Hillary Clinton on Al-Jazeera: "Stop the Settlement Construction."

On Friday, we noted the aftermath of the Obama-Netanyahu meeting in Washington, with an emerging Israeli attempt to undermine a "grand design" by the US for the Middle East. More specifically, the two countries are at odds over the expansion of Jewish settlements in the West Bank.

This is the interview that Secretary of State Hillary Clinton gave to Al-Jazaeera on Tuesday, where her assurance that Hamas remained on the outside of the process sat alongside her denunciation of the setttlements:.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=ZEmMQOx0Hwk[/youtube]

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, thanks for your time, first of all, for talking to this program on Al-Jazeera.

The meeting yesterday between President Obama and the Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, after the meeting, President Obama could not have made it any clearer that he wanted a two-state solution. On the other hand, Prime Minister Netanyahu sort of danced around the issue without using the terminology, which has raised concerns in the Arab world. How concerned are you about the fact that he didn’t actually mention once “two-state solution”?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, this is the beginning, and we see this as an intensive period of our outreach and of our frankly laying out what we want to see happen. You rightly point out that the President underscored our commitment to a two-state solution and also called for a stop to the settlements. We have made that very clear. I reinforced that last night at a dinner that I hosted for Prime Minister Netanyahu.

Now the hard work starts. But I think it is significant that the Obama Administration is not waiting. We are starting this intensive engagement right now, very early in our Administration. We have consulted broadly already. Both George Mitchell and I have spoken with many Arab leaders, as well, of course, with the Palestinians and the Israelis. And we are determined to forge ahead on what we believe is in the best interests of the Israelis, the Palestinians, the larger region, and the world, as well as what we think is right. And the President – our President has often said, “Judge us on our actions, not our words.” But his words were very strong, and now we intend to match those words with our actions.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, when President Obama yesterday talked about the issue of settlements and he said that he wanted the Israelis to freeze the building on the West Bank, does that mean that he wants the settlements, the existing settlements, to be rolled back to the 1967 border, specifically?

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, there are two pieces to that question. First, we want to see a stop to settlement construction, additions, natural growth – any kind of settlement activity. That is what the President has called for. We also are going to be pushing for a two-state solution which, by its very name, implies borders that have to be agreed to. And we expect to see two states living side by side, a state for the Palestinians that will be sovereign and within which the Palestinians will have the authorities that come with being in charge of a state with respect to such activities as settlements. So it’s really a two-step effort here. We want to see a stop now, and then, as part of this intensive engagement that Senator Mitchell is leading for us, we want to move toward a two-state solution with borders for the Palestinians.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, on the issue of the division, the split within the Palestinian body, Fatah and Hamas, can you envisage a scenario where you would be able to achieve a two-state solution without talking in some way, in some form, to Hamas?

SECRETARY CLINTON: I believe that Hamas has to comply with not only the Quartet principles but the underlying principles of the Arab Peace Initiative. You cannot expect either Fatah or the Israelis or Arabs who wish to see this matter resolved, with a two-state solution, to work with a group that does not believe in the outcome of these efforts. And in any peace negotiation that I’m aware of anywhere in the world, groups that are resistance groups, insurgent groups, guerilla groups, when they come to the peace table have to commit to peace. And we would expect Hamas to recognize Israel’s right to exist, to renounce violence as the way to the achievement of a homeland for the Palestinian people, and to recognize the prior agreements that have been entered into by the Palestinians either through the PLO or the PA.

I think that’s an incredibly reasonable request. Now, it is truly up to Hamas. The unity efforts that Egypt has been leading have been difficult because, clearly, there are very strongly divergent opinions that are being expressed. My hope is that I will see, you will see Palestinian children in their own state having a chance to lead normal lives, being given the opportunity to fulfill their own God-given potential, to get an education, to get the healthcare they need, to have good jobs and pursue their dreams. I don’t want to see them consigned to years more of conflict that just destroys that future.
And I think we have an opportunity now. We have a President of the United States who has already reached out and said here is what I’m committed to doing. I am committed. We have a team in this Administration, and we are looking for partners. We think that the Palestinian Authority is ready to be a partner. We believe through our efforts we will get the Israelis to make the kind of commitment to a two-state solution that is absolutely necessary. We know that many leaders in the Arab world see this in a different way, as the Arab Peace Initiative suggests. So let’s try to bring people to that recognition, and that includes Hamas.

QUESTION: Madame Secretary, thanks for the time, and I hope we can have you again on Al Jazeera.

SECRETARY CLINTON: Thank you very much. Nice to talk to you.

QUESTION: Great to see you. Thank you very much.

Iran: Roxana Saberi Freed from Tehran Prison

Enduring America, 17 April: "For Saberi’s sake and — not more importantly but more broadly — for the sake of US-Iran engagement, some politicians and officials in Iran need to move with a face-saving solution such as conviction and immediate deportation."

Iran's Press TV has confirmed that, a day after her appeal of an 8-year sentence for espionage, Iranian-American journalist Roxana Saberi has been freed from jail in Tehran. Saberi's father Reza collected her in front of Evin prison.

Saberi's defence lawyer Saleh Nikbakht earlier said, "Her punishment has been changed to a suspended two-year sentence and she will be out of prison in one-and-half hours." Iranian judiciary spokesman Alireza Jamshidi confirmed to the state-run Islamic Republic News Agency, "In consideration of this ruling, naturally she will be freed."

The narrow legal rationale, according to Al Jazeera's Alireza Ronaghi, is that Saberi was sentenced under "article 501 that says any co-operation with hostile governments and hostile countries deserved one to 10 years in prison....That article of law has been disputed by lawyers who say Iran is not at war with anyone at the moment", raising the question of interpretation of "hostile government".

The overriding reason for Saberi's release, however, is political. As Ronaghi notes, "[Iran doesn't] want to jeopardise all the possibilities and potential of future changes in Iran-US relations with one court order."

Afghanistan Civilian Deaths: US Military Un-Apologises

Related Post: Obama Fiddles, Afghanistan and Pakistan Burn

Al Jazeera's headline this morning cleverly uses scare quotes: "US Military 'Confirms' Afghan Deaths".

The raised eyebrows over "confirm" are justified, however. While "a senior military official" told the press, in advance of a formal briefing on Friday, that, yes, US airstrikes had killed civilians, he was quick to shift responsibility.

According to CNN, the official said that the "buildings and compounds" hit by the U.S. had been "identified as areas from which insurgent fighters were firing on Afghan and coalition forces". The insurgents were holding residents in those buildings "as a means of causing civilian casualties". And, just for good measure and a good headline, he added that there was "separate intelligence that some civilians in a nearby area were killed with hand grenades by militants who then displayed the bodies".

Never mind that there was no evidence, in eyewitness accounts and from the International Committee of the Red Cross, who had officials on the scene, that the dead civilians were human shields. Never mind that tribal elders who contacted the ICRC made no reference to civilians held by insurgents in the bombed buildings, as they asked for help to deal with casualties.

Forget the possibility that American officials could say what, at this point, is the likely scenario. In the battle between Afghan insurgents and the Afghan military, there was crossfire. That crossfire included US bombs. And crossfire is not always accurate or discriminate. In war, stuff happens.

No, the "collateral damage" --- not to the innocent but to the US military --- must be limited. So Secretary of Defense Robert Gates will say, with a straight face, ""We regret any, even one, Afghan...innocent civilian casualty." The US senior official will frame the "real" issue, "The question now for investigators, the official said, is how much information was available at the time of the strikes about the potential presence of civilians and whether those in charge should have known civilians might be in the vicinity."

And that will do until the next incident.

Video: Raw Footage of US Soldiers "Hunting People for Jesus" in Afghanistan

Related Post: US Military “Hunt People for Jesus” in Afghanistan

The extended, unedited footage released today by Al Jazeera and documentary maker Brian Hughes after the Pentagon disputed their original report of US soldiers in Afghanistan advocating evangelism and conversion of Afghans:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MbJ63Y4R0dA[/youtube]

The statement from Brian Hughes:

On Sunday, May 3, the Al Jazeera English network and I made an agreement to produce a broadcast segment from a rough cut of my documentary film. This opportunity came after a May 2009 Harper’s magazine cover story called “Jesus Killed Mohammed.” While he researched and prepared that article, I allowed the author Jeff Sharlet to view the work-in-progress documentary. Sharlet’s article brought the film to Al Jazeera English’s attention.

My documentary, titled The Word and the Warriors, is inspired by a personal experience I had while serving as a combat flight crew member during the first Gulf War. During a very difficult and emotional time at war, an Army chaplain provided me comfort and counsel. I will never forget the important advice or the man who - without questioning my own faith - helped me at a time of need.

For two-and-a-half years, I have been researching and producing this film. I have traveled the world, interviewing both military servicemembers and civilians about the important role of these religious leaders/military officers.

During April/May 2008, I went to Afghanistan. With the assistance and full cooperation of the U.S. Army, I was allowed to film at Bagram Air Field. During that time, I was always wearing press credentials, and I was always accompanied by a media liaison while filming. The media liaison staff knew everything I filmed and - as I was told by them - they filed reports every evening about what I had filmed. It was my primary media liaison, an Army NCO, who - on my first day - invited me to meet LTC Gary Hensley. Hensley, the ranking chaplain in Afghanistan talked to me off camera expressing a concern he had about allowing me to film his chaplains. At the conclusion of the discussion, he agreed that I would be allowed to embed with his chaplains and invited me to film several hours of religious services.

Those hours at the Enduring Faith Chapel included his own sermon at a service called Chapel Next. With the exception of a few minutes I could not film because I was reloading my camera or moving to position for another shot, I videotaped Hensley’s entire sermon.

Any contention by the military that his words are purposefully taken out of context to alter the tone or meaning of his sermon is absolutely false.

In recent press statements, the military also contends that - in the footage depicting the Afghan-language (Dari and Pashto) bibles - a cut was made before “it would have shown that the chaplain instructed that the Bibles not be distributed.” This is a false statement. The chaplain - as seen in the footage before the cut - instructs the group to be careful and reiterates the definition of General Order #1. After this cut he begins to organize the group for the evening’s bible study lessons.

Finally, and in my opinion most important, is the fact that EVERY FRAME of the rough cut from Bagram was provided to the U.S. Army Public Affairs Office in advance of this release. On Thursday, April 30 at approximately 1 pm EST, the Army took possession of a DVD with this footage by accepting a FedEx from me. Since Al Jazeera English first aired the piece Sunday, May 3 at 10pm EST, the Army had every frame of this rough cut for more than 80 hours.

UPDATED A Very Religious War: US Military "Hunt People for Jesus" in Afghanistan

UPDATE: Responding to Pentagon claims that it had "grossly misrepresent[ed] the truth", Al Jazeera has released extended, unedited footage from Brian Hughes recording the statements of US military in "Bible Study". The footage supports the original claim that US soldiers were advocating evangelism in Afghanistan. We've posted the video and Hughes' further comments in a separate blog.

This is the video report from Al Jazeera, compiled from footage taken by documentary maker Brian Hughes last year, that has sparked controversy over the last 48 hours:

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=hVGmbzDLq5c[/youtube]

The most sensational call to arms comes from Lieutenant-Colonel Gary Hensley, the chief of the US military chaplains in Afghanistan, who tells soldiers that they have a responsibility "to be witnesses for" Jesus Christ:

The special forces guys - they hunt men basically. We do the same things as Christians, we hunt people for Jesus. We do, we hunt them down. Get the hound of heaven after them, so we get them into the kingdom. That's what we do, that's our business.

US commanders moved quickly to discredit the report and to limit any damage. Colonel Greg Julian claimed, "This is irresponsible and inappropriate journalism....The Bibles were taken into custody and not distributed. There is no effort to go out and proselytise to Afghans." Asked in his Monday press briefing about the incident, Admiral Mike Mullen, the Chairman of the Joint Chiefs of Staff, denied any knowledge and added, "From the United States' military's perspective, it is not our position to push any specific kind of religion."

The US military is no stranger to controversy over evangelism in its wars. Lieutenant General William Boykin provoked controversy in 2003 when he bragged about hunting down an insurgent in Somalia:

He went on CNN and he laughed at us, and he said, "They'll never get me because Allah will protect me. Allah will protect me." Well, you know what? I knew that my God was bigger than his. I knew that my God was a real God and his was an idol.