Hillary, contrary to popular Trumpesque memes, has neither been hiding/sleeping nor spending every waking minute of every day prepping to face her opponent tonight. Sunday, Hillary dropped in on, “Apple Seeds,” a kids’ center in the NYC Flatiron district, paid a visit to Chelsea and family, and met with Netanyahu who is in town for UNGA.
Posts Tagged ‘Benjamin Netanyahu’
Hillary Clinton Out and About on Sunday in New York
Posted in 2016 Election, Clinton/Kaine 2016, Democratic Party, Foreign Policy, Hillary 2016, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton 2016, Hillary For America, Hillary for President, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Uncategorized, tagged 2016 election, Benjamin Netanyahu, Chelsea Clinton, Clinton/Kaine 2016, debates, Donald Trump, Foreign Policy, Hillary 2016, Hillary Clinton, UNGA on September 26, 2016| Leave a Comment »
Hillary Clinton’s Op-Ed in ‘Forward’ – Unbreakable Bond with Israel
Posted in 2016 Election, Foreign Policy, Hillary 2016, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton 2016, Hillary For America, Hillary for President, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, state department, tagged 2016 election, Benjamin Netanyahu, Foreign Policy, Forward, Hillary 2016, Hillary Clinton, Hillary For America, Hillary for President, Israel on November 5, 2015| Leave a Comment »
How I Would Reaffirm Unbreakable Bond With Israel — and Benjamin Netanyahu
We have recently marked the 20th anniversary of the assassination of then Israeli prime minister Yitzhak Rabin, a good friend, a courageous warrior and a great statesman. This somber anniversary, and Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s visit to Washington on November 9, is an opportunity to reaffirm the unbreakable bonds of friendship and unity between the people and governments of the United States and Israel.
The alliance between our two nations transcends politics. It is and should always be a commitment that unites us, not a wedge that divides us.
Ever since President Truman waited only 11 minutes to recognize the new nation of Israel in 1948, Americans have believed that Israel is more than a country — it’s a dream nurtured for generations and made real by men and women who refused to bow to the toughest odds.
Hillary Clinton’s ‘Hard Choices’ Retrospective Part Five Chapter 20 Gaza: Anatomy of a Cease-Fire
Posted in Hard Choices, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Uncategorized, tagged Benjamin Netanyahu, Gaza, Hamas, Hard Choices, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Israel, Mahmoud Abbas, Middle East, Mohamed Morsi, Retrospective on September 30, 2014| 5 Comments »
Hillary begins this chapter by verifying an incident we had all seen reported that was never confirmed. It took place on the road between Ramallah and Jerusalem in 2012 and concerned many of us.
She was traveling in the Holy Land just before Thanksgiving.
Video: Hillary Clinton With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
November 20, 2012 by still4hill
President Obama asked me to come to Israel with a very clear message: America’s commitment to Israel’s security is rock solid and unwavering. That is why we believe it is essential to de-escalate the situation in Gaza.
The rocket attacks from terrorist organizations inside Gaza on Israeli cities and towns must end and a broader calm restored. The goal must be a durable outcome that promotes regional stability and advances the security and legitimate aspirations of Israelis and Palestinians alike.
The incident on the Ramallah road involved a rocket that might have been launched, according to Hillary, and not the attempted ground attack we had read of here.
As she mentioned in chapter 14, the Obama administration came into office on the heels of a cease-fire in the region that more-or-less held through the next two years and began a creeping deterioration through 2011 into 2012. Events of the Arab Spring influenced Hamas activity in Gaza as related by Hillary and Sinai began to descend into lawlessness as Bedouin tribes, excluded by the Muslim Brotherhood in Cairo, became restless.
On this first trip to post-revolutionary Egypt, she raised the issue of Sinai to then President Morsi to no avail. He perceived no problem. After all, there was an Islamist government now. She found his perception naive at best.
Hillary Clinton with Egyptian FM Mohamed Kamel Amr
July 14, 2012 by still4hill
Hillary Clinton in Egypt: Day Two
July 15, 2012 by still4hill
Came August – Henry Kissinger had once warned her as secretary of state never to plan a vacation in August – this.
Hillary Clinton on Vacation (Sort Of)
August 23, 2012 by still4hill
With regard to the Secretary’s call with Egyptian Foreign Minister Amr, they obviously talked about the situation in Sinai and the ongoing Egyptian security operations. They talked about the visit of the IMF to Cairo and under the – with Christine Lagarde there as well, and the United States’ ongoing interest in support Egypt’s recovery as well.
In October the Emir of Qatar made an official visit to Gaza. It was a big deal for Hamas and precipitated a thorny regional situation for all involved at a volatile time. The Emir, Sheikh Hammad bin Khalifa al-Thani, assisted by his cousin, Sheikh Hammad bin Jassim al-Thani, sought to seize the moment to peddle Qatari influence and consolidate power in the region.
The power-play was short-lived. With the overthrow of Morsi and Islamist influence diluted, the two Sheikhs stepped aside in 2013. In 2014 Saudi Arabia, Bahrain, and the UAE recalled their ambassadors to Qatar.
Hillary was in Australia with Leon Panetta and Martin Dempsey when a call came through from Ehud Barak that in response to rocket attacks from Gaza, Israel was about to begin an air campaign.
Hillary Clinton With Australian Foreign Minister Robert Carr, Australian Defense Minister Stephen Smith, and Secretary of Defense Leon Panetta
November 14, 2012 by still4hill
Hillary was bound for Singapore and then Thailand to meet up with President Obama. They were to make an historic joint visit to Burma and Cambodia where she had originally been scheduled to attend ASEAN with President Obama. It was a critical summit addressing issues about the South China Sea.
But in the Middle East there was a chance of a ground invasion of Gaza.
Barack Obama and Hillary Clinton Tour Wat Pho Royal Monastery in Bangkok
November 18, 2012 by still4hill
By the 20th all the plans had changed.
SECRETARY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON: Public Schedule for November 20, 2012
November 20, 2012 by still4hill
The decision had been made that it was most important that she travel to the Middle East to seek a cease-fire. Hillary and her traveling party headed for Israel.
Breaking: Hillary Clinton Wheels Down Israel
November 20, 2012 by still4hill
She met with Netanyahu immediately upon landing, but was told she would not be given much time. If she did not effect an agreement quickly, the plans for a ground invasion would be implemented.
Hillary Clinton’s Day in Pics
November 20, 2012 by still4hill
Video: Hillary Clinton With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
November 20, 2012 by still4hill
Hillary Clinton Strongly Condemns Bus Bombing in Tel Aviv
November 21, 2012 by still4hill
Hillary Clinton Brokers Egyptian-Sponsored Middle East Cease-Fire
November 21, 2012 by still4hill
The visit to Abbas was largely a formality to keep him relevant in a situation where he had no real control or muscle to exert since the threat was coming from Hamas. Hillary wanted to be sure he was kept in the loop. He appreciated that.
Missing element: trust. Mubarak was gone and the Israeli’s did not trust the Muslim Brotherhood government in Egypt that was negotiating for Hamas. An Iraeli official told Hillary that this was the hardest choice Bibi had faced as Prime Minister.
She left for Cairo with an Israeli-approved strategy. This is what her day looked like.
Public Schedule for November 21, 2012
Public Schedule
Washington, DCNovember 21, 2012
U.S. DEPARTMENT OF STATE
PUBLIC SCHEDULE
WEDNESDAY NOVEMBER 21, 2012SECRETARY HILLARY RODHAM CLINTON
Secretary Clinton is on foreign travel to Jerusalem, Ramallah, and Cairo. Please click here for more information.
8:15 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Clinton meets with United Nations Secretary General Ban Ki-moon, in Jerusalem.
(CLOSED PRESS COVERAGE)9:30 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Clinton meets with Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, in Ramallah.
(CAMERA SPRAY PRECEDING MEETING)11:00 a.m. LOCAL Secretary Clinton meets with Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, in Jerusalem.
(CAMERA SPRAY PRECEDING MEETING)2:40 p.m. LOCAL Secretary Clinton meets with Egyptian President Mohammed Morsi, in Cairo.
(CAMERA SPRAY PRECEDING MEETING)4:10 p.m. LOCAL Secretary Clinton and Egyptian Foreign Minister Mohamed Kamel Amr deliver joint press statements, in Cairo. Please click here for a transcript of the remarks.
(OPEN PRESS COVERAGE)Note: Secretary Clinton has no public schedule through Sunday, November 25th.
Morsi was educated in the U.S. and read carefully. He questioned the translation, and objected to a portion until Hillary pointed out that his it was folks who had proposed that element at which point he let it slide. He and the Muslim Brotherhood were new to leadership despite having something of a history, and Hillary had to remind them of their position of leadership in the region. The moment of the announcement would represent the apex of their authority.
Video: Hillary Clinton Announces Mid-East Cease-Fire
November 21, 2012 by still4hill
Hillary Clinton and the Gaza Cease-Fire
November 25, 2012 by still4hill
In the end a senior Israeli official told Hillary that they had been forty-eight hours from launching a ground offensive and that her intervention was the only thing standing in the way.
__________________________________________________________
Hillary Clinton’s ‘Hard Choices’ Retrospective: Introduction
Access other chapters of this retrospective here >>>>
__________________________________________________________
####
Glenn Thrush, Psychic, Predicts a John Kerry Wayback Machine to Correct Hillary Clinton’s Course of State
Posted in Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, state department, U.S. Department of State, tagged Benjamin Netanyahu, Condolezza Rice, Glenn Thrush, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, John Kerry, Libya, Madeleine Albright, Middle East, Politico, Secretary of State, State Department, Syria on February 22, 2013| 25 Comments »
When this blog began in 2008, Hillary Clinton was a Senator and a former presidential candidate. She was campaigning for the Obama-Biden ticket, and she and all of the rest of us fully expected that after the election she would simply return to the Senate and put her pretty nose to the grindstone once again. The focus here has been on Hillary’s work and not on her job, and the blog handle has never included her titles. So while the past four years have necessarily focused on foreign policy because of her job, there has never been an intention for this blog to be mistaken for one that lent more attention to State Department matters than to the last Secretary of State.
That said, I am drawn back to matters of State today due to yesterday’s Politico article by Glenn Thrush, John Kerry: The un-Hillary Clinton. Thrush’s take on the Kerry secretariat, stunningly premature since all Kerry has done so far is make a speech and board the Big Blue Plane, overwhelmingly shifts the paradigm back to years not only before Hillary Clinton, but pre-Rice and pre-Albright. It is as if he is broadcasting “Thank God, mature white men are back in charge at Foggy Bottom.”
Prejudgment this predictive has not been seen since Barack Obama received the Nobel Peace Prize prompting a clear-sighted Michelle Obama to remark, “But he hasn’t done anything yet,” unless you count all of the hysterical momentum behind Hillary 2016 PACs and the assuredness with which they insist that she will run and will win. We shall see about that when she makes her decision and not when third-hand rumors abound.
Thrush begins with this astounding statement.
… she’s not necessarily his model for how to do the job. He’s more drawn to power players of recent history — George Shultz, James Baker, Henry Kissinger and George Marshall — secretaries who have wielded considerably more influence inside the White House than Clinton.
“He’s going to be more willing than Hillary was to tackle the big things… If he were able to help broker an exit for [Syrian President Bashar] Assad, for instance, that would be huge for him,” says a veteran senior diplomat who knows Kerry and has served as an adviser to officials in both parties.
People who “knew” Hillary, in late 2008, insisted that she would remain in the Senate and not accept Secretary of State. There were cries of protest from certain Hillary quarters when she agreed to tackle the job. Dark scenarios arose wherein the sub-secretaries for regions-at-risk, Holbrooke, Mitchell, and Ross (her idea) would steal her fire. Some feared security players in the White House, particularly Susan Rice and Samantha Power (the latter of whom Thrush apparently is unaware), would override her every agenda, a fear resoundingly overturned when, between stops in Paris on March 14 2011 and March 19 2011, both women were instrumental in helping her change President Obama’s prior stance on joining the No Fly Zone cooperative over embattled Libya. If this was not tackling a “big thing” I do not know what is. The trio also helped prove that government by women can be every bit as bold and risk-taking as government by men.
Issues surrounding Syria are unlikely to differ simply because the U.S. has a new SOS. If a trustworthy opposition coalition does not emerge, aid to the opposition is unlikely to change. Kerry heroically driving Assad out is wishful thinking on the part of Thrush.
It’s not that Clinton didn’t try to do big things, State Department watchers say. But Obama’s determination to avoid new foreign entanglements — and his insistence on tight control over diplomacy — dictated a narrower approach, focusing on women’s rights and smaller international initiatives, like re-establishing relations with Myanmar.
Oooohhhhh!!!! Suddenly I see! First of all that word “entanglements” somehow implies military rather than diplomatic. We should pursue the latter in avoidance of the former, and HRC was never Secretary of Defense. She certainly generated plenty of treaties (many of which the administration failed to push for ratification) and memoranda of understanding during her tenure . Anyone who thinks Hillary Clinton’s efforts on the part of women and girls was Obama’s idea, has not been paying attention.
Folks have pointed to several of HRC’s major speeches as ground-breaking, her internet freedom speech of January 2010 among them. For my money it was the very low profile Barnard commencement speech of May 18, 2009 that laid out her agenda very clearly. There she truly broke new ground, but hardly anyone noticed. Can it be the “girls’ school” venue, the emphasis on conditions for women globally, the encouragement to make bold moves using everyday social networking tools, the notion that half the world’s population should and might finally be spotlighted as deserving a place at the table? Nothing about that agenda was narrow. The degree to which she was able to weave her agenda into a single cloth of a foreign policy that can rightly be dubbed Clinton Doctrine is highlighted in the following as she wrapped up her tour as Secretary of State.
2. Video: Hillary Clinton at the Foreign Policy Group’s “Transformational Trends 2013″ Forum
3. American Leadership: Hillary Clinton’s Final Address as Secretary of State
Former State Department official Aaron David Miller says Kerry can afford to be “more ambitious” because he poses less of a threat to Obama’s team –
Interesting remark! The team-player non plus a threat? What would make them think that?
Thrush goes on to quote Kerry on George Marshall. Certainly, in the course of her many remarks as SOS, Hillary made clear her admiration of Marshall and agreement with his motives and strategies. At least once, as a vehicle to explain how foreign policy is also domestic policy, (the topic of Kerry’s maiden major address as SOS – and not a new idea), she put the Marshall Plan in the context of her own family, the plan following on the heels of her father’s return from war, just as Kerry did from the perspective of his father’s diplomatic service in post-war Germany. Where is the great difference there?
Discussing Kerry’s decision to travel first to Europe and the Middle East, Thrush suggests he will tackle the Middle East peace process more robustly than Hillary did, ignoring Hillary’s tough stance against settlement construction in East Jerusalem in late Spring 2009, and Netanyahu’s intransigence at the time. Recent Israeli elections are likely to affect Netanyahu’s position. This does not guarantee Kerry a success where every secretary of state since 1947 has failed, and we wish him luck. But if he does succeed it will be arguably not that Hillary was weak, but that Netanyahu has been weakened. I am not even factoring in here Obama having reined Hillary in by November 2009 (Secretary Clinton’s Remarks With Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu) when she stated:
What the prime minister has offered in specifics of a restraint on the policy of settlements, which he has just described – no new starts, for example – is unprecedented in the context of the prior two negotiations. It’s also the fact that for 40 years, presidents of both parties have questioned the legitimacy of settlements.
All of this is not to say that Secretary Kerry will not do well. In fact it has little to do with Kerry and more to do with Thrush’s POV which appears to be one of relief that after 16 years DOS is finally back in the hands of someone who is not going to nag about inclusion of women and girls at the big table, someone who is more likely to be spending time behind closed doors in ministerial halls and not imposing upon the office the indignity crawling into tents – as Condi Rice did – to talk to women in African refugee camps or tour women’s start-ups, give town halls, visit the marketplaces, and mix with civil society on every continent she visited, as Hillary Clinton did.
Hillary Clinton brought statecraft into the 21st century. Thrush’s psychic predictions see foreign policy moving backward into the 20th century – an “ambitious” time machine agenda that is stale and stuffy. No matter what John Kerry said or the “insiders” intimate, it is unlikely that a smart man like John Kerry will abandon Hillary Clinton’s innovations.
Hillary Clinton Brokers Egyptian-Sponsored Middle East Cease-Fire
Posted in Foreign Policy, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Middle East, Secretary of State, Secretary of State Travel, state department, U.S. Department of State, tagged Ban-Ki Moon, Benjamin Netanyahu, cease-fire, Egypt, Foreign Policy, Gaza, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Israel, Mahmoud Abbas, Mohamed Morsi, Palestine, Secretary of State, State Department, U.S. Department of State on November 21, 2012| 6 Comments »
Today, after shuttling from Israel to Ramallah to Egypt conversing with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas, Egyptian President Mohamed Morsi, and U.N. Secretary General Ban Ki-Moon, Secretary of State Hillary Clinton brokered a Middle East cease fire that officially went into effect at 2 p.m. EST today. In a courageous ascent to a leadership position, Egypt is sponsoring the cease-fire. The encouraging news is being reported by all major news sources.
Here are some photos from her busy day of shuttle-diplomacy.
God bless you, Mme. Secretary. Now come home for Thanksgiving. We are all thankful for your dedicated service.
Hillary Clinton Strongly Condemns Bus Bombing in Tel Aviv
Posted in Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Middle East, Secretary of State, state department, U.S. Department of State, tagged Benjamin Netanyahu, bombing, Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, State Department, Tel Aviv, U.S. Department of State on November 21, 2012| 12 Comments »
Today’s Bus Bombing in Tel Aviv
Press Statement
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of StateWashington, DCNovember 21, 2012
The United States strongly condemns this terrorist attack and our thoughts and prayers are with the victims and the people of Israel.
As I arrive in Cairo, I am closely monitoring reports from Tel Aviv, and we will stay in close contact with Prime Minister Netanyahu’s team. The United States stands ready to provide any assistance that Israel requires.
Hillary Clinton’s Day in Pics
Posted in Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Middle East, Secretary of State, Secretary of State Travel, state department, U.S. Department of State, tagged Benjamin Netanyahu, Egypt, Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Israel, Mahmoud Abbas, Middle East, Mohamed Morsi, Secretary of State, State Department, U.S. Department of State on November 20, 2012| 2 Comments »
Having begun her long day by arriving a tad late for a bilateral between President Barack Obama and Japan’s Prime Minister Yoshihiko Noda in Phnom Penh, Cambodia, Mme. Secretary hopped on her “Big Blue Bird” and took off for the troubled Middle East. Her first stop was Israel where we see her with PM Benjamin Netanyahu. From there, she will travel to Ramallah to meet with Mahmoud Abbas, and then to Cairo and a meeting with President Morsi.
Adding in, here, an interesting and informative portion of today’s press briefing from Victoria Nuland.
TRANSCRIPT:
12:44 p.m. EST
MS. NULAND:All right. Happy Tuesday, everybody. I hope you all got the notice that the Secretary has split off from the presidential party now. She’s on her way to Jerusalem. She’ll have her first meeting there with Prime Minister Netanyahu shortly after landing. It’ll be quite late this evening in Jerusalem time. To the extent that we have information to read out from her various meetings, we will do that, but as you know, her formal press posture is that she’ll have sprays at each of those – of the meetings on this trip. So we’ll try to stay in touch with you over the next couple of days as this proceeds.
Why don’t we go to what’s on your minds.
QUESTION:Do you have any news about Hamas claims that the calming down will take place tonight at 9 o’clock their time?
MS. NULAND: I don’t have any specifics to report to you either with regard to the ground situation or with regard to the state of the diplomacy. As I said yesterday, the President, the Secretary, all of us are intensely involved here, but we’re not going to be sharing details in public until there’s something to report.
QUESTION: So is it fair to assume that Mrs. Clinton will oversee the signing of calming down between Israel and Hamas under the auspices of Egypt?
MS. NULAND: Again, as you know, intensive diplomacy is ongoing. The President and the Secretary have both been on the phone nonstop with regional leaders for a number of days. The purpose of her trip is to continue and intensify that engagement now, face to face, in service to the goal of trying to de-escalate this violence and restoring calm.
QUESTION: And lastly, should we interpret her trip as a good sign that there’s something in the offing, a calming down in the offing?
MS. NULAND: Again, Said, I think we are all hoping for a de-escalation, we are all hoping for a restoration of calm, we’re all hoping to open space for deeper, broader conversations. That is obviously the goal we all share.
QUESTION: Ma’am —
MS. NULAND: Jill.
QUESTION: What about – Toria, realistically, what can the Secretary do? I mean, even if you look at a ceasefire or a calming down, a lot of that seems linked to larger issues, medium range or long range. It doesn’t appear that they are simply going to stop fighting, or at least Hamas, unless there is some resolution of other issues – issues that affect Gaza, for example. So what, realistically, do you think, even broadly, can she accomplish?
MS. NULAND: Well, as we’ve been saying for some time, we have to obviously start with a de-escalation of this conflict. We have to see an end to the rocket fire on Israel. We have to see a restoration of calm in Gaza. And the hope is that if we can get through those stages, that will create space for the addressing of broader issues, but I don’t want to prejudge. This is obviously ongoing and live diplomacy.
QUESTION: And just one other thing: Some have said that obviously she would not go if there were going to be a ground invasion at the time that she hits the runway. Is that a fair assumption, that she – that there was some sort of knowledge that the U.S. had that there would not be a ground invasion, ergo she wouldn’t go?
MS. NULAND: As I said yesterday, I’m not in a position to speak to the ground situation at all, other than to say that I think all of the parties involved have expressed a preference to solve this peacefully, to solve this diplomatically. That is what we are all trying to support and assist, and that is what we are all hoping for.
QUESTION: On this point —
QUESTION: The United States —
MS. NULAND: Said. Said.
QUESTION: On this point, just a quick follow-up on this point, Israeli sources say that they want a period of 24 hour of calm before they sign any truce. Do you support or do you advocate such a – like a period of calm before signing anything?
MS. NULAND: Again, I’m not in a position here to get into the substance of any of the discussions that are ongoing. There are a lot of discussions going on involving a lot of different parties. When there’s something to announce, I’m sure it will be announced, Said.
Sir, can you tell me who you are?
QUESTION: Yeah, Oren Dorell from USA Today. The Hamas leaders have said that they would like the blockade to be lifted as – if they’re to stop their rocket fire. What is the United States position on that?
MS. NULAND: Again, you’re trying to take me into the tactics of diplomacy, the conversations that are ongoing among lots of different parties who are trying to support a de-escalation here. Don’t think that’s productive to the process for us to be getting into the back-and-forth here.
Samir.
QUESTION: What’s the Quartet doing in this crisis? Doing anything?
MS. NULAND: As a formal matter, the Quartet has not met, but as you know, the Secretary’s been in touch with Lady Ashton. In fact, she was in touch with some of her European counterparts today. She had phone calls with German Foreign Minister Westerwelle, French Foreign Minister Fabius again, with Quartet Representative Blair. The Quartet itself hasn’t met, but the Quartet envoys and representatives have all been active. As you know, UN Secretary General Ban Ki-moon was just there. I think he may still be in the region, in fact.
Jill.
QUESTION: Toria, one more. Why was it so important for the Secretary to go? I mean, it involves the United States in a very obvious and maybe dangerous way because she will be on the ground in a – not physically, I mean, but diplomatically, it could all backfire. Why is it so important for her to go?
MS. NULAND: Well, again, I think, as we said in the statement that we released announcing her travel, and as Ben Rhodes said when he briefed the White House Press Corps earlier today from Phnom Penh, we have been, the President has been, she has been, actively engaged on the phone. But sometimes, there’s no substitution for showing up, as the Secretary herself likes to say, for talking face to face, for doing what you can in person. And the President and she obviously thought that her going and actually sitting down with leaders – with Prime Minister Netanyahu, with President Abbas, and with President Morsi – could help de-escalate the situation. So it was obviously important to leave no stone unturned.
QUESTION: Toria, I realize you don’t want to get into any of the details that we might find useful or helpful, but despite that, it is correct that the Administration would like to see this – any kind of de-escalation, whether that would be a formal ceasefire or an informal one side stops so the other side then stops; is that correct? You would just like to see – even if it’s temporary, fleeting, you would like to see a de-escalation of any kind; is that correct?
MS. NULAND: We have spoken about this in terms of a de-escalation, because that’s obviously a first step to help prepare the way for anything else. We obviously need to see this violence come down.
QUESTION: Right, right, but you would be happy with even an informal cessation of hostilities?
MS. NULAND: Again, beyond what we’ve said, I’m not going to characterize X as acceptable, Y as not acceptable. That’s a subject for negotiations.
QUESTION: Well, but I —
MS. NULAND: Matt, I’m not going to.
Nadia, please.
QUESTION: Wait, I’m not done.
MS. NULAND: Go ahead.
QUESTION: I’m not done. I don’t understand why you can’t say that any halt in violence would be a good thing in the Administration’s eyes.
MS. NULAND: Any de-escalation is a step forward. We want to see this de-escalated.
QUESTION: Okay. So it doesn’t necessarily have to be a durable – meaning long-lasting, a fixed period, six months, as long – at least at the beginning – as long as the fighting and the dying of people stops, that’s okay, at least in the short term; is that correct?
MS. NULAND: Matt, I am not going to limit, characterize the steps necessary here —
QUESTION: Okay. Well, surely you’re not —
MS. NULAND: — because the parties are talking, we’re going to be part of that, and we’re not going to negotiate it here from the podium. We’re not going to characterize it here from the podium.
QUESTION: Well, okay, fine, but surely you’re not saying that you’re okay with the violence continuing, are you?
MS. NULAND: Matt, what have I said seven times now?
QUESTION: All right. Then – frankly, you’ve said a lot, but it hasn’t really amounted to an answer. So in his briefing —
MS. NULAND: We’re going to move on now. We’re going to move on to Nadia, please.
QUESTION: In his briefing —
MS. NULAND: Go ahead, Nadia. Go ahead, Nadia, please.
QUESTION: Toria —
QUESTION: In his briefing – in – I’m sorry, Toria. I’m not done, and this is an important question. In his briefing to the White House Press Corps, Ben Rhodes was asked why he would not use the word “ceasefire,” and he said that’s essentially – I’m paraphrasing – he said no, and then he proceeded not to use it again and instead talked about de-escalation.
Does the Administration have some aversion to calling this a ceasefire or – and if it doesn’t, why not just use it? And if it does, what’s the aversion?
MS. NULAND: You know very well from having watched these kinds of situations unfold that there are many ways that this can de-escalate. I’m not going to prejudge here, and I think Ben didn’t want to prejudge how it happens. So your six efforts to get us to do that are not going to be successful.
Nadia, go ahead.
QUESTION: Victoria –
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: — you know that the U.S. has been criticized for not taking a leading role earlier to end the conflict. Just to follow up on Jill’s questions, if you felt that the Secretary needed to be there physically to meet with the leaders, why didn’t she go there in the beginning of the conflict? Was it because she was in Asia or because of the calculated decision on your part that you needed to wait a few more days?
MS. NULAND: Well, first of all, both the President and the Secretary have been extremely active. As you can see, the President, I think, in the past 24 hours has spoken with Egyptian President Morsi, for example, some three times. The Secretary’s made more than a dozen phone calls. So we have been very active in supporting all of the various efforts to try to de-escalate this. The judgment was that it had gotten to a stage where actually sitting face to face was – would be of value, so that was the decision that the Secretary and the President made.
QUESTION: I just wondered, if it’s possible, to walk us through when that decision was taken. Is it because the Egyptians have said that now we are in the process of getting a ceasefire and it’s important for the Secretary to be there? Is this the precise timing for her to be in the region?
MS. NULAND: Again, I think the President and Secretary were obviously together; they had a chance to – they have been comparing notes over the last couple of days about how this situation has been evolving. And the conclusion was that her going personally and sitting with leaders who she knows well had the potential to be helpful to the various parties in trying to seek a de-escalation. So beyond that, I don’t want to parse it too finely, Nadia.
Anything else on this subject? Please, can you —
QUESTION: I have some more on the logistical —
QUESTION: Kimberly Halkett, Al Jazeera English.
MS. NULAND: Yeah.
QUESTION: I’m just wondering how helpful it will be, though, given the fact that the Secretary is only meeting with the Palestinian Authority leader, and, who is at odds with Hamas – given the fact that the U.S. is only speaking to one of the two sides in this conflict, how productive can these discussions really be?
MS. NULAND: Well, as we’ve been saying for some time, there are different leaders in the region, around the world, who have influence with different actors in this situation. So we have Egyptians and Turks and Qataris and others making very strong representations to Hamas. The Secretary obviously thought that it was important to see President Abbas in this – on this trip because he is the interlocutor and the representative legitimately elected of the Palestinian people with whom we interface. So that is the role that we will play. We will work with the Israelis, we will work with President Abbas, and we will work with President Morsi, and others have more direct influence than we do with Hamas.
QUESTION: But do you think by shutting out Khaled Meshaal that you are going to be able to help bring about something beyond a ceasefire, a lasting solution, as I think you called it?
MS. NULAND: Again, the first step is a de-escalation, which the hope is then that can create space for something deeper. But again, we have to take this one step at a time.
Said, yes.
QUESTION: Sorry, Toria, just a quick follow-up on the humanitarian situation.
MS. NULAND: Yes.
QUESTION: There has been reports by the Palestinian Red Crescent, by UNRWA, by ANERA, by almost everybody speaking of a difficult humanitarian situation – shortages in water, food, medicines and so on. Suppose there is a calming-down period; would the United States send in direct aid to Gaza?
MS. NULAND: Again, you’re asking me to get ahead of where we are. But as you know, we have always supported the UN agencies and others providing humanitarian assistance through appropriate and agreed channels. Those channels do exist, and obviously the goal of all of this diplomacy is to relieve the suffering of civilians, whether they are Israelis or whether they are Palestinians.
QUESTION: So is it plausible just to break the blockade for a couple of days, or three days, or four days?
MS. NULAND: Again, there are established channels for getting humanitarian aid in, and those are the channels that should be used.
QUESTION: According to the U.S. officials, there are three —
MS. NULAND: Can you tell me who you are, please?
QUESTION: Wi Xu Diao from CCTV. So according to two U.S. officials, there are – three U.S. Navy warships are sending to – near Israel to – just in case evacuation needed. So these are supposed to be – come back after Thanksgiving. Can you confirm that and when the – how long they will be delayed, for their homecoming?
MS. NULAND: The Pentagon has spoken to that issue today or yesterday in terms of contingency planning, so I’ll send you to them for any more detail.
Goyal, still on this subject?
QUESTION: Toria – no.
QUESTION: No. I have two more, one of which – I suspect one of which is easy, and one of which is logistical and it may have been asked already.
So just the first one, which I think is the easy one: Would you – you keep the phrase de-escalate – don’t worry, I’m not going to try and get you to change that, but when you – when the Secretary is in her talks, is it fair to say that she is less about an – less talking about an imminent de-escalation than in how to hold or make durable a longer-term solution? I mean, obviously she’s not involved in mediating a truce, or whatever you want to call it, between Hamas and Israel, because you guys don’t talk to Hamas. Is it her goal to try and make whatever might come out of negotiations – those negotiations that are going on, to make that hold and be longer than just some quick, temporary fix? Is that fair?
MS. NULAND: I think everybody involved in trying to support a de-escalation here wants to see not just a tactical end to the violence, but wants to see the conditions improve for being able to address some of the underlying issues. But the way that unfolds and how much is going to be possible in the next 36 hours I think very much depends on the meetings that she has and what she finds.
QUESTION: You don’t – are you saying that you don’t want to rule out the fact that she might get involved – and obviously not with Hamas directly, but that she might get involved in trying to mediate an initial de-escalation? You don’t want to rule that out, or is that something that is —
MS. NULAND: I think it completely depends on where the situation is in the – in four hours from now or six hours from now when she lands.
QUESTION: All right. And then the second one, which is logistical and may have been asked before, is that when she is in Egypt, when she goes to Cairo tomorrow, is she going to see anyone other than Morsi? Are there other people coming in to town, like the Turks? I mean, I know Ban Ki-moon is out there. Is she going to be seeing anyone other than the Egyptians in her short time in Cairo?
MS. NULAND: The current schedule that we have is the schedule that we announced, that she will, this evening, very late Jerusalem time, see Prime Minister Netanyahu; that she will early in the morning tomorrow see President Abbas in Ramallah; and then she’ll go to Cairo to see President Morsi. That’s all I have in terms of schedule. I don’t have anything else at the moment in terms of other meetings or other third-country representatives on this trip. But you know how these go. That could change, so stand by. If we have something to announce, we will.
Please.
QUESTION: How do you view the legal status of Gaza? Is it occupied? The Israelis are not there? Is it autonomous?
MS. NULAND: I don’t think our position on Gaza has changed. There’s nothing new there.
Please.
QUESTION: When you talk about improving conditions for addressing underlying issues, can you be any more clear about what issues you’re talking about?
MS. NULAND: Well, it’s the full range of issues, but obviously this goes to the underlying security of Israel and that the end of attacks from Gaza into Israel should be halted not simply temporarily, but in a sustained way. It goes to the condition of civilians in Gaza. And it goes to the ability of Israelis and Palestinians to get back to the table about a lasting settlement, which is obviously the long-term solution for this.
QUESTION: Victoria.
MS. NULAND: Please on this, Samir – Said.
QUESTION: There were reports that there are a couple dozen servicemen, American servicemen, in – actually in southern Israel that were hurriedly removed for safety. Do you know anything about that? Do you know anything about (inaudible)?
MS. NULAND: I don’t. It sounds like something to ask the Pentagon. I don’t have anything on that.
Anything else on this subject?
QUESTION: Got one more logistical one that I forgot. Is she definitely coming directly back to Washington after Cairo or are you leaving open the possibility that she could make another stop, either in the region or in Europe, or, I don’t know, in Africa?
MS. NULAND: At the current moment, we have nothing after Cairo. If that changes, we’ll let you know.
Hillary Clinton With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Posted in Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Clinton Images, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Secretary of State, Secretary of State Travel, state department, U.S. Department of State, tagged Benjamin Netanyahu, Democratic Party, Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Israel, Secretary of State, State Department, U.S. Department of State on July 16, 2012| Leave a Comment »
Remarks With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu
Remarks
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of StateIsraeli Prime Minister Benjamin NetanyahuJerusalemJuly 16, 2012
PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: I want to welcome you – shall I say this formally? – Secretary of State Clinton, Hillary, to Jerusalem once again. And I’m – we were just discussing how turbulent and how swiftly changing the world is, in our part of the world in particular, so I look forward first to hearing of your impressions from Egypt. That has been an anchor of peace, and maintaining the peace treaty between us I think is something that is uppermost in both our minds. And I appreciate the efforts that you’re investing to this end.
We’re going to talk about the Palestinians. That is also an anchor of peace, and we have to invest every effort to maintain it, to keep the tranquility, and see if we can move the process forward.
And third, we have our common effort to make sure that Iran not achieve its ambition of developing nuclear weapons.
So that’s a small agenda for this plate and for this dinner, and I look forward to discussing all these issues with you. Welcome to Jerusalem.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you so much, Bibi. Well, Prime Minister Bibi, it is wonderful to be back in Jerusalem, to have a chance to meet with your government and now for us to have a working dinner to discuss the broad range of issues that you just mentioned. You’re absolutely right; we’re living in a time of unprecedented change with a lot of challenges for us both. And we will continue to consult closely, as we have on an almost daily basis between our two governments, to chart the best way forward for peace and stability for Israel, the United States, the region, and the world. And we are all delighted to be here with you. Thank you.
PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: Thank you. Thank you.
SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you.
Secretary Clinton’s Remarks With Israeli PM Netanyahu
Posted in Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Middle East, Secretary of State, state department, U.S. Department of State, tagged Benjamin Netanyahu, Foreign Policy, Hillary Clinton, Hillary Rodham Clinton, Israel, Middle East, Palestine, Secretary of State, State Department, U.S. Department of State on September 22, 2011| 4 Comments »
Remarks With Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu Before Their Meeting
Remarks
Hillary Rodham Clinton
Secretary of StateLoews Regency HotelNew York CitySeptember 21, 2011
QUESTION: Madam Secretary, are you able to give the press a readout of your meeting just now with President Obama (inaudible)?
SECRETARY CLINTON: I think that’s being done through the White House, so I’ll let them give the readout.
QUESTION: Was any progress made on suspending this bid for statehood on Friday?
SECRETARY CLINTON: I think I’ll let the White House give the readout.
QUESTION: Would you like to give the press any reaction to the hikers being released?
SECRETARY CLINTON: I would like to say how pleased, relieved, and grateful I am that these two young men are finally out of an Iranian prison, where they never should have been in the first place. And I am not going to say any more because they have a chance now to reuinte with their families and to decompress from what has been a terrible experience for them. And I’m looking forward to seeing them when they return home.
QUESTION: Mr. Prime Minister, why won’t you freeze the settlements if that’s one way to get back to talks?
PRIME MINISTER NETANYAHU: Well, I did, as you know, and did something that no previous Israeli government did. I actually froze any construction for ten months, waited nine months and one week; the Palestinians finally came and said, well, keep on freezing. So I think wisely – and we concluded with the United States – that what we really have to do is get on with the real issues and get down and negotiate all these issues in order to get peace. We have to negotiate the issues to resolve them. We can’t just negotiate about the negotiations.