http://www.haaretz.com/israel-news/.premium-1.717746
A few days before the speech, White House Chief of Staff Rahm Emmanuel told Clinton that he was concerned that Obama’s not visiting Israel after his Cairo speech would insult the Israelis. He suggested that Clinton, who had been in Cairo with Obama, continue on from Cairo to Jerusalem “to do damage control.” Landler quoted a former senior administration official as saying “she couldn’t, wouldn’t and didn’t.”
Obama’s senior advisers were furious, viewing the secretary’s decision as based on personal political considerations motivated by her desire to avoid harming her image as a friend of Israel and her relationship to the American Jewish community, Landler writes. According to the book, Clinton’s refusal to go to Jerusalem after Cairo was one example of her clear disinclination to be involved in the Israeli-Palestinian peace process due to concern over political damage that would hurt her in a future run for the presidency.
A week later, Clinton spoke out sharply against the settlements and said that Obama was demanding a complete freeze. But while Clinton was speaking, talks were underway between Mitchell and representatives of the Israeli government toward a deal that would allow for construction within the large settlement blocs to accommodate natural growth only. According to the book, Clinton’s statements sabotaged those talks. The Israelis were livid and Obama’s advisers were irritated that Clinton had “plussed up” Obama’s position – corralling them into a more hardline position than they had wanted to take.
1 replies
New book by NYTimes columnist sheds light on Clinton's role in middle east peace process (Original post)
