Obama and the Israeli and Palestinian Prime Ministers are to meet in New York today - where they are all attending a UN meeting. From the pronouncements being made, the meeting will be no more than a photo-op.
Stephen Walt, professor of international relations at Harvard and co-author of the best-selling book The Israel Lobby, writing in The Washington Post, has some sobering observations in an op-ed piece "Settling for Failure in the Middle East" about where things are at in the Middle East:
"Like so many of his predecessors, President Obama is quickly discovering that persuading Israel to change course is nearly impossible.
Obama came to office determined to achieve a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians. His opening move was to insist that Israel stop building settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem -- a tough line aimed at bolstering Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and persuading key Arab states to make conciliatory gestures toward Israel. These steps would pave the way for the creation of a viable Palestinian state and the normalization of Israel's relations with its Arab neighbors, and also help rebuild America's image in the Arab and Muslim world.
Unfortunately, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has no interest in a two-state solution, much less ending settlement expansion. He and his government want a "greater Israel," which means maintaining effective control of the West Bank and Gaza. His response to Obama's initiative has ranged from foot-dragging to outright defiance, with little pushback from Washington.
This situation is a tragedy in the making between peoples who have known more than their share. Unless Obama summons the will and skill to break the logjam, a two-state solution will become impossible and those who yearn for peace will be even worse off than before."
And:
"Obama said in Cairo that a two-state solution is "in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest and the world's interest." He's right, but it's not the rest of the world that needs to get behind this vision. It is the Israelis who have to be convinced, and that will take sustained U.S. pressure. To succeed, Obama must use his bully pulpit to explain to the American people that the two-state solution is by far the best outcome for Israel and that time is running out. If he does not get that message across, he will become the latest in a long line of U.S. presidents who tried to end this conflict -- and failed".
One might have thought that the op-ed piece is moderate and more than sensible in what it articulates. Not according to Zionist zealot Jeffrey Goldberg, writing in The Atlantic:
"J Street would be better off with Osama Bin Laden's endorsement than it would with Stephen Walt's. As best as I can tell, the bulk of J Street's backers are people who ardently support the creation of a Palestinian state and don't very much like Benjamin Netanyahu, but they are also people who don't like grubby Jew-baiters like Stephen Walt. I'm curious to see what Jeremy Ben-Ami, the head of J Street, has to say about this."
Stephen Walt, professor of international relations at Harvard and co-author of the best-selling book The Israel Lobby, writing in The Washington Post, has some sobering observations in an op-ed piece "Settling for Failure in the Middle East" about where things are at in the Middle East:
"Like so many of his predecessors, President Obama is quickly discovering that persuading Israel to change course is nearly impossible.
Obama came to office determined to achieve a two-state solution between Israelis and Palestinians. His opening move was to insist that Israel stop building settlements in the West Bank and East Jerusalem -- a tough line aimed at bolstering Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas and persuading key Arab states to make conciliatory gestures toward Israel. These steps would pave the way for the creation of a viable Palestinian state and the normalization of Israel's relations with its Arab neighbors, and also help rebuild America's image in the Arab and Muslim world.
Unfortunately, Israeli Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu has no interest in a two-state solution, much less ending settlement expansion. He and his government want a "greater Israel," which means maintaining effective control of the West Bank and Gaza. His response to Obama's initiative has ranged from foot-dragging to outright defiance, with little pushback from Washington.
This situation is a tragedy in the making between peoples who have known more than their share. Unless Obama summons the will and skill to break the logjam, a two-state solution will become impossible and those who yearn for peace will be even worse off than before."
And:
"Obama said in Cairo that a two-state solution is "in Israel's interest, Palestine's interest, America's interest and the world's interest." He's right, but it's not the rest of the world that needs to get behind this vision. It is the Israelis who have to be convinced, and that will take sustained U.S. pressure. To succeed, Obama must use his bully pulpit to explain to the American people that the two-state solution is by far the best outcome for Israel and that time is running out. If he does not get that message across, he will become the latest in a long line of U.S. presidents who tried to end this conflict -- and failed".
One might have thought that the op-ed piece is moderate and more than sensible in what it articulates. Not according to Zionist zealot Jeffrey Goldberg, writing in The Atlantic:
"J Street would be better off with Osama Bin Laden's endorsement than it would with Stephen Walt's. As best as I can tell, the bulk of J Street's backers are people who ardently support the creation of a Palestinian state and don't very much like Benjamin Netanyahu, but they are also people who don't like grubby Jew-baiters like Stephen Walt. I'm curious to see what Jeremy Ben-Ami, the head of J Street, has to say about this."
Comments