I’m listening to Kerry’s 70 minute speech, his defense of a two-state solution for Israel/Palestine, explaining the US’s decision to abstain from the recent UN vote, both to Israel and to the upcoming US administration. It’s a legacy speech (how many times did you see Kerry give long speeches? I haven’t) but if nothing else, it’s an example of a classically well-written speech. I don’t expect we’ll hear those again for a long time to come. [not that I was a fan of them but considering that we won’t likely hear any for a while as we’ve moved into a world of tweet policy/response] I want to get one last listen.

I’m listening to Kerry’s 70 minute speech, his defense of a two-state solution for Israel/Palestine, explaining the US’s decision to abstain from the recent UN vote, both to Israel and to the upcoming US administration.

It’s a legacy speech (how many times did you see Kerry give long speeches? I haven’t) but if nothing else, it’s an example of a classically well-written speech. I don’t expect we’ll hear those again for a long time to come. [not that I was a fan of them but considering that we won’t likely hear any for a while as we’ve moved into a world of tweet policy/response] I want to get one last listen.

===

A strong reason for this speech does seem to be an attempt to shift eyes away from Aleppo. There’s no question that Kerry was working hard on Aleppo as he was in Israel, but I haven’t seen much clarity in Aleppo US justification but a two-state vs one-state Israel side-choosing -is- theoretically a defensible position, whether or not one agrees with it.

====

Still listening to it – so for some background, he’s primarily defending the Oslo Accords
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oslo_Accords

===

He’s throwing in some zingers in this speech. I just heard him basically say “Hey, Israel, if you pursue the one-state solution, how are you going to administer all of those Palestinian settlements without all the money we provide”? Yowzer.

—–

I don’t know if I agree or disagree with the _content_ of his speech, but it’s very well written, attempts to address all points in _some_ fashion, and tries to guide the listener in a particular direction at every turn.

===

I’m enjoying it, something I wouldn’t normally do, because I honestly don’t expect to ever hear a well-constructed speech for at least the next four years from anybody. So, it’s “one last hurrah” for this style of speech.

====

The speech pulls out every good speech writing trick in the book. The logical side brain is enjoying this.

Just now, he quotes from a NYT article written Dec 23rd.
He gives the quote and then after a brief pause says, “Now, my friends, this wasn’t written last week, December 23rd. It was written December 23rd, 1987″. Zing!

====

I don’t know what US policy will be in the future, but if you want to understand what it *was* from Kerry’s POV at least, this has it all.

===

Ah there we go. 55 minutes in, Saudi Arabia gets a mention. I was waiting.

===

 

Ooh, ouch, 65 minutes into it, right at the end, he speaks openly about US support of the Arab Peace Initiative. It took a long time to get there. I don’t know enough about the Arab peace initiative (which I *think* was put forth by Saudi Arabia) but when I hear criticisms of his speech that say, “He’s just cozying up to Saudi Arabia”, they’re not wrong.

Where do I stand? I honestly don’t know. In the general, I want peaceful co-existence Is this the way to get there? I don’t know that either. But if nothing else, I now have a better handle on US policy in this matter.

I *still* never got a clear answer about Aleppo though, which this might just be a smoke shift about. Eh, politics.

====

 

Leave a comment

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *


+ six = 7

Leave a Reply