To read Rice’s Bridge To Peace by David Ignatius one must conclude that to Dr. Rice (and Ignatius by the approving tone of his column) that Israeli security is negotiable. Well it’s worse than that, it’s not a factor.
The bridging process has been evident over the past month as the two sides sought to marry the security guarantees promised in the existing “road map” with the Annapolis document and its “political horizon.” The hang-up was that, under the road map, the Israelis demanded security measures as a condition for further movement. To break the logjam, Rice’s team drafted compromise language that would allow the United States to act as arbiter of whether the road map’s security conditions are being met.
The United States as arbiter? The United States may be Israel’s ally, but their interests, at times, diverge. So since the United States has determined (against all evidence and reason) that a Palestinian state is in its interests, it will play down Palestinian support for terror in order to keep the process “alive.” The near the end we read
To bring a measure of international support, it’s possible that the Annapolis statement of Israeli-Palestinian support for a two-state solution would be incorporated into a new U.N. Security Council resolution. Arabs also hope that the Annapolis declaration will include confidence-building steps, such as a moratorium on Israeli settlements, easing of West Bank checkpoints and release of Palestinian prisoners.
Where are the Palestinian confidence building measures? Say acknowledging Israel’s right to exist or stopping support of terror groups? Those aren’t really confidence building measures, but as long as the Palestinians have benchmarks of performance and no obligations, this part of the peace process will be a sham (as it’s always been).
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
The “bridging process” apparently consists of telling Israelis to jump off of one.
The feedback this system generates is stupefying. By insisting Israel appease the Arab side with concessions at no cost, it encourages their intransigence.
For its part, Israel prefers not to jeopardize what little pro forma international support it has, and rejects a muscular response to outright terrorism.
Eventually, the Arabs will again interpret all this to mean the time is right to eliminate Israel, and they will launch another losing war.
This war will make their people more miserable and Israel more vulnerable diplomatically.
And this, the Arabs will interpret as “victory”.
May God defend the right.
Gary – :-) (actually :-( might be more appropriate.)
Ed – exactly right. Those do-gooders who think they’re helping the peace process along by advocating for the Palestinians are only encouraging their intransigence.