U.N. Assembly, in Blow to U.S., Elevates Status of Palestine

More than 130 countries voted on Thursday to upgrade Palestine to a nonmember observer state of the United Nations, a triumph for Palestinian diplomacy and a sharp rebuke to the United States and Israel.

But the vote, at least for now, did little to bring either the Palestinians or the Israelis closer to the goal they claim to seek: two states living side by side, or increased Palestinian unity. Israel and the militant group Hamas both responded critically to the day’s events, though for different reasons.

The new status will give the Palestinians more tools to challenge Israel in international legal forums for its occupation activities in the West Bank, including settlement-building, and it helped bolster the Palestinian Authority, weakened after eight days of battle between its rival Hamas and Israel.

But even as a small but determined crowd of 2,000 celebrated in central Ramallah in the West Bank, waving flags and dancing, there was an underlying sense of concerned resignation.

“I hope this is good,” said Munir Shafie, 36, an electrical engineer who was there. “But how are we going to benefit?”

Still, the General Assembly vote — 138 countries in favor, 9 opposed and 41 abstaining — showed impressive backing for the Palestinians at a difficult time. It was taken on the 65th anniversary of the vote to divide the former British mandate of Palestine into two states, one Jewish and one Arab, a vote Israel considers the international seal of approval for its birth.

The past two years of Arab uprisings have marginalized the Palestinian cause to some extent as nations that focused their political aspirations on the Palestinian struggle have turned inward. The vote on Thursday, coming so soon after the Gaza fighting, put the Palestinians again — if briefly, perhaps — at the center of international discussion.

“The question is, where do we go from here and what does it mean?” Salam Fayyad, the Palestinian prime minister, who was in New York for the vote, said in an interview. “The sooner the tough rhetoric of this can subside and the more this is viewed as a logical consequence of many years of failure to move the process forward, the better.” He said nothing would change without deep American involvement.

President Mahmoud Abbas of the Palestinian Authority, speaking to the assembly’s member nations, said, “The General Assembly is called upon today to issue a birth certificate of the reality of the state of Palestine,” and he condemned what he called Israeli racism and colonialism. His remarks seemed aimed in part at Israel and in part at Hamas. But both quickly attacked him for the parts they found offensive.

“The world watched a defamatory and venomous speech that was full of mendacious propaganda against the Israel Defense Forces and the citizens of Israel,” Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel responded. “Someone who wants peace does not talk in such a manner.”

While Hamas had officially backed the United Nations bid of Mr. Abbas, it quickly criticized his speech because the group does not recognize Israel.

“There are controversial issues in the points that Abbas raised, and Hamas has the right to preserve its position over them,” said Salah al-Bardaweel, a spokesman for Hamas in Gaza, on Thursday.

“We do not recognize Israel, nor the partition of Palestine, and Israel has no right in Palestine,” he added. “Getting our membership in the U.N. bodies is our natural right, but without giving up any inch of Palestine’s soil.”

Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, Ron Prosor, spoke after Mr. Abbas and said he was concerned that the Palestinian Authority failed to recognize Israel for what it is.

“Three months ago, Israel’s prime minister stood in this very hall and extended his hand in peace to President Abbas,” Mr. Prosor said. “He reiterated that his goal was to create a solution of two states for two peoples, where a demilitarized Palestinian state will recognize Israel as a Jewish state.

“That’s right. Two states for two peoples. In fact, President Abbas, I did not hear you use the phrase ‘two states for two peoples’ this afternoon. In fact, I have never heard you say the phrase ‘two states for two peoples’ because the Palestinian leadership has never recognized that Israel is the nation-state of the Jewish people.”

The Israelis also say that the fact that Mr. Abbas is not welcome in Gaza, the Palestinian coastal enclave run by Hamas, from which he was ejected five years ago, shows that there is no viable Palestinian leadership living up to its obligations now.

As expected, the vote won backing from a number of European countries, and was a rebuff to intense American and Israeli diplomacy. France, Spain, Italy and Switzerland all voted yes. Britain and Germany abstained. Apart from Canada, no major country joined the United States and Israel in voting no. The other opponents included Palau, Panama and Micronesia.

Susan E. Rice, the American ambassador to the United Nations, was dismissive of the entire exercise. “Today’s grand pronouncements will soon fade,” she said. “And the Palestinian people will wake up tomorrow and find that little about their lives has changed, save that the prospects of a durable peace have only receded.”

A major concern for the Americans is that the Palestinians may use their new status to try to join the International Criminal Court. That prospect particularly worries the Israelis, who fear that the Palestinians may press for an investigation of their practices in the occupied territories widely viewed as violations of international law.

Saeb Erekat, the chief Palestinian negotiator, said that after the vote “life will not be the same” because “Palestine will become a country under occupation.”

“The terms of reference for any negotiations become withdrawal,” Mr. Erekat said.

Another worry is that the Palestinians may use the vote to seek membership in specialized agencies of the United Nations, a move that could have consequences for the financing of the international organizations as well as the Palestinian Authority itself. Congress cut off financing to the United Nations Educational, Scientific and Cultural Organization, known as Unesco, in 2011 after it accepted Palestine as a member. The United States is a major contributor to many of these agencies and is active on their governing boards.

In response to the Palestinian bid, a bipartisan group of senators said Thursday that they would introduce legislation that would cut off foreign aid to the authority if it tried to use the International Criminal Court against Israel, and close the Palestine Liberation Organization’s office in Washington if Palestinians refused to negotiate with Israel.

Calling the Palestinian bid “an unhealthy step that could undermine the peace process,” Senator Lindsey Graham, Republican of South Carolina, said that he and the other senators, including Charles E. Schumer, Democrat of New York, would be closely monitoring the situation.

The vote came shortly after an eight-day Israeli military assault on Gaza that Israel described as a response to stepped-up rocket fire into Israel. The operation killed scores of Palestinians and was aimed at reducing the arsenal of Hamas in Gaza, part of the territory that the United Nations resolution expects to make up a future state of Palestine.

The Palestinian Authority, based in Ramallah, was politically weakened by the Gaza fighting, with its rivals in Hamas seen by many Palestinians as more willing to stand up to Israel and fight back. That shift in sentiment is one reason that some Western countries gave for backing the United Nations resolution, to strengthen Mr. Abbas and his more moderate colleagues in their contest with Hamas.

Jennifer Steinhauer contributed reporting from Washington, Isabel Kershner from Jerusalem, and Khaled Abu Aker from Ramallah, West Bank.

OBAMA LUNCH WITH ROMNEY

*Romney, Obama have lunch, agree to ‘stay in touch.’ Maybe.

Mitt Romney arrives the White House

Mitt Romney and Barack Obama

President Barack Obama and former Gov. Mitt Romney met for lunch at the White House on Thursday, their first face-to-face meeting since the bitter election campaign in which each man basically warned voters that the other risked destroying the economy. A syrupy White House statement released after the meal said they had discussed America's global leadership role and agreed on their desire to stay in touch. Maybe.
Romney arrived one minute early for the 12:30 p.m. lunch, walking into the West Wing through a side entrance a safe distance from the press. He walked out the same way at 1:43 p.m., even as Obama's press secretary Jay Carney gave only meager details of what he insisted was a "private" get-together between the president and his defeated Republican rival.
Romney "congratulated the president for the success of his campaign and wished him well over the coming four years," according to the White House account of the meal. "The focus of their discussion was on America's leadership in the world and the importance of maintaining that leadership position in the future.
"They pledged to stay in touch, particularly if opportunities to work together on shared interests arise in the future," the statement said.
The lunch menu included white turkey chili and Southwestern grilled chicken salad.
The White House barred reporters from the event, but released an official photo showing Obama giving Romney a tour of the Oval Office.
Carney, briefing reporters while the lunch was going on, predicted that the two men would compare experiences from the campaign trail. "There aren't that many people who have run, been nominees for their party. There aren't that many people you can talk to who know what it's like."
Obama is "very interested in some of Gov. Romney's ideas," Carney insisted. But, when pressed, he would highlight only the Republican's widely praised rescue of the Salt Lake City Olympics and say that Obama hoped to apply Romney's know-how to his own efforts to make government more efficient.
That's a skill set, not an idea, one reporter pointed out. So are there actually ideas of Romney's that the president always either supported or opposed in the campaign but is now rethinking?
"There were certainly things that the two men agreed on" during the campaign, Carney said. "I wouldn't say it was the majority of things. It wasn't."
Still, Carney pointed to the three presidential debates and underlined that the erstwhile rivals had frequently professed to agree with each other.
He's right. Here's a sample of some of those moments. Note that some of the "agreements" are tactical attempts to score political points rather than any sincere assertion of commonality of purpose.
From the first debate:
Obama: "Gov. Romney and I both agree that our corporate tax rate is too high."
"I agree that the Democratic legislators in Massachusetts might have given some advice to Republicans in Congress about how to cooperate."
Romney: "I agree, education is key, particularly the future of our economy."
"We agree; we ought to bring the tax rates down, and I do, both for corporations and for individuals."
"Let's come back to something the president (and) I agree on, which is the key task we have in health care is to get the costs down so it's more affordable for families."
Or this exchange:
Obama: "One of the things I suspect Gov. Romney and I probably agree on is getting businesses to work with community colleges so that they're setting up their training programs ..."
Moderator Jim Lehrer: "Do you agree, Governor?"
Obama: "Let—let—let me just finish the point."
Romney: "Oh, yeah. Oh, yeah."
Or this one:
Lehrer: "Can the two of you agree that the voters have a choice, a clear choice, between the two of you?"
Romney: "Absolutely."
Obama: "Yes."
Sources:(Pete Souza/official White House photo) (Jason Reed/Reuters)

Former President Obasanjo and coronet Obas in Egba meet on Yoruba Culture and Tradition

Coronet Obas from over 60 towns in Egbaland, Ogun State, Nigeria attended a one-day retreat to ventilate how they can revamp the Yoruba heritage of culture and tradition to enhance their reign and rulership in this era of democratic governance.
Several Yoruba historians and traditionalists as well as legal experts and other social specialists presented papers that were as educative and entertaining.
The event was organized by the Village Network Empowerment Initiative, an Akinale based NGO in pursuit of rural empowerment through education.
Chief Olusegun Obasanjo, former President and Balogun Owu and other notable traditional rulers were in attendance.

ANTI-ROBBERY SQUAD HQTS IN ABUJA ATTACKED BY BOKO HARAM

The Special Anti-Robbery Squad (SARS) of the Nigeria Police Force headquarters, Abuja was attacked early this [Monday] morning by unknown gunmen.

Though details are still sketchy, there are speculations that some detained suspects including members of the dreaded  Boko Haram terrorists may have been freed during the raid.

Police Force spokesman, Mr. Frank Mba, who is presently in Asaba, Delta State confirmed the attack to  in a phone call. He said he would give us details of the incident as soon as he gets the facts.

CONSTITUTION REVIEW: OPC President urges Legislature to reconsider Sovereign National Conference

The leader and founder of Odua Peoples Congress (OPC), Dr. Frederick Fasehun has called on the National Assembly to put into consideration the call by Nigerians for Sovereign National Conference (SNC) in the review of the constitution.

According to Fasehun, "we shall continue to demand for the convening of the Sovereign National Conference, SNC. This current Constitution is a handout from the Military; therefore no amount of tinkering and panel-beating can reform it into a people's document".

Fasehun in a statement made available to Thisday yesterday insisted that the National Assembly's ongoing review of the 1999 Constitution amounts to a brazen display of impunity.

He said "in view of Nigerians complaining that the presidential system is too expensive and should be jettisoned for the uni-cameral Parliamentary system?

Only the people can determine such and they will do so only in the atmosphere of a Sovereign National Conference."

However, on the dialogue with Boko Haram sect, Fasehun said OPC proposed that Boko Haram should expunge General Muhammadu Buhari from its list of delegates, except he confirms his bonafide membership of the group.

He said "Boko Haram has remained faceless; government must insist on not discussing with a faceless group, until the leaders are unveiled and known.

Much of Boko Haram's hostility has been turned against Christians; therefore, Christians, through the Christian Association of Nigeria (CAN), must be represented at the talks."

He added "negotiations should be opened up to accommodate other ethnic interests in the conflict, including: Ohanaeze Ndigbo, Afenifere, Middle-Belt Forum, Egbesu, MEND and other nationality groups, whose indigenes have been wantonly slaughtered by Boko Haram."

OBAMA RE-ELECTED INTO THE WHITE HOUSE

Cheerful President Obama !

Barack Hussein Obama was re-elected President of the United States on Tuesday, overcoming powerful economic headwinds, a lock-step resistance to his agenda by Republicans in Congress and an unprecedented torrent of advertising as the nation voted to give him a second chance to change Washington.
In defeating Mitt Romney, the president carried Wisconsin, Iowa, New Hampshire, Colorado and Virginia and was holding on to a narrow advantage in Ohio and Florida. The path to victory for Mr. Romney narrowed as the night wore along, with Mr. Obama steadily climbing toward the 270 electoral votes needed to win a second term.
A cheer of jubilation sounded at the Obama campaign headquarters in Chicago when the television networks began projecting him as the winner at 11:20 p.m., even as the ballots were still being counted in many states where voters had waited in line well into the night. The victory was far narrower than his historic election four years ago, but it was no less dramatic.
As a succession of states fell away from Mr. Romney, a hush fell over his Boston headquarters on Tuesday night. Two advisers said in interviews that the contest seemed over, but Mr. Romney was not conceding, with the electoral votes from Ohio and Florida still outstanding.
The evening was not without the drama that has come to mark so many recent elections:
Even after Fox News Channel projected that Mr. Obama would win Ohio — effectively sealing Mr. Obama’s re-election — its on-air analyst, the Republican strategist Karl Rove, was arguing that it had done so too quickly and that Mr. Romney still had a chance.
His panics made up an important part of Mr. Obama’s winning coalition, preliminary exit poll data showed. And before the night was through, there were already recriminations from Republican moderates who said Mr. Romney had gone too far during the primaries in his statements against those here illegally, including his promise that his get-tough policies would cause some to “self-deport.”
Mr. Obama, 51, faces governing in a deeply divided country and a partisan-rich capital, where Republicans retained their majority in the House and Democrats kept their control of the Senate. His re-election offers him a second chance that will quickly be tested, given the rapidly escalating fiscal showdown.
For Mr. Obama, the result brings a ratification of his sweeping health care act, which Mr.Romney had vowed to repeal. The law will now continue on course toward nearly full implementation in 2014, promising to change significantly the way medical services are administrated nationwide.
Confident that the economy is finally on a true path toward stability, Mr. Obama and his aides have hinted that he would seek to tackle some of the grand but unrealized promises of his first campaign, including the sort of immigration overhaul that has eluded presidents of both parties for decades.
But he will be venturing back into a Congressional environment similar to that of his first term, with the Senate under the control of Democrats and the House under the control of Republicans, whose leaders have hinted that they will be no less likely to challenge him than they were during the last four years.
The state-by-state pursuit of 270 electoral votes was being closely tracked by both campaigns, with Mr. Romney winning North Carolina and Indiana, which Mr. Obama carried four years ago. But Mr. Obama won Michigan, the state where Mr. Romney was born, and Minnesota, a pair of states that Republican groups had spent millions trying to make competitive.
Americans delivered a final judgment on a long and bitter campaign that drew so many people to the polls that several key states extended voting for hours. In Virginia and Florida, long lines stretched from polling places, with the Obama campaign sending text messages to supporters in those areas, saying: “You can still vote.”
Neither party could predict how the outcome would affect the direction of the Republican Party. Moderates were hopeful it would lead the rank and file to realize that the party’s grass-roots conservatism that Mr. Romney pledged himself to during the primaries doomed him in the general election.
Tea Party adherents have indicated that they will argue that he was damaged because of his move to middle ground during the general election.
The results were more a matter of voters giving Mr. Obama more time than a second chance. Through most of the year slight majorities of voters had told pollsters that they believed his policies would improve the economy if they could stay in place into the future.
Mr. Obama’s campaign team built its coalition the hard way, through intensive efforts to find and motivate supporters who had lost the ardor of four years ago and, Mr. Obama’s strategists feared, might not find their way to polls if left to their own devices.
Up against real enthusiasm for Mr. Romney — or, just as important, against Mr. Obama — among Republicans and many independents, their strategy of spending vast sums of money on their get-out-the-vote operation seemed vindicated on Tuesday.
As opinion surveys that followed the first debate between Mr. Romney and Mr. Obama showed a tightening race, Mr. Obama’s team had insisted that its coalition was coming together as it hoped it would. In the end, it was not a bluff.
Even with Mr. Obama pulling off a new sweep of the highly-contested battlegrounds from Nevada to New Hampshire, the result in each of the states was very narrow. The Romney campaign was taking its time early Wednesday to review the outcome and searching for any irregularities.
The top issue on the minds of voters was the economy, according to interviews, with three-quarters saying that economic conditions were not good or poor. But only 3 in 10 said things were getting worse and 4 in 10 said the economy was improving.
Mr. Romney, who campaigned aggressively on his ability to turn around the deepest economic downturn since the Great Depression, was given a narrow edge when voters were asked which candidate was better equipped to handle the economy, the interviews found.
The electorate was split along partisan lines over a question that has driven much of the campaign debate, whether it was Mr. Obama or his predecessor, former President George W. Bush, who bore the most responsibility for the nation’s continued economic challenges. But about 4 in 10 of independent voters said that Mr. Bush should be held responsible.
The president built a muscular campaign organization and used a strong financial advantage to hold off an array of forces that opposed his candidacy. The margin of his victory was smaller than in 2008 — the winner of the popular vote was still in doubt early Wednesday – but a strategic firewall in several battleground states protected his Electoral College majority.
As Mr. Romney gained steam and stature in the final weeks of the campaign, one thing perhaps above all others that the Obama campaign put its hopes in: that the rebound in the auto industry after the president’s bailout package of 2009 would give him the winning edge in Ohio, a linchpin of his road to re-election.
Early interviews with voters showed that just over half of Ohio voters approved of the bailout, a result that was balanced by a less encouraging sign for the president: Some 4 in 10 said they or someone in their household had lost a job over the last four years.
The strong early-voting program was central to Mr. Obama’s performance in Ohio. He was narrowly leading Mr. Romney in Hamilton County, home to Cincinnati, but only because of the amount of votes he banked in the month leading up to Election Day.
Four years after Mr. Obama drew broad support across so many categories of voters, the national electorate appeared to have withdrawn to its more familiar, demographic borders, according to exit polls conducted by Edison Research. Mr. Obama’s coalition included disproportionate support from blacks, Hispanics, women, those under 30, those in unions, gays and Jews, though his support among Jews appeared to have diminished some.
Mr. Romney’s coalition included disproportionate support from whites, men, older people, high-income voters, evangelicals, those from suburban and rural counties, and those who call themselves adherents of the Tea Party — a group that had resisted him through the primaries but had fully embraced him by Election Day.
The Republican Party seemed destined for a new round of self-reflection over how it approaches Hispanics going forward, a fast-growing portion of the voting population that senior party strategists had sought to woo before a strain of intense anti-illegal immigration activism took hold within the Republican grassroots.
It was the first presidential election since the 2010 Supreme Court decision loosening restrictions on political spending, and the first in which both majorparty candidates opted out of the campaign matching system that imposes spending limits in return for federal financing. And the overall cost of the campaign rose accordingly, with all candidates for federal office, their parties and their supportive “super PACs” spending more than $6 billion combined.
The results Tuesday were certain to be parsed for days to determine just what effect the spending had, and who would be more irate at the answer — the donors who spent literally millions of dollars of their own money for a certain outcome, or those who found a barrage of negative advertising to be major factors in their defeats.
While the campaign often seemed small and petty, with Mr. Romney and Mr. Obama intensely quarreling and bickering, the contest was actually rooted in big and consequential decisions, with the role of the federal government squarely at the center of the debate.
Though Mr. Obama’s health care law galvanized his most ardent opposition, and continually drew low ratings in polls as a whole, interviews with voters found that nearly half wanted to see it kept intact or expanded, a quarter of wanted to see it repealed entirely and another quarter said they wanted portions of it repealed.
In Chicago, as crowds waited for Mr. Obama to deliver his speech, his supporters erupted into a roar of relief and elation. Car horns honked from the street as people chanted the president’s name.
“I feel like it’s a repudiation of everything the Republicans said in the campaign,” said Jasmyne Walker, 31, who jumped up and down on the edge of a stone planter in a downtown plaza. “Everybody said that if he lost it would be buyer’s remorse—that we were high on hope in 2008. This says we’re on the right track. I feel like this confirms that.”

source:New York Times