Thread: Carter Meets With Hamas

Of course the cost of all this is very substantial.
A recent study by the Adva Centre, an independent policy centre in Tel Aviv, makes the continued Occupation and security situation seem even more unsustainable-

"Adva's report said: "The truth is that the conflict with the Palestinians is like a millstone around the neck of Israel: it undermines economic growth, burdens the budget, limits social development, sullies its vision, hangs heavy on its conscience, harms its international standing, exhausts its army, divides it politically, and threatens the future of its existence as a Jewish nation-state."

Adva's figures show Israel's economy grew 43% between 1997 and 2006, well behind world economic growth during that period of 67% and growth of 68% in the US and in the EU.

Although it is almost impossible to calculate an accurate cost of the occupation of the Palestinian territories because much of the defence budget is secret, Adva said that additions to the defence budget to pay for increased military activity in the territories came to 36.6bn shekels between 1989 and 2008.

That amount is greater than the government's budget for elementary, secondary and tertiary education in Israel this year, it said....

Adva said that one in every five Israeli families now ranked as poor, against one in every 10 in the 1970s, which it said was partly a result of the conflict and partly due to the arrival of hundreds of thousands of immigrants from the Soviet Union and Ethiopia who have struggled to find work. Social security payments, particularly child allowances, unemployment compensation and income maintenance, were cut significantly between 2001 and 2005, at least in part because of rising defence costs"

Occupation has cost Israel dear, says report | World news | The Guardian

Originally Posted by Bugs

I love it when groups tag themselves as "independent". Generally this is an attempt to imply that they are some kind of neutral party, have no agenda, and are not associated with any cause(s) -

and the posters in issues who ridiculously claim to be 'independent'.

Well this is quite the most sensible, and productive, noise I have heard emanating from the other side of the Pond with respect to Israel/ Palestine for a long while. Nick Kristoff, the author, take a bow. Obamas wankiness in Israel recently I can only hope will not be replicated when (if) he's in power. Given the Democratic parties usual impotence in taking positive steps towards peace in the Middle East, I'll not hold me breath.

"On his visit to the Middle East, Barack Obama gave ritual affirmations of his support for Israeli policy, but what Israel needs from America isn't more love, but tougher love.

Particularly at a time when Israel seems to be contemplating military strikes on Iranian nuclear sites, the United States would be a better friend if it said: "That's crazy" - while also insisting on a 100 percent freeze on settlements in the West Bank and greater Jerusalem....


Peace-making invariably involves exasperating and intransigent antagonists and unequal steps, just as it did in the decades in which Britain struggled to end terrorism emanating from Northern Ireland.

But London never ordered air strikes on Sinn Fein or walled in Catholic neighborhoods. Over time, Britain's extraordinary restraint slowly changed attitudes so as to make the eventual peace possible.

I hope Obama, as a candidate or as a president, will be a true enough friend of Israel to say all this, warmly but firmly."


Full Article- Tough love for Israel? - International Herald Tribune


Why aren't more people saying this from the USA?
Surely, it is common sense?

Maybe, being a 'proud friend of Israel' needs to be treated as more than just a slogan, and the underlying realities looked at. Thats what Friendship is.