.

Schakowsky, Dold Support President's UN Speech

Politicians, rabbi oppose Palestinian statehood bid.

Local members of Congress and a Glencoe rabbi voiced strong support forspeech to the United Nations General Assembly Wednesday opposing a bid for statehood by the Palestinian Authority through the Security Council. 

President Obama told world leaders Wednesday the only path to a peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinian Authority is direct negotiations. Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas plans to ask the Security Council to recognize statehood Friday. President Obama has threatened a veto. 

Supporting the president

, and of Glencoe, who sat on a White House committee on American-Israeli relations under the Obama administration, all agreed with the President’s position. 

“I strongly support the President’s diplomatic leadership and efforts to convince the Palestinians and their international allies to abandon efforts to use the UN to bypass negotiations with Israel,” Schakowsky said.  “It is only through direct peace negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians themselves that a lasting solution can be found.” 

Dold agrees direct negotiations between the parties are the only way to find lasting peace in the region. He also supports the President’s promise to use a veto to prevent what he calls an attempt to bypass talks between Israel and the Palestinian Authority. 

“I am pleased that President Obama is committed to vetoing this unilateral attempt on the Security Council,” Dold said. “We must continue in our efforts to urge the nations of the world to stand with the United States, support peace efforts in the Middle East, and oppose this resolution.” 

Nesselson is concerned the unilateral attempt by Abbas could harm the peace process. She was one of 15 rabbis—the only one from Illinois—that spent two sessions at the White House in April and May last year getting briefed on the ongoing peace process. 

“Whatever the outcome of the UN vote will be will make no difference to the people on the ground,” Nesselson said. “The perception that lives will change is a sad premise.” 

She has long supported a two-state solution. 

A two-state solution

Schakowsky and Dold are also proponents of the two state solution. They think President Obama’s existing efforts are the best way to achieve the goal. 

“The only path to lasting peace, with two states living side-by-side in peace and security, is through direct negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians,” Dold said. “We must continue in our unambiguous and firm commitment to this principle.” 

Schakowsky takes the issue a step further. She recognizes not only the need for a Palestinian state but one where the Palestinian people can live with pride and prosperity alongside Israel as a Jewish nation. 

“The President emphasized the importance not just of peace, but of human dignity and economic opportunity,” Schakowsky said. “He also emphasized any peace agreement must acknowledge and address the ongoing security threats faced daily by Israel and be based on a recognition that Israel is the historic homeland of the Jewish people.” 

Nesselson is also concerned statements by one of the President’s potential Republican rivals, Gov. Rick Perry of Texas, will push Israelis and Palestinians further apart. She did not that Perry accused Obama of "appeasement" in his dealings with Palestinian Authority.

“America’s insurance Israel will have a qualitative military edge in the region is not appeasement,” Nesselson said. “His ideas could heighten friction and lead to potential violence and blood,” she added, referring to Perry’s call for expansion of West Bank settlements.

Matt September 23, 2011 at 07:06 PM
anyone who opposes Palestinian statehood should be ashamed of themselves. When the US vetoes their request we should all be humiliated to be Americans. I cannot think of a more hippocritical action by the US in recent memory. the American political landscape has been held captive by the right wing, terror supporting (Israeli Defense Forces) Israeli agenda for so long that we are actually working against our own global interests and security.
Paul September 24, 2011 at 11:17 PM
Israel does not support a "two-state" solution; rather it supports a "bantustan" solution. The nail in the coffin of apartheid and religious nationalism should have occurred in the last century. Why in the hell is the U.S. supporting such an illegal project anyway? Our support of the theft of Palestinian land and resources has made us very unpopular and very unsafe.
The Q September 25, 2011 at 12:10 AM
We veto Terrorists that's why....wake up. Just cause they want a state on Israels land does not mean the US should support it. Nonsense from you two!
Paul September 25, 2011 at 12:11 AM
Who are the terrorists anyway? Seems to me Israel was founded on terrorism, and this terrorism has now found new heights -- state terrorism. And excuse me, I think if you read your history correctly Israel was founded on Palestinian land, with the intent of eventually taking all of the land over time by force. If I read your muddled statement correctly, yes, the U.S. should not support Israel's taking someone else's land.
The Q September 25, 2011 at 12:41 AM
Go find a History book that has the Country of Palestine.....LOL....get your facts straight no such place. It was the ottoman empire....and England won WW I it was their land to do with what they wish and they set up a jewish state, called Israel. Now some folks invaded that state namely Jordan and Egypt and that's where the so called Palestine lines come from the war of 67'....no state of Palestine. Get your facts straight and stop spreading hate.
Matt September 25, 2011 at 04:36 AM
99% of the world would never call the land that Israel occupies their "own". They have no right to even posses any of it. I would argue that Israel is the state in that region that is knowingly harboring and supporting terror over any of its geographic neighbors. the US clearly does not "veto terrorists", as we have been in bed with the murderous Israeli agenda for more than 6 decades, while quashing any possible international resolution to the situation. It is time for the American political agenda to step out of this close-minded terror supporting (Israeli) philosophy that has dogged us for many years. We are not serving the better interests of anyone by supporting Israel over Palestine in any regard. If anything, there should be 4 times as much US aid going to the Palestinian Authority than what we send to Israel. Between the two states, who actually needs it more?? Certainly not the hegemon....
The Q September 25, 2011 at 11:40 AM
Yea and the US has no right to the land we have either.....it was the American Indian's once too. That logic will get you no where......

Boards

More »
Got a question? Something on your mind? Talk to your community, directly.
Note Article
Just a short thought to get the word out quickly about anything in your neighborhood.
Share something with your neighbors.What's on your mind?What's on your mind?Make an announcement, speak your mind, or sell somethingPost something
See more »