LETTER TO THE EDITOR: Obama’s opinion on Israel borders irrelevant

Question of the Day

Is it still considered bad form to talk politics during a social gathering?

View results

The otherwise informative article “Obama mum on Bush’s borders for Israel” (Web, News, Tuesday) omits two important facts.

First, whether the administration of President George W. Bush put verbal U.S. understandings of Israel’s final borders in writing - and regardless of President Obama’s position on the matter - the United States previously confirmed that Israel need not withdraw to the 1949 Israeli-Jordanian armistice line regarding the West Bank.

Following the 1967 Six-Day War, the United States and Britain co-authored U.N. Security Council Resolution 242. It was adopted after Israel, acting in self-defense, gained the Jordanian-occupied West Bank, among other territories. As explained by U.S. Undersecretary of State Eugene Rostow, “Israel was not to be forced back to the ‘fragile’ and ‘vulnerable’ Armistice Demarcation lines.” British Ambassador Lord Caradon added that 242’s call for Israeli withdrawal “from territories occupied in the recent conflict” did not mean all territories.

So, regardless of whether the Obama administration concurs with Mr. Bush’s 2004 letter to Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon that “it is unrealistic to expect that the outcome of final status negotiations will be a full and complete return to the armistice lines of 1949,” Israel was never obligated to make such a return.

Security Council Resolution 338, adopted after the 1973 Yom Kippur War, requires adoption of a cease-fire and immediate negotiations to implement Resolution 242. Subsequent diplomatic initiatives, including the 2003 “road map,” incorporate resolutions 242 and 338.

Withdrawal from some of the territories won in 1967 (also including the Sinai Peninsula, Gaza Strip, Golan Heights and eastern Jerusalem) was linked to a negotiated settlement in which all states of belligerence ended and the right of each state in the region to live in peace “within secure and recognized boundaries” was acknowledged. The article states that Israel’s Cabinet “also has sought to establish the principle that Israel’s final borders be ‘defensible’.” It should have read “the Cabinet has sought to re-establish the principle laid down in Resolution 242 that Israel’s final borders be ‘secure.’”


Washington director

Committee for Accuracy in Middle East Reporting in America (CAMERA)


© Copyright 2014 The Washington Times, LLC. Click here for reprint permission.

blog comments powered by Disqus
TWT Video Picks
You Might Also Like
  • Maureen McDonnell looks on as her husband, former Virginia Gov. Bob McDonnell, made a statement on Tuesday after the couple was indicted on corruption charges. (associated press)

    PRUDEN: Where have the big-time grifters gone?

  • This photo taken Jan. 9, 2014,  shows New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie gesturing as he answers a question during a news conference  at the Statehouse in Trenton.  Christie will propose extending the public school calendar and lengthening the school day in a speech he hopes will help him rebound from an apparent political payback scheme orchestrated by key aides. The early front-runner for the 2016 Republican presidential nomination will make a case Tuesday Jan. 14, 2014, that children who spend more time in school graduate better prepared academically, according to excerpts of his State of the State address obtained by The Associated Press. (AP Photo/Mel Evans)

    BRUCE: Bombastic arrogance or humble determination? Chris Christie’s choice

  • ** FILE ** Secretary of State Hillary Rodham testifies on Capitol Hill in Washington, Wednesday, Jan. 23, 2013, before the Senate Foreign Relations Committee hearing on the deadly September attack on the U.S. diplomatic mission in Benghazi, Libya, that killed Ambassador J. Chris Stevens and three other Americans. (AP Photo/Pablo Martinez Monsivais, File)

    PRUDEN: The question to haunt the West

  • Get Breaking Alerts