Leave it to the United States to use the incendiary word “apartheid” as a potential outcome in Israeli politics. Hardly anything could have encouraged an already uncooperative Palestinian Authority from stubbornly digging in its heals even more.http://www.cnn.com/2014/04/29/politics/kerry-apartheid-controversy/
Kerry made the ill-advised comment at a closed door meeting of senior experts from Japan, Russia, Western Europe, and the United States. Kerry said this,
“Because a unitary state winds up either being an apartheid state with second class citizens, or it ends up being a state that destroys the capacity of Israel being a Jewish state.”
A number of Jewish organizations in the Diaspora condemned Kerry for making such an outrageous claim.
The American Israel Public Affairs Committee said, “Any suggestion that Israel is, or is at risk of becoming an apartheid state is offensive and inappropriate. Israel is the lone stable democracy in the Middle East, and protects the rights of minorities regardless of ethnicity or religion”.
The AIPA C declared that when Barack Obama was running for president in 2008, Obama stated “injecting a term such as ‘apartheid’ into the discussion does not advance the goal of a two-state solution. It’s emotionally loaded, historically inaccurate, and it’s not what I believe”.
Either President Obama changed his mind or Kerry is making comments conflicting with America’s own foreign policy which is a bad move on Kerry’s part. It is unfathomable the nation’s secretary of state would make such a foolish comment.
After a bristling rebuke from Israel supporters, Kerry issue a semi-retraction which he stated, “if I could rewind the tape, I would have chosen a different word”.http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Editorials/The-apartheid-fallacy-350824
Kerry is not endearing himself to Israel who had long been suspicious of Kerry for having anti-Israel views before he was named America’s secretary of state.
The timing of Kerry’s comments could not come at a worse time as Hamas and the Palestinian Authority have forged a reconciliation agreement. There just is not any good potential coming from any direction concerning a peace initiative that would not leave Israel holding the proverbial bag.
The Palestinians have rejected numerous peace attempts from Israel starting in 1947 with the UN Partition Plan. This continued during the 2000 Clinton parameters, a generous 2008 proposal, and as recently as last week with PA President Mahmoud Abbas signing an agreement, not with Israel, but with Hamas. One could hardly blame Israel for not wanting to negotiate with a terrorist organization committed to Israel’s destruction.
It matters not where the borders are, Hamas is only interested in Israel’s elimination as a country.