tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-971541537715440752.post5664908988917320914..comments2023-11-05T22:12:50.570+11:00Comments on Daphne Anson: Two-State Solution? The West Must Practise More Straight Talking, Less Doublespeak, argues David SingerDaphne Ansonhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/12297188759548931101noreply@blogger.comBlogger2125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-971541537715440752.post-48289495443066700212015-08-23T19:11:01.717+10:002015-08-23T19:11:01.717+10:00Anonymous
Actually the Knesset did debate Sharon&#...Anonymous<br />Actually the Knesset did debate Sharon's action in accepting the Roadmap with reservations and voted 57 to 42 in favour of his handling of the situation on 16 June 2003. Subsequent Governments followed his decision without being legally required to do so.<br /><br />Contrast this to the letter dated April 14, 2004, from President Bush to Sharon on defensible borders and settlement blocs, whose terms were subsequently ratified by large bipartisan majorities in both the US Senate (95-3) and the House of Representatives (407-9) on June 23-24, 2004. This Presidential Congress- endorsed commitment is binding on subsequent Presidents - although Obama still refuses to publicly acknowledge he is bound by those commitments.David Singer -https://www.blogger.com/profile/18281274914728257734noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-971541537715440752.post-15043752767295108632015-08-17T13:52:15.232+10:002015-08-17T13:52:15.232+10:00I was under the impression in a parliamentary demo...I was under the impression in a parliamentary democracy, a government has to have legislation and international agreements approved by parliament. The Oslo accords were voted on by the Knesset, the Roadmap never was. <br /><br />Why does anyone consider them binding on any government subsequent to Sharon's? In what kind of democracy are governments held responsible for the unimplemented policies of their predecessors? Anonymousnoreply@blogger.com