Downing Street Says » Middle East

Asked if the Prime Minister’s call for balance in expressing opinions about the Middle East was an implicit criticism of the former diplomats’ letter to him, the PMOS said that as he had told journalists at this morning’s press briefing, we were quite happy to have a debate about the Middle East and Iraq. Irrespective of the diplomats’ letter, the Prime Minister’s comments about the Israeli/Palestinian issue always emphasised the need for balance and the need to understand the position of both sides. That was our approach. It was for the diplomats to explain the approach which they were taking. As we knew from experience, without balance, people would not be able to address the full complexity – and pain – of the issue in question. Put to him that the Prime Minister had appeared to be indicating quite strongly today that he did not think the diplomats’ letter was balanced, the PMOS said that our disagreements with the letter had been spelled out at this morning’s briefing. In our view, it was important not to personalise the issue. Rather, people should be addressing the substance of the argument. For the Israeli/Palestinian issue, that meant taking a balanced approach. On Iraq, we believed that the country was capable of democracy and that we should help to bring that about.

Asked if the Prime Minister would regard the unilateral recognition of settlements on the West Bank as a balanced solution to the Israeli/Palestinian issue, the PMOS said that he would regard the premise of the question as an unbalanced presentation of what the Prime Minister had said in his joint press conference with President Bush in the White House Rose Garden on 16 April, when he had stated that he regarded the prospect of Israel withdrawing 7,000 settlers from Gaza and parts of the West Bank as a first step. Indeed, both he and President Bush had underlined several times that it was only a first step which would not in any way pre-empt or pre-judge the outcome of the final status negotiations. Challenged further on this point, the PMOS drew journalists’ attention to the transcript of the joint press conference from which he quoted President Bush as saying: “I am committed to the vision of two states, Israel and Palestine, living side by side in peace and security. As I said, all final status issues must still be negotiated between the parties.” He had said later, “We’re not going to prejudge the final status discussions.” It was there in black and white for all to see.

Asked if the Prime Minister believed that the Israeli Prime Minister recognised that the withdrawal of settlers from Gaza and parts of the West Bank was a first step, the PMOS said that he was not a spokesman for Prime Minister Sharon. The important point was that there were two approaches to take on this issue: either wait for a perfect solution to arrive – whenever that might be, or we could work with the reality on the ground and make progress by seeing the movement of 7,000 settlers out of Gaza and the West Bank. As the Prime Minister had stated on 16 April, we preferred to take the latter approach – but had also made it clear that in doing so, we were not pre-empting final status negotiations.

Asked if the Prime Minister agreed with comments made today by Louise Ellman MP, who had said that the FCO was a base for Arabists, the PMOS said that the Prime Minister worked with many fine diplomats in the FCO whose advice and experience he valued. He had been proud to work with such people through the difficult issues he had faced during his time as Prime Minister, including those issues which had arisen in the last year. Asked if the Prime Minister valued the advice of Andrew Green, a member of MigrationWatch UK, who had signed the letter, the PMOS said that the membership of the group who had signed the letter was a matter for the group themselves, not us. Asked why the Prime Minister valued the experience and advice of diplomats currently employed in the Foreign Office, but not, apparently, those who had left recently, the PMOS said that those who had written the letter were private citizens who were entitled to express their view, just as we were entitled to disagree with it. There were many many former diplomats. Those who had signed the letter were only a small proportion.

1 Comment »

海外直営店直接買い付け！★ 2020年注文割引開催中，全部の商品割引10% ★ 在庫情報随時更新! ★ 実物写真、付属品を完備する。 ★ 100%を厳守する。 ★ 送料は無料です(日本全国)!★ お客さんたちも大好評です★ 経営方針: 品質を重視、納期も厳守、信用第一！税関の没収する商品は再度無料にして発送します}}}}}}
https://www.bagssjp.com/product/detail-9454.html
Comment by BagssjpBap — 28 Feb 2024 on 3:53 am | Link

RSS feed for comments on this post.

Post a public comment

Name (required)
E-mail (required)
(You must give an email address, but it will not be displayed to the public.)
Website
(You may give your website, and it will be displayed to the public.)

Comments:

This is not a way of contacting the Prime Minister. If you would like to contact the Prime Minister, go to the 10 Downing Street official site.

Privacy note: Shortly after posting, your name and comment will be displayed on the site. This means that people searching for your name on the Internet will be able to find and read your comment.

Original PMOS briefings are © Crown Copyright. Crown Copyright material is reproduced with the permission of the Controller of HMSO and the Queen's Printer for Scotland. Click-use licence number C02W0004089. Material is reproduced from the original 10 Downing Street source, but may not be the most up-to-date version of the briefings, which might be revised at the original source. Users should check with the original source in case of revisions. Comments are © Copyright contributors. Everything else is © Copyright Downing Street Says.

» Tuesday, April 27, 2004

Middle East

1 Comment »

Post a public comment

Search

Supported by

Recent Briefings

Archives

Links

Syndicate (RSS/XML)

Credits

Enquiries