Obama Challenges Israel to Make Hard Choices Needed for Peace

NYT.COM

Visit msnbc.com for breaking news, world news, and news about the economy

speaking on Sunday to the nation’s foremost pro-Israel lobbying group, repeated his call for Palestinian statehood based on Israel’s pre-1967 borders adjusted for land swaps, issuing a challenge to the Israeli government to “make the hard choices that are necessary to protect a Jewish and democratic state for which so many generations have sacrificed.”

In his remarks to the American Israel Public Affairs Committee, the president, while offering fulsome praise for the relationship with Israel, did not walk back from his speech on Thursday, which had infuriated Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel. Rather, the president took indirect aim at Mr. Netanyahu, first by repeating what the Israeli prime minister so objected to — the phrase pre-1967 borders — and then by challenging those whom he said had “misrepresented” his position.

“Let me repeat what I actually said on Thursday,” Mr. Obama said in firm tones at one point, “not what I was reported to have said.”

“I said that the United States believes that negotiations should result in two states, with permanent Palestinian borders with Israel, Jordan, and Egypt, and permanent Israeli borders with Palestine. The borders of Israel and Palestine should be based on the 1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps, so that secure and recognized borders are established for both states.”

The president emphasized the “mutually agreed swaps,” then went into an elaboration of what he believes that means. Mr. Netanyahu, in his critique of Mr. Obama’s remarks, had ignored the “mutually agreed swaps” part of the president’s proposal.

“Since my position has been misrepresented several times, let me reaffirm what “1967 lines with mutually agreed swaps” means,” Mr. Obama said. “By definition, it means that the parties themselves — Israelis and Palestinians — will negotiate a border that is different than the one that existed on June 4, 1967. It is a well known formula to all who have worked on this issue for a generation. It allows the parties themselves to account for the changes that have taken place over the last 44 years.”

“There was nothing particularly original in my proposal,” he said. “This basic framework for negotiations has long been the basis for discussions among the parties, including previous U.S. administrations.”

Mr. Netanyahu’s furious reaction last week to what many administration officials viewed as a modest compromise from the more dramatic all-encompassing American peace plan that some of Mr. Obama’s advisers had been advocating, infuriated the White House. In particular, administration officials were angry by Mr. Netanyahu’s lecturing tone during statements the two leaders gave on Friday. American officials were also irritated by Mr. Netanyahu statement directly after Mr. Obama’s speech that used the phrase “expects to hear” in saying that Mr. Netanyahu expected to hear certain assurances from Mr. Obama during their meeting.

Mr. Obama also assured the group that the administration was steadfast in its “opposition to any attempt to de-legitimize the state of Israel,” but he warned that Israel would face growing isolation without a credible Middle East peace process.

Sunday’s audience, which had been quiet, cheered Mr. Obama, although the cheers were far more muted than the standing ovation they had given at other points of Mr. Obama’s speech, like when he talked about Iran and when he reiterated that his opposition to a looming United Nations vote on Palestinian statehood.

“I know very well that the easy thing to do, particularly for a president preparing for re-election, is to avoid any controversy,” Mr. Obama said. “I don’t need Rahm” — former chief of staff Rahm Emanuel — “to tell me that.”

But, Mr. Obama added, “as I said to Prime Minister Netanyahu, I believe that the current situation in the Middle East does not allow for procrastination. I also believe that real friends talk openly and honestly with one another.”

Others close to the administration have also pushed back against the notion that Mr. Obama was signaling a major shift in American policy on Thursday. “No, he wasn’t,” said his newly departed special envoy to the Middle East, George Mitchell, when asked that question on Sunday.

“The president didn’t say that Israel has to go back to the ’67 lines,” Mr. Mitchell said on ABC’s “This Week”. “He said ‘with agreed swaps.’ Those are significant.”

Mr. Mitchell went on: “ ‘Agreed’ means through negotiations; both parties must agree. There’s not going to be a border unless Israel agrees to it, and we know they won’t agree unless their security needs are satisfied.”

It was a quietly delivered speech that lasted 20 minutes, and at the end, the packed hall of at the Washington Convention Center stood up for Mr. Obama and clapped — some even cheered. There were no boos or hisses, as some of the president’s allies had feared.

Mr. Obama’s arrival on stage, before a backdrop collage that meshed fragments of the Israeli and American flags, was met with loud applause. But that was at least partly because it followed an introduction by Lee Rosenberg, the group’s president, that ended with a guaranteed applause line: “Thank you, Mr. President, for ridding the world of Osama bin Laden.”

Saudi Arabia, UAE financing Pak's hardline clerics

Hardline Deobandi and Ahl-i-Hadith clerics in Pakistan's Punjab province have been receiving financial aid worth nearly $100 million annually from groups in Saudi Arabia and UAE, according to a secret US diplomatic cable released by WikiLeaks.

The cable sent in November 2008 to the US State Department by Bryan Hunt, then Principal Officer at the US Consulate in Lahore, was based on information gathered during discussions with local government and non-governmental sources during trips to Multan and Bahawalpur cities in Punjab.

Most of the funding flowed to southern Punjab, which has been described by Western diplomats and security officials as an emerging stronghold of jihadists, including the Punjabi Taliban.

The cable said that "financial support estimated at nearly $100 million annually was making its way to Deobandi and Ahl-i-Hadith clerics in south Punjab from organisations in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates ostensibly with the direct support of those governments".

Quoting local interlocutors, Hunt explained how the "sophisticated jihadi recruitment network" operated in a region dominated by the moderate Barelvi sect.

The presence of the Barelvis, according to the cable, made southern Punjab "traditionally hostile" to the Deobandi and Ahl-i-Hadith schools of thought. Hunt referred to a "network of Deobandi and Ahl-i-Hadith mosques and madrassahs" being strengthened through an influx of "charity" that earlier went to hardline groups "such as Jamaat-ud-Dawa and Al-Khidmat Foundation".

Portions of these funds were given to clerics "to expand these sects' presence" in a "potentially fruitful recruiting ground", the cable said.

The cable described how "families with multiple children" and "severe financial difficulties" were being exploited by those recruiting for militant groups. Families approached by "ostensibly 'charitable'" organisations would later be introduced to a "local Deobandi or Ahl-i-Hadith maulana" who would offer to educate the children at his madrassa and "find them employment in the service of Islam".

"Martyrdom" was "often discussed", with a final cash payment to the parents, the cable said. "Local sources claim that the current average rate is approximately Rs 500,000 (approximately $6,500) per son," the cable said. Children recruited by the jihadis were given age-specific indoctrination and eventually trained after madrassa teachers assessed their inclination "to engage in violence and acceptance of jihadi culture" versus their value as promoters of the Deobandi or Ahl-i-Hadith sects or recruiters, the cable said.

Recruits "chosen for jihad" were taken to "more sophisticated indoctrination camps". "Locals identified three centres reportedly used for this purpose," the cable said. Two centres were stated to be in Bahawalpur district, while one was reportedly situated "on the outskirts of Dera Ghazi Khan city".

These centres "were primarily used for indoctrination", after which "youths were generally sent on to more established training camps in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and then on to jihad either in FATA, NWFP, or as suicide bombers in settled areas", the cable said.

The cable quoted local officials criticising the PML-N-led government in Punjab and the PPP-led federal government for their "failure to act" against "extremist madrassas, or known prominent leaders such as Jaish-i-Mohammad's Masood Azhar".

The then Bahawalpur district nazim (mayor) told Hunt that despite repeatedly highlighting to the provincial and federal governments the threat posed by extremist groups and indoctrination centres, he had received "no support" in dealing with the issue unless he was ready to change his political loyalties.

The nazim, who at the time was with the PML-Q, "blamed politics, stating that unless he was willing to switch parties neither the Pakistan Muslim League-Nawaz provincial nor the Pakistan People's Party federal governments would take his requests seriously".

Saudi Arabia, UAE financing extremism in south Punjab

A US official in a cable sent to the State Department stated that “financial support estimated at nearly 100 million USD annually was making its way to Deobandi and Ahl-i-Hadith clerics in south Punjab from organisations in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates ostensibly with the direct support of those governments.”

The cable sent in November 2008 by Bryan Hunt, the then Principal Officer at the US Consulate in Lahore, was based on information from discussions with local government and non-governmental sources during his trips to the cities of Multan and Bahawalpur.

Quoting local interlocutors, Hunt attempts to explain how the “sophisticated jihadi recruitment network” operated in a region dominated by the Barelvi sect, which, according to the cable, made south Punjab “traditionally hostile” to Deobandi and Ahl-i-Hadith schools of thought.

Hunt refers to a “network of Deobandi and Ahl-i-Hadith mosques and madrassahs” being strengthened through an influx of “charity” which originally reached organisations “such as Jamaat-ud-Dawa and Al-Khidmat foundation”. Portions of these funds would then be given away to clerics “in order to expand these sects’ presence” in a relatively inhospitable yet “potentially fruitful recruiting ground”.

Outlining the process of recruitment for militancy, the cable describes how “families with multiple children” and “severe financial difficulties” were generally being exploited for recruitment purposes. Families first approached by “ostensibly ‘charitable’” organisations would later be introduced to a “local Deobandi or Ahl-i-Hadith maulana” who would offer to educate the children at his madrassah and “find them employment in the service of Islam”. “Martyrdom” was also “often discussed”, with a final cash payment to the parents. “Local sources claim that the current average rate is approximately Rs 500,000 (approximately USD 6,500) per son,” the cable states.

Children recruited would be given age-specific indoctrination and would eventually be trained according to the madrassah teachers’ assessment of their inclination “to engage in violence and acceptance of jihadi culture” versus their value as promoters of Deobandi or Ahl-i-Hadith sects or recruiters, the cable states.

Recruits “chosen for jihad” would then be taken to “more sophisticated indoctrination camps”. “Locals identified three centres reportedly used for this purpose”. Two of the centres were stated to be in the Bahawalpur district, whereas one was reported as situated “on the outskirts of Dera Ghazi Khan city”. These centres “were primarily used for indoctrination”, after which “youths were generally sent on to more established training camps in the Federally Administered Tribal Areas and then on to jihad either in FATA, NWFP, or as suicide bombers in settled areas”.

The cable goes on to quote local officials criticising the PML-N-led provincial and the PPP-led federal governments for their “failure to act” against “extremist madrassas, or known prominent leaders such as Jaish-i-Mohammad’s Masood Azhar”. The Bahawalpur district nazim at the time told Hunt that despite repeatedly highlighting the threat posed by extremist groups and indoctrination centres to the provincial and federal governments, he had received “no support” in dealing with the issue unless he was ready to change his political loyalties. The nazim, who at the time was with the PML-Q, “blamed politics, stating that unless he was willing to switch parties…neither the Pakistan Muslim League – Nawaz provincial nor the Pakistan People’s Party federal governments would take his requests seriously”.Dawn.com

Nawaz feared arrest on deportation: cables

Nawaz Sharif feared that he might be taken under arrest after deportation from Pakistan in 2007; a private TV channel reported quoting cables released by WikiLeaks.

According to leaked cables, former Lebanon Prime Minister Saad Al-Hariri asked Nawaz Sharif not to return to Pakistan but Nawaz did otherwise.

The secret US cable, which revealed this information, was sent from US consulate in Jeddah on September 12, 2007.

The discussion between the head of Saudi secret agency Prince Muqrin and US’s then ambassador disclosed this information in a secret cable released by WikiLeaks.

According to cable, Saudi Prince Muqrin told US ambassador that Nawaz had feared that he might be arrested on way to Saudi Arabia after his deportation from Pakistan.

Upon this he was given two options: he could either stay at a palace that had been prepared for him, or at his home. Sharif opted to go to his home.

The cable also released details of the secret agreement that allowed Sharif to go into exile in Saudi Arabia for 10 years after he was convicted on charges, like hijacking, following the military coup against him by former President Pervez Musharraf.

Babar wants few answers from Nawaz Luhar

Federal Law Minister Dr Babar Awan has urged the federal government to take practical steps for the procurement of additional wheat from the farmers of the province.
Speaking at a seminar ‘Zulfiqar Ali Bhutto, Constitution and Justice’ held here at Aiwan-e-Iqbal on Saturday, he said that the rulers in the province were spending billions of rupees on Kalima Chowk flyover, completely ignoring plight of the growers and now it was responsibility of the federal government to make necessary arrangements.
Awan assured the growers that the federal government would not leave them alone in the hour of need. Coming hard on the PML-N leadership for getting security from Elite Force while visiting Sindh, he said that the step had conveyed a wrong message to the smaller province.
“Neither Mohtarma, nor Junejo or Jamali brought with them security men from their respective provinces while visiting Punjab. The PML-N leader should answer that why he did it while going to Sindh”, he said. He also ask four more questions from the PML-N Quaid Nawaz Sharif while urging him to respond to the queries himself instead of assigning the responsibility to any other person.
“The PML-N remained in power for eight months after the Kargil Operation. Why Nawaz Sharif rushed to the US instead of approaching the parliament.
Nawaz Sharif should also inform that why joint session of the parliament was not summoned on Eimal Kansi issue. He should also tell the nation that when he would return the money to the country earned from ‘Karz Utaro Mulk Sanwaro Scheme’, he said, adding that the PML-N was not ready to sit with anyone of the mainstream political parties.
“PML-N can’t sit with the MQM and Q-League. It is also not comfortable with the ANP. The PML-N leader should tell the name of the party with whom he is comfortable”, he said. He said that the person who left the country after tendering apology was talking about national pride and integrity.
Referring to the ZAB reference in the Apex Court, Awan said that contesting case of Quaid-e-Awam was a matter of pride for him. He said that coming era was of Bhuttoism and the poor, labourers and farmers would get the right to rule the country.

Saudi Arabia, UAE funded jihadi networks in Pakistan

Islamic charities from Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates financed a network in U.S. ally Pakistan that recruited children as young as eight to wage holy war, a local newspaper reported on Sunday, citing Wikileaks.

A U.S. diplomatic cable published by WikiLeaks said financial support estimated at $100 million a year was making its way from those Gulf Arab states to a jihadist recruitment network in Pakistan's Punjab province, Dawn newspaper reported.

The November 2008 dispatch by Bryan Hunt, the then principal officer at the U.S. consulate in Lahore, was based on discussions with local government and non-governmental sources during trips to Punjab, Pakistan's most populous province.

It said those sources claimed that financial aid from Saudi and United Arab Emirates was coming from "missionary" and "Islamic charitable" organizations ostensibly with the direct support of those countries' governments.

Asked to respond to the report, Saudi foreign ministry spokesman Osama Nugali said: "Saudi Arabia issued a statement from day one that we are not going to comment on any WikiLeaks reports because Saudi Arabia is not responsible for these reports and we are not sure about their authenticity."

Saudi Arabia, the United States and Pakistan heavily supported the Afghan mujahideen against Soviet occupation troops in the 1980s.

Militancy subsequently mushroomed in the region and militants moved to Pakistan's northwest tribal areas along the border with Afghanistan, seen as a global hub for militants.

Since then there has been a growing nexus between militant groups there and in Punjab. In recent years militants have been carrying out suicide bombings seemingly at will in Pakistan, despite military offensives against their strongholds.

The discovery that Osama bin Laden was living in a Pakistani town not far from Islamabad until he was killed by U.S. special forces earlier this month has severely damaged ties between Washington and Islamabad.

The United States wants Pakistan to be a more reliable partner in its war on militancy.

CHILDREN SENT TO TRAINING CAMPS

But militancy is deeply rooted in Pakistan. In order to eradicate it, analysts say, the government must improve economic conditions to prevent militants from recruiting young men disillusioned with the state.

The network in Punjab reportedly exploited worsening poverty to indoctrinate children and ultimately send them to training camps, said the cable.

Saudi Arabia, home to the fundamentalist Wahhabi brand of Islam, is seen as funding some of Pakistan's hardline religious seminaries, or madrassas, which churn out young men eager for holy war, posing a threat to the stability of the region.

"At these madrassas, children are denied contact with the outside world and taught sectarian extremism, hatred for non-Muslims, and anti-Western/anti-Pakistan government philosophy," said the cable.

It described how "families with multiple children" and "severe financial difficulties" were being exploited and recruited, Dawn reported.

"The path following recruitment depends upon the age of the child involved. Younger children (between 8 and 12) seem to be favored," said the cable.

Teachers in seminaries would assess the inclination of children "to engage in violence and acceptance of jihadi culture."

"The initial success of establishing madrassas and mosques in these areas led to subsequent annual "donations" to these same clerics, originating in Saudi Arabia and the United Arab Emirates," the cable stated.