Skip to main content
Skip to content
Case File
d-33626House OversightOther

Opinion piece linking Netanyahu's policies to US diplomatic shifts

The passage is an editorial commentary without specific allegations, dates, transactions, or actionable leads. It references public statements by known officials but offers no new evidence or concrete Claims that Netanyahu is diverging from past Israeli policy. References historical statements by Ehud Olmert, Ehud Barak, and George W. Bush. Suggests a shift in US policy toward Israel under Preside

Date
November 11, 2025
Source
House Oversight
Reference
House Oversight #023518
Pages
1
Persons
2
Integrity
No Hash Available

Summary

The passage is an editorial commentary without specific allegations, dates, transactions, or actionable leads. It references public statements by known officials but offers no new evidence or concrete Claims that Netanyahu is diverging from past Israeli policy. References historical statements by Ehud Olmert, Ehud Barak, and George W. Bush. Suggests a shift in US policy toward Israel under Preside

Tags

us-foreign-policyisraeleditorialpolitical-commentarynetanyahuhouse-oversightobama-administration

Ask AI About This Document

0Share
PostReddit

Extracted Text (OCR)

EFTA Disclosure
Text extracted via OCR from the original document. May contain errors from the scanning process.
Article 1. The Washington Post Where Netanyahu fails himself and Israel Fareed Zakaria May 26 -- Conventional wisdom is fast congealing in Washington that President Obama was wrong to demarcate a shift in American policy toward Israel last week. In fact, it was Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu who broke with the past — in one of a series of diversions and obstacles Netanyahu has come up with anytime he is pressed. He wins in the short run, but ultimately, he is turning himself into a version of Soviet Foreign Minister Andrei Gromyko, “Mr. Nyet,” a man who will be bypassed by history. Here is what Netanyahu’s immediate predecessor, Ehud Olmert, said in a widely reported speech to the Israeli Knesset in 2008: “We must give up Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem and return to the core of the territory that is the State of Israel prior to 1967, with minor corrections dictated by the reality created since then.” Olmert, a man with a reputation as a hard-liner, said that meant Israel would keep about 6 percent of the West Bank — the major settlements — and give up land elsewhere. This was also the position of Ehud Barak, Israel’s prime minister during the late 1990s. The Bush administration did not have a different position, as statements from the president and Condoleezza Rice make clear. Here is George W. Bush in 2008: “I believe that any peace agreement between them will require mutually agreed adjustments to the armistice lines of 1949 to reflect current realities and to ensure that the Palestinian state is viable and contiguous.” (The 1949 armistice lines is another way of saying the 1967 borders.) Or consider this statement from last November: “|T|he United States believes that through good-faith negotiations, the parties can

Forum Discussions

This document was digitized, indexed, and cross-referenced with 1,400+ persons in the Epstein files. 100% free, ad-free, and independent.

Annotations powered by Hypothesis. Select any text on this page to annotate or highlight it.