"The Arab-Israeli conflict has bedeviled every U.S. president for more than a half-century. President George W. Bush now has an opportunity to bring it to an end. This is in the interests of Israel, the Palestinians, and everyone in the Middle East who prefers peace to war. From the perspective of the United States, it has become a strategic imperative."
So writes Robert E Hunter, former US Ambasssdor to Nato, in a piece in the IHT. As Hunter also writes:
"Then came 9/11 and the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Like it or not, since then America has found that it again has a strategic need to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. The demands placed on the United States were underscored by the recent fighting in Lebanon - Israel's first failure in war to achieve its political objectives, compounded by what seemed worldwide to be the inexplicable unwillingness of America to call a timely halt to the combat."
This is a measured and seemingly carefully considered piece here. It certainly makes out a compelling argument for the Bush Administration to seize an opportunity to restore at least a semblence of peace in the Middle East.
So writes Robert E Hunter, former US Ambasssdor to Nato, in a piece in the IHT. As Hunter also writes:
"Then came 9/11 and the U.S. invasion of Iraq. Like it or not, since then America has found that it again has a strategic need to resolve the Arab-Israeli conflict. The demands placed on the United States were underscored by the recent fighting in Lebanon - Israel's first failure in war to achieve its political objectives, compounded by what seemed worldwide to be the inexplicable unwillingness of America to call a timely halt to the combat."
This is a measured and seemingly carefully considered piece here. It certainly makes out a compelling argument for the Bush Administration to seize an opportunity to restore at least a semblence of peace in the Middle East.
Comments