That’s how Obama described Israel’s continued building in its own capital. As Jonathan observed, while reaching out to Muslims in Indonesia, Obama scolded Israel, which, darn it, isn’t listening to him – again:
US President Barack Obama criticized Israel on Tuesday at a news conference in Indonesia, following Monday’s announcement that that Israel has advanced plans to build 1,345 homes in east Jerusalem.
“This kind of activity is never helpful when it comes to peace negotiations,” Obama said during a visit to Jakarta.
What is never helpful is Obama’s approach to the Middle East, which has elevated and maintained settlements as the end-all and be-all of negotiation. Unlike every other administration that managed to avoid escalating the issue, Obama insists on exacerbating it. The inevitable Palestinian intransigence and European heckling followed:
Also on Tuesday, senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erekat called on the international community to counter Israel’s latest construction plans by recognizing a Palestinian state.
“Israeli unilateralism is a call for immediate international recognition of the Palestinian state,” he said, according to a Reuters report.
Earlier, EU foreign policy chief Catherine Ashton added her comments on the issue, saying she is “extremely concerned by the announcement by Israel of a plan for the construction of 1,300 new housing units in east Jerusalem,” in a statement.
“This plan contradicts the efforts by the international community to resume direct negotiations and the decision should be reversed,” the statement read.
Who can be surprised? Neither the Palestinians nor the Israel-bashers around the world can be less obsessed over settlements than the president. So non-direct non-talks remain the order of the day while the UN prepares to dismantle Israel. (Sort of like if the League of Nations had extracted the Sudetenland from another small democracy.)
Let’s see how Congress and pro-Israel groups react to yet another round of decidedly un-smart Obama diplomacy. His political aura has faded at home, so those who have bristled at the Obama assault on Israel but have bitten their tongues might think about speaking up. Preferably before the UN starts redrawing Israel’s boundaries.
How is what China is doing any different from the weak dollar policy that the Bush administration has pursued for the past 8 years?
Kent Lyon, excellent question. The United States does not go into the market and buy and sell its currency every day to maintain the price within a tight trading band or, as is true in the last few months, at a fixed value. Moreover, the general weakness in the dollar is essentially the byproduct of policies intended to accomplish other aims, not the direct result of policies intended to drive the dollar down.
While the Bush administration has not done all that it should have to shore up the value of the dollar, our currency has moved at times in ways that have confounded the administration, at least as far as I can tell.
That’s beautiful. NYT bonds are junk status, but they are telling China how to run their country.
How typical of the lefty illuminati loons. The green they should be concerned with is the monetary kind.
I agree that China has to boost domestic consumption by using their huge savings accumulated in the past 30 years but it will take a long time before we see any tangible effect. With more than three quarters of Chinese population of age above 30, who experienced either first hand or being influenced by their parents about the economic hardship before reform, they will continue to be frugal; you pretty much need to count on the 20 something fearless consumers.
http://seattletimes.nwsource.com/html/nationworld/2008304822_chinacards24.html
I don’t know how you get people who are fundamentally programmed to save to start spending money without a) rebooting the entire system or b) commanding people to start spending money (two guesses at which China will choose to do). It’s the same fate of America in the opposite direction (we spend rather than save), except ours is by choice and not by fiat from the government.
JLiu, agreed on all counts. Thanks for contributing these observations about generational differences in opinions.
Free America, I did not know NYT bonds were rated junk. I guess I should not be surprised. I appreciate this tidbit.
Chris Bolts Sr., Beijing will not reboot the system and it can’t put guns to the heads of housewives, so don’t wait for a big rise in consumption. It ain’t going to happen for a long time.
Hmmmm
*shrug*
1. The money might not actually be there. The Chinese banking system is still heavily controlled by the government and there is still vast amounts of corruption involving non-performing loans (NPL) to private and semi-private corporations that are providing kickbacks to corrupt government officials.
2. It isn’t just memories of poverty and hardtimes it’s also the fact that there aren’t many social programs that people can rely on. With relatively few exceptions most Chinese have to rely on themselves, their families and whatever funds they’ve been able to save. Here in the USA we’re more apt to flirt with financial disaster because there are so many social programs available.
3. In 2006 there were an estimated 85,000+ violent protests involving groups of Chinese citizens and police or army forces. The potential for domestic unrest due to a bad economy is there and there isn’t much “padding” if you will. Here in the US we have a much longer history of prosperity and the rule of law. In China prosperity is still razor thin for most of the population and the rule of law is largely nonexistent.
And historically speaking a bad economy, or traditionally: famine, has always been the biggest cause for the overthrow of dynasties.
I have been reading this sort of advice for years and to me it just seems that the advisors do not accept the difficulties the Chinese are up against. They have a virtually *limitless* supply of cheap labor that they have to integrate into the modern economy. Domestic consumption may be able to do this, but it will take many decades and by then it will be too late for the Chicoms and for China.
China can not consume fast enough to match what the export market can do, and by the way the industrialized portion is consuming at breakneck speeds already (visit Shanghai if you doubt this,) and the rural areas can not increase consumption until they have another occupation for all those workers currently hand planting rice.
The Chinese are smart enough to know that if they lose the export advantage to India, Indonesia, etc,. they will have an agrarian revolt.
Mr. Chang — Thoughts?
memomachine, analysts have not used the term “padding” in this context. Thanks for adding an apt term to the vocabulary.
jcp, I agree with your posting, especially your concluding point that, should the Chinese lose their export advantage, the political system will be at risk.
The main basis of legitimacy of the Communist Party is its management of the economy. When the economy falters, unrest will, one way or another, overwhelm the country. There are tens of thousands of protests a year during prosperous times. Just imagine what will happen when the downturn occurs.
Very informative! Great post!