–bumped–
The report on the investigation into January’s Operation Cast Lead and the charges that Israel committed multiple war crimes in its Gaza war this year, orchestrated through the UN Human Rights Council and headed by Justice Richard Goldstone, has landed with a dull kaboom.
Ian Kelly with State’s reaction:
MR. KELLY: Okay. So I have a reaction to the report of the fact-finding mission of Justice Goldstone. As President Obama made clear at the time of the events covered by the report, we are deeply concerned about the loss of life and humanitarian suffering in both Israel and Gaza. As we’ve said previously, prior to U.S. membership, the UN’s Human Rights Council set forth a one-sided and unacceptable mandate for this fact-finding investigation.
Although the report addresses all sides of the conflict, its overwhelming focus is on the actions of Israel. While the report makes overly sweeping conclusions of fact and law with respect to Israel, its conclusions regarding Hamas’s deplorable conduct and its failure to comply with international humanitarian law during the conflict are more general and tentative.
We also have very serious concerns about the report’s recommendations, including calls that this issue be taken up in international fora outside the Human Rights Council and in national courts of countries not party to the conflict. We note in particular that Israel has the democratic institutions to investigate and prosecute abuses, and we encourage it to use those institutions.
We believe this report should be discussed within the Human Rights Council, and we look forward to participating in that discussion. We will approach discussions on the report keeping in mind the underlying causes of the tragic events in Gaza earlier this year – the lack of a peace agreement between the Israelis and the Palestinians, and the attacks by Hamas against innocent civilians.
Our focus right now, as I’ve said before, is to get all sides to take steps to re-launch Israeli-Palestinian negotiations so we can end this conflict and the humanitarian suffering it has caused. We will move forward in discussions of the report while keeping that overriding goal at the forefront. We hope efforts related to the Middle East at the Human Rights Council and other international bodies will look to the future and how we can support the goal of a two-state solution.
Meanwhile, the Washington Post reports a fascinating tale of Israel’s missile defense that is quite intriguing, not to mention chock full of weapon nuggets.
The effort, partly financed by the United States and incorporating advanced U.S. radar and other technology, has been progressing quietly for two decades but now has reached a level of maturity that Israeli defense and other analysts say could begin changing strategic decisions in the region. Centered on the already-deployed Arrow 2 antimissile system, it is being extended to include a longer-range Arrow 3, the David’s Sling rocket designed to hit lower- and slower-flying cruise missiles, and the Iron Dome system intended to destroy Grads, Katyushas, Qassams and other shorter-range projectiles fired from the Gaza Strip and southern Lebanon.
With the Arrow system in operation and the Iron Dome due for deployment next year, Israel “has something to stabilize the situation: the knowledge that an attack will fail,” said Uzi Rubin, a private defense consultant who ran Israel’s missile defense program in the 1990s. Iran, he said, could not be assured of a successful first strike against Israel, while groups such as Hamas in Gaza and Hezbollah in Lebanon may find one of their favored tactics undermined.
All this in a week that has Pres. Obama rightly scrapping Bush era missile defense, which Pres. Medvedev of Russia greeted positively, the week before all sorts of foreign policy gaming begins next week in New York.
Sect. Clinton today at Brookings presented the Administration’s stance on Iran, while simultaneously stating that regardless of where Iran’s rhetoric stands, the Obama administration is ready to talk.
Here, allow me to diverge a bit, to quote a portion of Clinton’s speech today, which focuses on what has become a central issue in my work (as I toil towards a broader goal, which I’ll share with you when I finally get the project off the ground):
Finally, our delegation, and I personally, will work to advance international efforts to recognize women as key drivers of economic progress and social stability, as well, to address impediments to women’s empowerment and advancement, particularly sexual and gender-based violence. I will chair a session of the Security Council and will speak on behalf of the adoption of a resolution on “women, peace and security” which will endorse concrete measures to implement Security Council Resolution 1820 and address sexual and gender-based violence as a tactic of war.
I saw the scale of misery caused by this violence on my recent trip to the Democratic Republic of Congo, having met, in many different settings around the world over many years, with women who are the victims of the worst that humanity offers, but also with women who are the strongest exemplars of the best of what humanity offers. I saw that very vividly on this most recent trip.
Next week, I will be speaking with other foreign ministers and heads of state about strategies to end this violence and to ensure that those who commit atrocities are prosecuted and not treated with impunity. I will work with women leaders, heads of state, foreign ministers at the General Assembly to highlight the importance of raising the status of girls and women and investing in their potential through education, economic development, and healthcare. If women are free from violence and accorded their rights, they can contribute to local economies and become change agents for greater prosperity and stability.
Our agenda is ambitious. …
And very important.
I’m thinking also about Palestinian women, who have no means by which to help their families, as they have few employment opportunities, amidst conditions that remain oppressively debilitating.
CNN called Clinton’s hopes for next week’s U.N. gathering a “sweeping agenda.”
Back to Israel. State’s Ian Kelley reported today rather dismal news at the briefing, as George Mitchell returns from Israel without a deal of any sort: There is no – there’s been no agreement to have a trilateral meeting.
Laura Rozen has a report, as well as some analysis on the issue that’s worth your time.
Foreign policy watchers will want to prepare your attention radar for next week, target the United Nations. It could range from very interesting to productive to gamesmanship on parade. But definitely great drama unfolding.
Pres. Obama makes his first appearance in front of the U.N. General Assembly on Wednesday of next week. He will also be the first U.S. president to head a meeting of the U. N. Security Council, which will happen on Thursday. The topic is nuclear nonproliferation.
Though I don’t suspect conservatives and right wing critics of Obama’s decision to move away from Bush-Cheney era missile defense plans will get the correlation between that decision and one of Obama’s signature foreign policy focuses, nuclear nonproliferation, on which he needs Russia’s involvement in order to be successful. Nobody ever accused the right of being insightful on national security. Pres. Obama, on the other hand, is thinking long-term.
Segue to Clinton again on Iran in her speech at Brookings, which incorporates everything that came down this week. Secretary Clinton really was at her best today:
… [...] Let me begin, though, by echoing the President’s statement yesterday concerning his approval of the recommendations not only of the Pentagon, but of his entire national security team to deploy a stronger and more comprehensive missile defense system in Europe. This decision came after a lengthy and in-depth review of our assessment of the threats posed, particularly the threat posed by Iran’s ballistic missile program, and the technology that we have today, and what might be available in the future to confront it. We believe this is a decision that will leave America stronger, and more capable of defending our troops, our interests, and our allies.
Let me be clear about what this new system will do relative to the previous program, which was many years from being deployed. With the President’s decision, we will deploy missile defense sooner than the previous program. We will be able to swiftly counter the threat posed by Iran’s short and medium-range ballistic missiles. We will deploy missile defense that is more comprehensive than the previous program with more interceptors in more places and with a better capacity to protect all of our friends and allies in the region. We will deploy technology that is actually proven so that we do not waste time or taxpayer money. And we will preserve the flexibility to adjust our approach to the threat as the threat evolves.
So make no mistake – if you support missile defense, which I did as a senator for eight years, then this is a stronger and smarter approach than the previous program. It does what missile defense is actually supposed to do. It defends America and our allies. Now I know we’ve heard criticism of this plan from some quarters. But much of that criticism is not yet connected to the facts. We are not, quote, “shelving” missile defense. We are deploying missile defense sooner than the Bush Administration planned to do so. And we are deploying a more comprehensive system.
We are not reducing our capacity to protect our interests and our allies from Iran. By contrast, we are increasing that capacity and focusing it on our best understanding of Iran’s current capabilities. And most of all, we would never, never walk away from our allies. We have recommitted ourselves to our Article 5 obligations under NATO. We have sent that message in bilateral and multilateral settings from the President’s and my trips to every other encounter and venue that we have been in over the last many months. We are deploying a system that enhances the security of our NATO allies. It actually advances our cooperation with NATO. And it actually places more resources in more countries. [...]
Oh, and finally, without further ado, Happy New Year!
Comments are closed.