Israel Matzav

A waste, but whose waste?

Roger Cohen calls the last year a waste in the Middle East 'peace process' and that is likely a correct description. But rather than look at why the last year was a waste, Roger directs his venom at Israel - and only at Israel - rather than impartially analyzing what went wrong. Perhaps, I can fill in the gaps (Hat Tip: Soccer Dad).

There is no alternative to resolving this most agonizing of conflicts but neither party ever quite gets to that realization.

Maybe that's because neither party sees the conflict as being capable of resolution at present, and therefore each in its own way has decided to postpone the resolution to a more opportune moment.

After 63 years the balance of power is overwhelmingly skewed in Israel’s favor and the one country that might redress that balance — the United States — is unwilling to because its politics allow no room for that.

How is the balance of power so 'overwhelmingly skewed' in Israels' favor? It's Israel that has all-but-been-placed in a diplomatic isolation ward. And it is Israel that is running around like a chicken with its head cut off trying to avoid a situation where - God forbid - Barack Hussein Obama will have to take its side in September or it will face the possibility of international sanctions and opprobrium. Sure, Israel holds a military advantage, but it's one that it is reluctant to use and one that Israel has earned at the cost of hundreds of lives and thousands of hours of work plundered from its economy.

Obama had one of his worst moments last September when he brought the Israeli and Palestinian leaders to the White House to announce renewed talks, only for them to unravel as Israel refused to extend a moratorium on settlement expansion.

I've emphasized the key words here. Cohen acts as if Israel made the talks fail because it refused to extend the moratorium. But the moratorium was a free gift to the 'Palestinians,' and for the first nine of its ten months, they refused to come to the table. Then, they came to the table only to seek its extension. And when Israel finally did agree to extend it for another three months, the US decided that the price was too high and the 'Palestinians' decided that it wasn't good enough. So who wasted the moratorium? Surely not Israel. Israel was the one that created the opportunity. The 'Palestinians' wasted it by refusing to come to the table, and arguably they were egged on into doing so by President Obama's foolish insistence on freezing Israeli construction in Jerusalem, and by the 'Palestinians' belief that a President whose middle name is Hussein would be able to totally take their side, unfettered by the political realities of governing a democratic country whose voters overwhelmingly support Israel.

Fayyad’s state building in the West Bank — schools and roads and institutions and security forces — led the World Bank to declare last year that the Palestinian Authority was ready for a state “at any point in the near future.” But Fayyad never got recognition from Israel for his achievements: Terrorist violence is down 96 percent in the West Bank in the past five years.

The International Monetary Fund doesn't believe the 'Palestinians' are ready for a state. And the decline in terrorism is attributable to the IDF presence in the Arab cities in Judea and Samaria, and to a lesser extent to the 'security fence.' What 'recognition' did Fayyad want? A medal?

Israel snubbed a viable partner — criminal waste.

I don't believe that the 'Palestinian Authority' is a viable partner for peace, but only for continuing conflict. But we don't even need to go there. Israel did not snub the 'Palestinian Authority.' It tried continually to bring the 'Palestinian Authority' to the table with one small condition: NO PRECONDITIONS. But the 'Palestinian Authority' would not come to the table unless the outcome was guaranteed in advance to be favorable to them. Do you do business? When was the last time you negotiated a business deal where the outcome was promised to be favorable to the other side in advance?

Abbas also decided to sign a reconciliation agreement with Hamas that was not thought through. It has since proved stillborn because Hamas will not accept Abbas’s insistence that Fayyad remain as prime minister.

Cohen may want to consider why Hamas will not accept Fayyad as Prime Minister. It's not because he's a Fatah man and not a Hamas man. And Hamas' refusal to accept him speaks volumes about the conflict and why it cannot be resolved.

The Israeli insistence on up-front recognition from the Palestinians of Israel as a “Jewish state” is absurd — a powerful indication of growing Israeli insecurities, isolation and intolerance.

And what about the 'Palestinian' insistence that their 'state' be 'based upon' the '1967 borders' with 'agreed changes' (which are unlikely to ever be agreed)? Does that show 'insecurity, isolation and intolerance'? Or can we all admit that Cohen is employing a vicious double standard?

Palestinians are not going to elaborate on their recognition ahead of negotiations, while Netanyahu refuses to elaborate on what his vague formulation of “two states for two peoples” might actually mean.

Yeah, but here's the catch. Israel is willing to come to the table on that basis. The 'Palestinians' aren't. The mantra that Netanyahu has been repeating for the last two and a half years is 'no preconditions.' The 'Palestinians' won't come to the table on that basis.

Poor Roger. He wants peace on his terms so badly that he cannot understand why no one else does. What could go wrong?

Labels: Roger Cohen's obsession with Israel, Salam Fayyad, two-state solution

posted by Carl in Jerusalem @ 5:29 PM