The United States has withdrawn a resolution it presented to the UN Security Council endorsing the relaunch of Middle East peace talks agreed in Annapolis, Maryland. US officials did not give a reason for Friday’s move but diplomats indicated that Israel, which is a close ally of Washington, did not want the UN involved in the process. “We looked at this matter, talked about it and at the end of the day the secretary [of state Condoleezza Rice] believes that the positive results of Annapolis speak by themselves,” Sean McCormack, US state department spokesman, said
Yes they do-
Israel’s high court on Friday ruled that the state could continue with month-long fuel cuts to the Hamas-run Gaza Strip, but ordered a delay on plans to reduce electricity supplies too, officials said. The rulings came in response to a petition by 10 Israeli and Palestinian human rights groups, who had called the moves to limit Gaza energy supplies an act of illegal collective punishment that endangered civilians.
An Israeli airstrike killed four Palestinian militants early Saturday in the southern Gaza Strip, Palestinian witnesses and officials said. Moaiya Hassanain, of the Gaza Health Ministry, said nine others were wounded in he strike, including two who were in critical condition.
Yeah butt out UN, the entirely impartial US can handle this. What a frickin’ joke and not only couldn’t Bush pronounce anyone’s names, he was only there long enough to get the photo op -he’s a peacemaker, lookit he’s got a photy to prove it!
1 December, 2007 at 5:33 am
Makes you wonder whether the UN has any value in the eyes of Isreal.
1 December, 2007 at 6:28 pm
Well the neo-cons don’t recognise it and they infest both the US & Israel & the US protects Israel’s activities with its security council veto. So they largely regard it as a nuisance and often an enemy and with the veto they can regard it as essentially powerless. So even the thin appearance that this was a ‘peace’ summit frays, it was more about the geopolitics of US ambitions.
2 December, 2007 at 5:10 pm
I think the conference primarily is for domestic political consumption. They want to create the appearance of success at something, and they are getting desperate.
2 December, 2007 at 7:01 pm
Yes, what is awful is how much credence the corporate media gave it, much like celebrity coverage, if that many leaders gather it gets covered by sheer gravity of reputation. Sort of the Oscars but with eviler intent and less glamour but keeps the home front distracted. As a ‘peace’ conference it was entirely false, I think they were testing the water and making deals for what they plan for ‘08.