Martin Indyk: Difference between revisions

From Citizendium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz
m (New page: {{subpages}} <!-- Text is transcluded from the BASEPAGENAME/Definition subpage-->)
 
imported>Howard C. Berkowitz
No edit summary
Line 1: Line 1:
{{subpages}}
{{subpages}}
<!-- Text is transcluded from the BASEPAGENAME/Definition subpage-->
'''Martin Indyk''' is the acting vice president, director of Foreign Policy, and [[Director of the Saban Institute for Middle East Policy]] at the [[Brookings Institution]];
 
Director of Near East-South Asian Affairs at the [[National Security Council]], [[U.S. Ambassador to Israel]] and [[Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs]] in the [[Bill Clinton|Clinton Administration]]
 
He is past director of research for the [[American Israel Public Affairs Committee]].
 
==Iraq==
In 1993, he describe U.S. policy as establishing that Saddam's government was "a criminal regime, beyond the pale of international society, and, in our judgment, irredeemable."  He also said the US was increasing support  to the [[Iraqi National Congress]].<ref name=Wurmser1999>{{citation
|title = Tyranny's Ally: America's Failure to defeat Saddam Hussein
| author = [[David Wurmser]]
| publisher = [[American Enterprise Institute]]
| year = 1999
| isbn = 084474073X}}</ref>
 
 
==Israel==
Indyk supports a two-state settlement.
 
Discussing [[Prime Minister of Israel|Prime Minister]] [[Benjamin Netanyahu]]'s May 2009 meeting with President [[Barack Obama]], he was reminded of a time, 16 years ago, when [[Bill Clinton]] stood next to [[Yitzhak Rabin]], committed to achieving peace. Rabin, according to Clinton, said he would take risks (i.e., withdrawing from the [[Golan Heights]], and, "If you do that, my role is to minimise those risks."<ref name=Australian2009-05-25>{{citation
| author = Martin Indyk
| title = Martin Indyk: Israel Must Take Risks for Peace (presentation at Lowy Institute in Sydney, Australia)
|journal = Australian | date = 25 May 2009
| url = http://hnn.us/roundup/entries/87179.html}}</ref>
 
In the May 2009 meeting, however, "Netanyahu certainly didn't sound in public as if he had told Obama in private that he was willing to take risks for peace." Avoiding the concern of his right-wing base,  Netanyahu did not commit to an independent Palestinian state. He mentioned  "self-government" for the Palestinians, and added an apparent new condition, that the Palestinians  'would have to "allow Israel the means to defend itself'." This appeared to mean no Palestinian defense force, airspace, or border control. Indyk recognized the results of Israel's withdrawal from Gaza: [[Hamas]] launched a rocket attack, and he agreed that Netanyahu reasonably will not allow that to happen in Gaza.
 
"But by refusing to declare his support for an independent Palestinian state, albeit with restrictions on its sovereignty, he focuses the Palestinians on what they will have to give up rather than what they will have to gain from an end of the Israeli occupation." Palestine can refuse this, and force Obama to "having to drag them to the negotiating table."
 
Indyk mentioned Netanyahu's thought on Arab state involvement in the Palestinian peace process: for a change, Israel, the US, and the Arabs have a common concern: "Iran's hegemonic regional ambitions and its aggressive nuclear program."
 
So, Obama sees a double value in involving Arab leaders, but Indyk said "Netanyahu appears to have handed Obama the challenge of bringing these Arab leaders to the peace party without indicating what he will do either to get them there or to reward them for the risk of coming. That's an invitation they will easily refuse..."
 
==References==
{{reflist}}

Revision as of 10:44, 28 July 2009

This article is developing and not approved.
Main Article
Discussion
Related Articles  [?]
Bibliography  [?]
External Links  [?]
Citable Version  [?]
 
This editable Main Article is under development and subject to a disclaimer.

Martin Indyk is the acting vice president, director of Foreign Policy, and Director of the Saban Institute for Middle East Policy at the Brookings Institution;

Director of Near East-South Asian Affairs at the National Security Council, U.S. Ambassador to Israel and Assistant Secretary of State for Near East Affairs in the Clinton Administration

He is past director of research for the American Israel Public Affairs Committee.

Iraq

In 1993, he describe U.S. policy as establishing that Saddam's government was "a criminal regime, beyond the pale of international society, and, in our judgment, irredeemable." He also said the US was increasing support to the Iraqi National Congress.[1]


Israel

Indyk supports a two-state settlement.

Discussing Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's May 2009 meeting with President Barack Obama, he was reminded of a time, 16 years ago, when Bill Clinton stood next to Yitzhak Rabin, committed to achieving peace. Rabin, according to Clinton, said he would take risks (i.e., withdrawing from the Golan Heights, and, "If you do that, my role is to minimise those risks."[2]

In the May 2009 meeting, however, "Netanyahu certainly didn't sound in public as if he had told Obama in private that he was willing to take risks for peace." Avoiding the concern of his right-wing base, Netanyahu did not commit to an independent Palestinian state. He mentioned "self-government" for the Palestinians, and added an apparent new condition, that the Palestinians 'would have to "allow Israel the means to defend itself'." This appeared to mean no Palestinian defense force, airspace, or border control. Indyk recognized the results of Israel's withdrawal from Gaza: Hamas launched a rocket attack, and he agreed that Netanyahu reasonably will not allow that to happen in Gaza.

"But by refusing to declare his support for an independent Palestinian state, albeit with restrictions on its sovereignty, he focuses the Palestinians on what they will have to give up rather than what they will have to gain from an end of the Israeli occupation." Palestine can refuse this, and force Obama to "having to drag them to the negotiating table."

Indyk mentioned Netanyahu's thought on Arab state involvement in the Palestinian peace process: for a change, Israel, the US, and the Arabs have a common concern: "Iran's hegemonic regional ambitions and its aggressive nuclear program."

So, Obama sees a double value in involving Arab leaders, but Indyk said "Netanyahu appears to have handed Obama the challenge of bringing these Arab leaders to the peace party without indicating what he will do either to get them there or to reward them for the risk of coming. That's an invitation they will easily refuse..."

References

  1. David Wurmser (1999), Tyranny's Ally: America's Failure to defeat Saddam Hussein, American Enterprise Institute, ISBN 084474073X
  2. Martin Indyk (25 May 2009), "Martin Indyk: Israel Must Take Risks for Peace (presentation at Lowy Institute in Sydney, Australia)", Australian