be on the verge of renewing cooperation with the United Nations Council on Human Rights, a year and a half after Jerusalem severed ties with the international body.

    Negotiations between Israel and the council will reach a pivotal stage in Geneva within the next two days, as ambassadors of Western states on the council vote on an agreement which would bring Israel back into the UN body. If the outline of the accord is passed, it would represent a significant diplomatic victory for Israel, which has boycotted the UN Human Rights Council in Geneva since March 2012.

    Then-Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman cut off ties with the commission, following the latter’s decision to convene an international committee to investigate the settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem.

    Israel’s negotiations with the council have received strong assistance from the United States, Switzerland, and France, which acted against other Western states. The Israeli side of the negotiations has been led by Ambassador Aharon Leshno-Yaar, head of the Foreign Ministry’s international organizations department, who reported to Deputy Foreign Minister Ze’ev Elkin.

    The outlined plan for resuming cooperation contains two clauses which, if passed, would be considered a significant diplomatic victory for Israel:

    The first is that Israel would join the permanent group of Western states serving as part of the human rights council, which includes Western European states, Turkey, Canada, Australia and New Zealand. As of today, Israel is not a part of any regional group, a fact that makes it difficult for Israel to garner support for various diplomatic endeavors.

    The second clause would limit the use of the council’s “article 7,” which stipulates that any conference on human rights would hold a separate discussion of human rights in Israel and the West Bank. Israel is the only state in the world subject to such a separate discussion.

    Within the outline under negotiations, Western European states would commit not to make any speeches at so-called “article 7” discussions. The European commitment would last for the next two human rights conferences, which are set to take place during the next two years. A unanimous vote would be required to reverse this limitation and resume the “article 7” discussions, which will prove very difficult to achieve.

    Over the next two days, discussions on the outline will continue among the Western member nations, in an attempt to achieve a consensus. The two obstacles to such a consensus are Turkey, which has yet to agree to allow Israel to join the group, and a few states,including Ireland, Lichtenstein and Iceland, which have expressed reservations regarding commitments to refrain from making speeches during “article 7” meetings.

    “It’s all done, and we’re waiting to get an official decision from the Europeans,” said a senior Foreign Ministry official. “If the outline is adopted, it will be a green light for renewing cooperation between Israel and the UN Human Rights Council.” 

    A decision on the matter must be reached in the next few days due to the fact that on Tuesday, Israel is supposed to appear in the periodical proceedings of the UN Human Rights Council, called the Universal Periodic Review, or UPR. The UPR consists of a hearing once every few years, during which every UN member state gives an account of human rights in its territory. The UPR is a cornerstone of international human rights.

    If the outline is not passed by the weekend, Israel will not appear at the UPR, and will become the first state to boycott the periodic hearing. As a result, Israel would likely receive harsh criticism from the international community, and would be considered responsible for creating a precedent that would allow nations like Iran, Syria, and North Korea to refuse to appear at such hearings in the future.