The Annapolis Fiasco -Brett Stevens
"Annapolis" was conceived earlier this year by the Bush administration as a landmark conference... [T]he operative theory is that Israel's neighbors, fearful of Iran's growing regional clout, have a newfound interest in putting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to rest.
On the contrary, [Israelis believe] that such a [Palestinian] state would become yet another finger of the Islamic Revolution...
(Wall Street Journal)
"Annapolis" was conceived earlier this year by the Bush administration as a landmark conference... [T]he operative theory is that Israel's neighbors, fearful of Iran's growing regional clout, have a newfound interest in putting the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to rest.
On the contrary, [Israelis believe] that such a [Palestinian] state would become yet another finger of the Islamic Revolution...
(Wall Street Journal)
Unpopular Child -Hillel Halkin
The Annapolis conference represents the kind of mistaken thinking that has characterized every American or international attempt to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since the 1991 Madrid Conference: Namely, the belief that there is something in the world of diplomacy called "process" that has an intrinsically positive momentum of its own capable of overcoming deep disagreements on substance between two sides to a dispute.
This is nonsense. There is nothing intrinsically positive about any diplomatic process. Such processes work when potential points of agreement already exist and can be focused on. When they don't exist, all the processes in the world can't conjure them up.
(New York Sun)
The Annapolis conference represents the kind of mistaken thinking that has characterized every American or international attempt to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict since the 1991 Madrid Conference: Namely, the belief that there is something in the world of diplomacy called "process" that has an intrinsically positive momentum of its own capable of overcoming deep disagreements on substance between two sides to a dispute.
This is nonsense. There is nothing intrinsically positive about any diplomatic process. Such processes work when potential points of agreement already exist and can be focused on. When they don't exist, all the processes in the world can't conjure them up.
(New York Sun)
1 comment:
Bush is desperate to accomplish something positive in the middle east, and in the blind faith that only a religion can foster, in this case the religion of "negative is positive" proseltized by the Republicans, he thinks fear mongering of Iran, probably a worthy thing, is the way. He forgets that everyone at these summits understands that he, W. Bush, empowered Iran, and emboldened the terrorists, and recruits for them, by invading a sovereign Muslim nation, and then murdering and torturing the populace until they poll that "things were better under Saddam". If the entire world were as blind as Bush, he might get somewhere.
Post a Comment