Jordan's King Warns Trump Against Moving U.S. Embassy

[EgyptianAmerican]

Jordan's King Warns Trump Against Moving U.S. Embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, State Media Reports
King Abdullah and U.S. President Trump had a 'good conversation,' White House says, doesn't mention if embassy relocation discussed.

Jordanian King Abdullah II (L) meeting with US President Donald Trump in Washington on February 2, 2017. YOUSEF ALLAN / AFP
Jordan's Abdullah tells U.S. House of Israeli security officials' concern over embassy move
UAE becomes first Muslim-majority country to back Trump's executive order
Netanyahu, Trump to meet February 15; PM to urge new Iran sanctions after missile test
WASHINGTON - Jordan's King Abdullah warned U.S. President Donald Trump against relocating the American embassy in Israel from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem in their meeting in Washington on Thursday, the Jordanian state news agency reported on Thursday.


Abdullah, the first Middle East leader to meet the U.S. president since his inauguration, told Trump that moving the embassy could threaten the two-state solution and have a detrimental effect on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
The White House said the two enjoyed a "good conversation" on a range of regional issues, but did not mention the U.S. embassy relocation.


The two leaders met on the sidelines of the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington. The King has been in Washington since Monday and has also met with Vice President Mike Pence, Defense Secretary James Mattis and senior members of Congress.
On Tuesday, Abdullah told the U.S. House of Representatives Foreign Affairs Committee that senior security and intelligence officials in Israel are concerned the relocation of the American Embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem would cause a violent escalation, Buzzfeed reported.
A member of the committee told the website that Abdullah noted that Israeli security officials are also concerned such a move, which was announced as imminent by U.S. President Donald Trump, would drive new members to Islamic State.

Jordan's King Abdullah, Secretary of State Rex Tillerson and Jared Kushner at the National Prayer Breakfast in Washington, D.C., February 2, 2017.Evan Vucci/AP

Before Trump took office, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu and senior ministers were briefed on what scenarios could arise if Trump announces the relocation of the embassy.
The Israeli army and police discussed their preparations for scenarios of limited violence or even a conflagration across the West Bank and East Jerusalem. One official noted that since the issue revolves around Jerusalem, the Palestinians believed that the matter has religious overtones, further increasing its sensitivity.
Netanyahu is scheduled to meet Trump in Washington on February 15.




read more: http://www.haaretz.com/us-news/1.769266

 

[YeBeWarned]

Technically trump or US has no say in that .. Its between Israel and Palestine stop poking your nose in world you Orange President .. why not he is trying to investigate the Fake vote count , Lock hilary up ? or drain the Freaking swamp ?

 

[EgyptianAmerican]

Technically trump or US has no say in that .. Its between Israel and Palestine stop poking your nose in world you Orange President .. why not he is trying to investigate the Fake vote count , Lock hilary up ? or drain the Freaking swamp ?

He stated that he was going to be the biggest supporter of Israel. One of the thing that entails is the moving of the embassy. Clearly he wants to send a Message.

 

[YeBeWarned]

He stated that he was going to be the biggest supporter of Israel. One of the thing that entails is the moving of the embassy. Clearly he wants to send a Message.

and create unrest in the region .. ME is already burning and now he wants to bring that fight to Israel as well , Israeli will be fool to follow trumps proposition .

 

[EgyptianAmerican]

and create unrest in the region .. ME is already burning and now he wants to bring that fight to Israel as well , Israeli will be fool to follow trumps proposition .

Well they are, the Israeli right wing just loves this dude.

 

[YeBeWarned]

Well they are, the Israeli right wing just loves this dude.

well than it will be provocation to Arab, weirdly this will unite far many Arabs under one cause to stop the taking over of Jerusalem by the Americans and Jews , so more battles , more civilians on both sides will die .

 

[Solomon2]

Be a pioneer and move it, and trust
Abdullah Hadlaq
01/28/2017 22:37

Some may wonder about Trump gains from the transfer of the US embassy to Jerusalem, and if the President Trump is considering keeping the promise he made during his election campaign to transfer the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, it makes sense for him to apply the same test to this idea, as outlined in the his inauguration speech , namely how transport affects American interests?

Who or what is the United States Cetktsabh him? The answer is the author of three aspects, says Robert Satloff , executive director of the Washington Institute for Diplomatic Studies.

The first goal of the United States to move the embassy to Jerusalem in the correct historical injustice that occurred in nearly seven decades, when the oldest of Harry Truman 's famous recognize Israel his move, after 11 minutes from its inception in May 1948, did not go beyond recognition of being a recognition of the fait accompli since Washington does not recognize the legitimate Israel only in January 1949 in a move the United States confirmed its acceptance of Israeli control over the entire region under its territory, including those beyond the limits of specific Jewish state in the partition resolution adopted by the United Nations in 1947, with one exception section that extends over an area of 38 square kilometers of Jerusalem and the Israeli - controlled sector at the end of the war of independence fought in 1948, and Washington never recognized Jerusalem as part of a project of Israel is not in a period of 19 years during which he took over what was then called the "Jerusalem" and certainly not during the nearly 50 years of control over the rest of the city, which was captured from Jordan during the June 1967 war has thrown light on this fact recently - and absurdly - during last September when the White House spokesman , amending the phrase "Jerusalem Israel "in the publication of a memorial service at the funeral of President Obama Shimon Peres text by deleting the word" Israel ", but that did not prevent the five US presidents to visit Jerusalem and the exercise of their official functions in it. However, Washington did not have any diplomatic facility in any part of the city to represent the United States with the government of Israel or its people. The transfer of the embassy that fit this historic wrong.

But the embassy transfer is not limited to being a correction of the past, but also the means to restore balance to the American policy towards future diplomacy on the city, the second goal, while it is obvious to a lack of any formal representation to the United States to Israel in Jerusalem, but there is something else not information to the same extent, which is that the United States diplomatically center in Jerusalem , meant to represent Washington at the last party to the claim, the (Palestinian Authority!), according to the official site of the Consulate General of the United States in Jerusalem since the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, this was the center "as a the actual representative of the US government in the Palestinian Authority. "

As a result, it lacks Washington to no official presence in the capital of the main democratic ally in the Middle East, but maintains a diplomat in the capital of this ally politician of another entity claims ownership of the land within the city, came "Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995" to address this problem, but presidents Clinton and George W. Bush and Obama waived constantly looking for clauses, saying that from their perspective beyond the law on the validity of the executive branch in foreign affairs. The transfer of the US embassy to correct the perception of the concrete case of imbalance and enhances the prospect of Washington helping to eventually negotiate a peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians are capable of , as the two sides agreed to address the issue of the permanent status of Jerusalem and borders.

The gain third to the interests of the United States to move the US embassy to Jerusalem is to achieve a broader goal of US policy goals, namely to assist in the reform of confidence signed with America 's allies, the Arabs or Israelis alike, in the Middle East crisis, Valart left Obama Find a state of uneasiness pervaded the Middle East , the end of his term because the Arabs and Israelis alike consider that the Obama administration gave importance to connect with America 's enemies - especially Iran - on loyalty to its allies account. Therefore, opening a new chapter in the Middle East requires a commitment from Trump to re - establish trust and intimacy between Washington and its partners in the region, and this strategy could , for example , call it "America 's allies first." In this context, if the decision had been made to the implementation of his promise to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, Vsepen so that America actually deliver on its promises. It should not , of course , expected to welcome the Arab leaders -by- step transfer of the embassy, but if you are described as part of a strategy to reorder American priorities in the region procedures and it is aimed at "West Jerusalem" controlled by Israel since its founding, and if you put it on it does not affect the disputed status the holy places, it is likely that they will understand this initiative and will not oppose it strongly. (Finished Robert Satloff analysis)

Must not overlook the possible consequences that may result from the transfer of the embassy , it is clear that the presidents from both parties who promised to move the embassy and then reneged on their promise were convinced that this work will lead to provoke the wrath of the Arab nations and Muslim majority and that will inflame violence between the Palestinians themselves to the point that the disadvantages this decision may outweigh the benefits. Opponents have long cited the idea that argument as if it were a truism! But this analysis is of course not self - evident - it is unbelievable Nmair doom voiced by some Middle Eastern leaders at face value, and is based on what is actually a condescending look at Arabs and Muslims , they assume that they would respond without thinking to invitations induced to commit acts of violence, nor does it take into account the potential impact of US diplomatic smooth and innovative, and strict sometimes. More importantly, this assessment does not focus only on the potential implications for the transfer of the embassy and never focuses as much on thebig benefits.

When Trump take the decision to move the US embassy to Jerusalem , he should be a clear assessment of balance between the benefits and risks, it is a mistake to focus on the potential costs only, no matter how real and significant, when the potential benefits are real and also important, so says the wise men and wise men of the people of diplomacy, politics and opinion and determination of the new US President Trump AC in the transfer of the US embassy to Jerusalem (Be a pioneer in it and move it, and trust).

Abdullah Hadlaq

 

[EgyptianAmerican]

Be a pioneer and move it, and trust
Abdullah Hadlaq
01/28/2017 22:37

Some may wonder about Trump gains from the transfer of the US embassy to Jerusalem, and if the President Trump is considering keeping the promise he made during his election campaign to transfer the American embassy in Israel to Jerusalem, it makes sense for him to apply the same test to this idea, as outlined in the his inauguration speech , namely how transport affects American interests?

Who or what is the United States Cetktsabh him? The answer is the author of three aspects, says Robert Satloff , executive director of the Washington Institute for Diplomatic Studies.

The first goal of the United States to move the embassy to Jerusalem in the correct historical injustice that occurred in nearly seven decades, when the oldest of Harry Truman 's famous recognize Israel his move, after 11 minutes from its inception in May 1948, did not go beyond recognition of being a recognition of the fait accompli since Washington does not recognize the legitimate Israel only in January 1949 in a move the United States confirmed its acceptance of Israeli control over the entire region under its territory, including those beyond the limits of specific Jewish state in the partition resolution adopted by the United Nations in 1947, with one exception section that extends over an area of 38 square kilometers of Jerusalem and the Israeli - controlled sector at the end of the war of independence fought in 1948, and Washington never recognized Jerusalem as part of a project of Israel is not in a period of 19 years during which he took over what was then called the "Jerusalem" and certainly not during the nearly 50 years of control over the rest of the city, which was captured from Jordan during the June 1967 war has thrown light on this fact recently - and absurdly - during last September when the White House spokesman , amending the phrase "Jerusalem Israel "in the publication of a memorial service at the funeral of President Obama Shimon Peres text by deleting the word" Israel ", but that did not prevent the five US presidents to visit Jerusalem and the exercise of their official functions in it. However, Washington did not have any diplomatic facility in any part of the city to represent the United States with the government of Israel or its people. The transfer of the embassy that fit this historic wrong.

But the embassy transfer is not limited to being a correction of the past, but also the means to restore balance to the American policy towards future diplomacy on the city, the second goal, while it is obvious to a lack of any formal representation to the United States to Israel in Jerusalem, but there is something else not information to the same extent, which is that the United States diplomatically center in Jerusalem , meant to represent Washington at the last party to the claim, the (Palestinian Authority!), according to the official site of the Consulate General of the United States in Jerusalem since the signing of the Oslo Accords in 1993, this was the center "as a the actual representative of the US government in the Palestinian Authority. "

As a result, it lacks Washington to no official presence in the capital of the main democratic ally in the Middle East, but maintains a diplomat in the capital of this ally politician of another entity claims ownership of the land within the city, came "Jerusalem Embassy Act of 1995" to address this problem, but presidents Clinton and George W. Bush and Obama waived constantly looking for clauses, saying that from their perspective beyond the law on the validity of the executive branch in foreign affairs. The transfer of the US embassy to correct the perception of the concrete case of imbalance and enhances the prospect of Washington helping to eventually negotiate a peace agreement between Israelis and Palestinians are capable of , as the two sides agreed to address the issue of the permanent status of Jerusalem and borders.

The gain third to the interests of the United States to move the US embassy to Jerusalem is to achieve a broader goal of US policy goals, namely to assist in the reform of confidence signed with America 's allies, the Arabs or Israelis alike, in the Middle East crisis, Valart left Obama Find a state of uneasiness pervaded the Middle East , the end of his term because the Arabs and Israelis alike consider that the Obama administration gave importance to connect with America 's enemies - especially Iran - on loyalty to its allies account. Therefore, opening a new chapter in the Middle East requires a commitment from Trump to re - establish trust and intimacy between Washington and its partners in the region, and this strategy could , for example , call it "America 's allies first." In this context, if the decision had been made to the implementation of his promise to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, Vsepen so that America actually deliver on its promises. It should not , of course , expected to welcome the Arab leaders -by- step transfer of the embassy, but if you are described as part of a strategy to reorder American priorities in the region procedures and it is aimed at "West Jerusalem" controlled by Israel since its founding, and if you put it on it does not affect the disputed status the holy places, it is likely that they will understand this initiative and will not oppose it strongly. (Finished Robert Satloff analysis)

Must not overlook the possible consequences that may result from the transfer of the embassy , it is clear that the presidents from both parties who promised to move the embassy and then reneged on their promise were convinced that this work will lead to provoke the wrath of the Arab nations and Muslim majority and that will inflame violence between the Palestinians themselves to the point that the disadvantages this decision may outweigh the benefits. Opponents have long cited the idea that argument as if it were a truism! But this analysis is of course not self - evident - it is unbelievable Nmair doom voiced by some Middle Eastern leaders at face value, and is based on what is actually a condescending look at Arabs and Muslims , they assume that they would respond without thinking to invitations induced to commit acts of violence, nor does it take into account the potential impact of US diplomatic smooth and innovative, and strict sometimes. More importantly, this assessment does not focus only on the potential implications for the transfer of the embassy and never focuses as much on thebig benefits.

When Trump take the decision to move the US embassy to Jerusalem , he should be a clear assessment of balance between the benefits and risks, it is a mistake to focus on the potential costs only, no matter how real and significant, when the potential benefits are real and also important, so says the wise men and wise men of the people of diplomacy, politics and opinion and determination of the new US President Trump AC in the transfer of the US embassy to Jerusalem (Be a pioneer in it and move it, and trust).

Abdullah Hadlaq

Dude stop spamming bullshit articles with a blatant pro-israel bias. Give us your opinions, not this bullshit.

 

[Ilay]

I honestly want to know why is the moving of the embassy is causing such a response from Muslims? Is it some how diminishing the "holiness" of Jerusalem or something?

 

[Solomon2]

Dude stop spamming bullshit articles with a blatant pro-israel bias. Give us your opinions, not this bullshit.

O.K. I think you should support Egypt moving its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem because doing so will re-establish a sovereign Muslim Arab presence in the holy city.

Of course, you could wait for King Abdullah to move his - I expect Trump's move will start a stampede - but won't the honor go to the country that moves its embassy to Jerusalem first?

 

[EgyptianAmerican]

I think you should support Egypt moving its embassy from Tel Aviv to Jerusalem because doing so will re-establish a sovereign Muslim Arab presence in the holy city.

No, I wouldn't at all because the Egyptian embassy to Israel should stay inside Israel.

 

[Solomon2]

No, I wouldn't at all because the Egyptian embassy to Israel should stay inside Israel.

There has never been a dispute that western Jerusalem will remain Israeli territory, no matter what arrangements will finally be made between Israel and its Palestinian Arab negotiating partners.

Still, if you want to emphasize Israel's total sovereignty over all of Jerusalem then keep Egypt's embassy in Tel Aviv, right?

 

[EgyptianAmerican]

There has never been a dispute that western Jerusalem will remain Israeli territory, no matter what arrangements will finally be made between Israel and its Palestinian Arab negotiating partners.

Still, if you want to emphasize Israel's total sovereignty over all of Jerusalem then keep Egypt's embassy in Tel Aviv, right?

Jerusalem should be a Neutral area owned by neither side as suggested by U.N that you so love.

Israel has no sovereignty over the area as made obvious by Jordan's threat of war. Don't doubt that Hezbollah would do the same, and considering Sissi drafted a U.N resolution condemning Israeli settlements don't doubt that he would join too. Don't push yourself.

Want to keep Israel long terms interests? Want to be pro-Israel than leave Jerusalem to no-one/U.N or the Palestinians and destroy all settlements that go beyond U.N partition plan.

Don't even understand why you Zionists want it so badly.