Romney trashes Mideast two-state solution

2012-09-18 15:03

Washington — Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney told donors that Palestinians "have no interest" in peace with Israel and suggested that efforts at Mideast peace under his administration would languish, according to a newly released video on Tuesday.

Romney said Palestinians are "committed to the destruction and elimination of Israel" and that the prospects for a two-state solution to Mideast peace were dim.

"You hope for some degree of stability, but you recognise that this is going to remain an unsolved problem, and we kick the ball down the field and hope that ultimately, somehow, something will happen and resolve it," Romney said.

The remarks are in a video clip posted on Tuesday morning on the website of Mother Jones magazine. The magazine said the video is from a $50 000-a-plate fundraiser in Boca Raton, Florida, on 17 May.

The new video is from the same event as a clip released on Monday in which Romney says almost half of Americans "believe that they are victims".

Late on Monday, Romney did not dispute the clip but said his remarks were "not elegantly stated". The Romney campaign has not disputed the authenticity of the video released on Monday.

Obama 'naive'

In the latest clip, Romney is asked about the "Palestinian problem". He gives a detailed, though somewhat rambling, response and says, "the Palestinians have no interest whatsoever in establishing peace", and "the pathway to peace is almost unthinkable to accomplish".

The magazine's website quotes Romney as saying he was against applying any pressure on Israel to give up disputed territory for a two-state solution with the Palestinians.

"The idea of pushing on the Israelis to give something up to get the Palestinians to act is the worst idea in the world," Romney said, according to the magazine. Mother Jones did not provide video of that comment.

Romney also criticised President Barack Obama's foreign policy approach as "naive".

"The president's foreign policy, in my opinion, is formed in part by a perception he has that his magnetism, and his charm, and his persuasiveness is so compelling that he can sit down with people like [Vladimir] Putin and [Hugo] Chávez and Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, and that they'll find that we're such wonderful people that they'll go on with us, and they'll stop doing bad things," Romney says. "And it's an extraordinarily naive perception."

  • stirrer.stirrer - 2012-09-18 15:15

    Every time this mor(m)on opens his mouth, he puts his foot in it.

      tc.convulvulous - 2012-09-18 15:42

      One moment.. Is what he is saying untrue? Answer that question! Stuff the filthy Political Correctness that we are so indoctrinated with. Face facts and declare whether it is Righ/Wrong.

      ronald.utenhage - 2012-09-18 15:49

      In which Coocko-land does idiot Romney Live? If he thinks 1 Apartheid state will bring everlasting peace and lower the threat to his country then he is even more stupid than George Bush

      zaatheist - 2012-09-18 15:49

      TC Yes. He is a warmongering idjit. Anyone who believes that his magic underpants will protect him from evil is a complete loon.

  • JohncarlosBiza - 2012-09-18 15:37

    So by keeping the status quo, the Palestinians will grow to love Israel?! He surpasses his own stupidity each time he talks

      larry.lachman.54 - 2012-09-20 08:15

      Palestinians are not expected to love Israel. They are expected to respect and recognise Israel's existence, and be decent neighbours. When they do this they will get the same in return.

  • zaatheist - 2012-09-18 15:47

    This guy is a very, very dangerous cretin. Hamas must be proud of him.

      ronald.utenhage - 2012-09-18 15:54

      seems we can agree on 1 thing :)

      zaatheist - 2012-09-18 16:03

      Oh, probably more :)

  • allcoveredinNinjas - 2012-09-18 16:18

    If the Isreali /Palestinian issue was just about territory and autonomy , then the issue would have been solved by now. Trying to tag on Apartheid to this is also a mistake as it flows both ways , its a kind of frankenstein Apartheid state now and the pundits are suggesting a more original apartheid solution which is seperate states , independent and developed seperately . Why is it that no-one suggests a non-religious denominated secular state where everyone can utilise the the rich religous history of the region and where no one religion is favoured ?

      rick.machiavelli.1 - 2012-09-18 16:25

      Aaaah Ninja. You know the answer. Israel is secular in nature. The falestinians, hell , it's in their koran what they must do to Jews wherever they find them,never mind within the same borders.

      Madhi - 2012-09-18 16:29

      U not that bad after all hey, or is it a good day for u? Never thought we could agree but yes I believe that a one state is the only viable solution if that's what u meant. Just exile all the leaders from all sides and let civil society and smart people like ME take over. It will be like the 60's again, love and loving will be back with Afro hair style and funny pants.

      cliff.slabbert - 2012-09-18 17:27

      Dream on !

      fidel.mgoqi - 2012-09-18 19:27

      @Rick Muslims have lived with Jews side by side in North Africa and the Middle East for almost a 1000 years without the propaganda you are promoting, using recent events to potray Muslims as always been anti-Jewish. It is only after the arrival of the European racist bigoted terrorists in the Holy land that relations between Jews and Muslims soured, a mere 60 years ago.

      fidel.mgoqi - 2012-09-18 19:38

      @Quirk What about the ethnic cleansing that is taking place today. Your reasoning shows a lack of self-awareness that borders on the psychotic.

      larry.lachman.54 - 2012-09-18 23:15

      What ethnic cleansing,Fidel. Are you talking about the alawite minority government in Syria murdering shiite citizens. because there is no ethnic cleansing in Israel/Palestine.

      Fidel - 2012-09-18 23:59

      Expelled Palestinians that are living as refugees in neighbouring countries! And no Larry, they were not asked to leave by the Arab armies who were about to attack Israel, but by a band of terrorists that were killing them and burning their homes, driving from village to village shouting in loud hailers and threatening to slaughter them if they didn't leave. This is a historical fact!

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-09-19 05:23

      "It is only after the arrival of the European racist bigoted terrorists in the Holy land that relations between Jews and Muslims soured, a mere 60 years ago." It has to be born in mind that Fidel doesn't really know what he's talking about when he expresses views like this. He's coming from a place where there's even something wrong with Nelson Mandela. In the US/Mandela thread a few weeks ago he said Mandela is a phony, a lackey of the West, a modern-day Uncle Tom. These are his exact words.

      larry.lachman.54 - 2012-09-19 06:54

      Your historical fact is hysterical fact. Firstly, you are relating the present with a 60 year old event. The problem is that when pro-Palestinians complain about Israel's oppression of Palestinians, they do not specify whether they mean 'the occupation of the west bank and Gaza', or whether they mean that 'Israel has stolen the land it exists on from original inhabitants.' Clarify your stance on this Fidel, because this relates directly to the article and Romney's comment. Palestinians and arab country supporters are not fighting against 'occupation' of West Bank ONLY, as is evident by their hostilities and antifada pre-1967 war when there was no occupation of the West Bank and Gaza. Their primary goal is the eradication of Israel - correct? In which case, Romney is 100% on the button, because there can never be peace from the Palestinians who do not seek to recognise and accept Israel's existence.

      Fidel - 2012-09-19 07:14

      The present refers to the Palestinians that are being ethnically cleansed from the West Bank by Zionist settlers.

      jaba.kov - 2012-09-19 07:55

      No Palestinians are being ethnically cleansed from the West Bank! The Palestinians have new neighbours now, who occupy mostly unused land; where the only crime is that they are not Muslim… that about sums it up - no Palestinians are being killed or forced to move to another country - thus your suggestions of ethnic cleansing is misleading and just racist propaganda. I too am against the settlements – but one can not lie about ethnic cleansing. Lastly when the Palestinian leadership chooses peace rather than religious war, the Israeli public will pull the settlements down for peace – just like was done in Gaza. However, as long as there is no partner for peace, the Israeli government can not stop the settlements, as there is no public support in stopping them.

      larry.lachman.54 - 2012-09-20 08:21

      Patrick/lesego, no-one takes you seriously on these issues. Nothing but squeaky inanities. Fidel,the real 'oppression' is occurring in the Palestinian refugee camps, perpetrated not by Israel, but by the brethren Arab countries that enforce ghettoisation, imprisonment and depravities upon Palestinian refugees, instead of assimilating them into their general populations. Waiting for what, the demise of Israel? Never going to happen. Where do you stand Fidel? Are you only for the withdrawal of Israel from the West Bank, back to pre-1967 borders; or do you advocate for the dismantelling of Israel and the removal of all Jews from their homeland?

  • roger.kaputnick.90 - 2012-09-18 16:21

    Like him or hate him, he is spot on.

  • Madhi - 2012-09-18 16:41

    Now I will sound schizo, I never thought I can ever like a Republican until Romney and yes Obama has a hand in my change of attitude. Disagree with Romney atleast u know where u stand, unlike Mr Hussein Obama. I disagree with his views but he is at least honest to state the unofficial US policy in mediating peace in the holy land. That's better than Obama or others who tell everyone they believe in peace but do nothing to promote it. In any conflict, the moral burden for peace is with the strongest and in this case Israel is the strongest side by 1 000 light years.

  • peter.mansfield.395 - 2012-09-18 16:43

    From which orifice did this emanate?

  • cliff.slabbert - 2012-09-18 17:25

    Correct Mitt Romney !

  • hannah.p.mostert - 2012-09-18 20:07

    Mitt is a tit

  • Zahir - 2012-09-18 20:53

    Romney is dangerous he is only going to think about the rich and how to get rid of the poor mby export them to mexico or off the coast

  • nicholas.breakey - 2012-09-18 23:50

    just export the palistinians to Iran and solve the problem.

      joe.mase.7 - 2012-09-19 02:53

      Spoken like true zionist

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-09-19 05:20

      Another shockingly racist and hateful comment by you Ziyaad. News24, how long are you going to allow this hate speech on your site?

      fred.fraser.12 - 2012-09-19 05:20

      Nicholas, that's a heartless comment, You're talking about human beings, families, children.

  • jaba.kov - 2012-09-19 06:47

    Republican presidential candidate Mitt Romney told donors that Palestinians "have no interest" in peace with Israel and suggested that efforts at Mideast peace under his administration would languish - but is he lying you ask? Well - he is not - he is looking at two sides of the conflict - 1) Israel that wants peace and 2) Hamas (took over from PA) who don’t want peace. Because it takes two to tango - there is no chance for peace - and if you don’t believe Mitt just Google Hamas's Charter & Goals and you will see why Mitt is 100% correct and that saying ideas that are not politically correct is not the same as lying. In 2000 (and on many other occasions), Israel offered the Palestinians nearly everything they demanded... and the offer was met not with a counteroffer, but with Jihad. Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak and President Clinton offered: 97% of the West Bank (with the remaining 3% to be made up from Israeli territory) The entire Gaza Strip Military control over East Jerusalem Many Palestinian refugees to return to Israel proper, with the rest being settled in the new state of Palestine. There would be a $30 Billion fund to compensate refugees. According to chief US negotiator Dennis Ross, Yasser Arafat rejected it all, and did not offer new ideas of his own.

      jaba.kov - 2012-09-19 06:50

      Today Hamas reject the same offer as the PA rejected. But Hamas obejetive is different - their objective is to kill all the Jews of the Middle East (at least they have the guts to tell the truth as written in their charter.) Just Google and see for yourself why peace is not a reality for Muslim fundamentalists – they only believe in 20year ceasefires but NEVER peace with Infidels. The ceasefire is meant to help them gain more power over time But there is still hope – one day, if the Palestinian population vote for a peaceful party rather than a terrorist organisation like Hamas there will be peace the next week. Israel is ready for peace… the Palestinians are not

      Fidel - 2012-09-19 07:30

      "In 2000 (and on many other occasions), Israel offered the Palestinians nearly everything they demanded... and the offer was met not with a counteroffer, but with Jihad." Don't you ever get tired of lying? The Palestinian Papers showed the extent of Israel's greed, arrogance and intransigence. Your statement actually refers to the compromises that the Palestinian leadership was willing to make, which were rebuked by Israel. Israel has always known that once peace is concluded with the Palestinians the civil war between the religious and secular elements would start. They need the common enemy to exist. “Israel takes more land [so] that the Palestinian state will be impossible . . . the Israel policy is to take more and more land day after day and that at the end of the day we’ll say that is impossible, we already have the land and we cannot create the state”. She conceded that it had been “the policy of the government for a really long time”. -Tzipi Livni

      jaba.kov - 2012-09-19 08:22

      I’m not deceitful - those are facts fidel... just because it shows the Palestinian leadership for what they are... fundamentalists, doesn’t mean I’m lying. I apologise if you don’t like the facts, but this is why Clinton washed his hands from Arafat. The Palestinian Papers showed nothing that was not already known... it showed that the current leadership does not want peace in the expense of foreign donations. Israel made all those offers and they were rejected by Arafat FACT... also a FACT is that the Palestinian leadership did not have any counter offer - no negotiations took place as there was nothing to negotiate according to Arafat. The failed Palestinian leadership lives on handouts - if there is peace the Palestinian leadership would have to start working to feed themselves. Palestinian’s billions of Aid still lies in France and being spend by Arafat’s Widow... This is all about money for the PA not the people. If things couldn’t get any worse they did in the mid 2000’s; Hamas killed Arafat and came to power later. This new leadership is not interested in peace because their main goal is to either die for their religion or kill for their religion... nothing more nothing less.

      jaba.kov - 2012-09-19 08:27

      There is no civil war in Israel, and never will be - Jews might hold different views but they are non violent dissimilar to their cousins in Syria, Egypt, Libya and the rest of the Arab world. When was the last time you saw angry mobs of Jews killing people and destroying property fidel??? Tzpi Livni is 100% right... but you take her words out of context... The Government policy is simple - as long as the Palestinians refuse peace with Israel – settlers have an open policy to build anything they want on disputed land (not occupied land). When Israel pulled out of Gaza, the settlers were taken out and settlements destroyed. Same thing will be done if the Palestinians ever decide that peace rather than war is the way forward. Problem is that this policy has failed and Tzipi is right! The Israeli government thought this would push the Palestinians to peace but rather it did not work and now the settlements are expanding – causing a vastly bigger problem than they were first expected to solve. But how big is the problem fidel? Currently settlements take up 3% of the disputed land in the West Bank – thus peace is achievable still today if the Palestinians stop rejecting and start negotiating. Lastly, fidel I don’t lie. Go to another article if you can’t handle the truth. The only fact that I might be mistaken on is that ‘Hamas killed Arafat’ – but the resulting power shift is proof that I might be spot on.

      jaba.kov - 2012-09-19 08:33

      More proof from this month: The European Union will double its aid for Palestinian development and the Palestinian Authority to €200 million in 2012, the EU executive said on Friday. Reuters Published: 09.16.12, 10:32 Fidel why would they (PA) want to learn to fish when they eating caviar?

      Fidel - 2012-09-19 09:02

      Palestine is not a country, because Israel and the US will not allow it to be, so it can't enter into any intl trade agreements, so it can't have a cogent economic system. Social hardships experienced by Palestinians are compounded by the fact that they live under an illegal occupation and a blockade as such aren't able to engage in any meaningful internatonal commerce.

      larry.lachman.54 - 2012-09-20 08:31

      Quite right Fidel. However it is the Palestinians themselves who perpetuate this victimhood upon themselves. The Palestinians can have what they want - normalisation within a sovereign state - and all that comes with that, however thay dance upon two stages in the same theatre. Their primary act is to continue their aggression against Israel, and their secondary act is cloaked in a tragedy/farce of victimhood and oppression because of occupation of their territory by Israel. The second stage exists because of the first stage, and Israel rightfully is watching the first stage only.

  • pages:
  • 1