I was surprised by two opinion pieces over the weekend. One was by Thomas Friedman, After Cairo, it’ Clinton Time. I assumed that Friedman was going to write how Secretary of State Clinton now had to pressure Israel. In fact the focus of the essay was how Secretary Clinton’s main job was assuring democracy in Iraq. More surprising was what Friedman wrote about Israel and the Palestinians.
No, not that peace process — not the one between Israelis and Palestinians. That one’s probably beyond diplomacy.
And the Washington Post in an editorial The Settlement Rift:
The problem is that no Israeli government — not Mr. Netanyahu’s, not even one led by the current opposition — is likely to agree to a total construction ban. By insisting on one, the administration risks bogging itself down in a major dispute with its ally, while giving Arab governments and Palestinians a ready excuse not to make their own concessions. Meanwhile, the practical need for a total settlement freeze is debatable. Palestinian negotiators have already conceded that many of the towns will be annexed to Israel in any final deal; so did former presidents Bill Clinton and George W. Bush.
While I don’t agree with all aspects of the editorial, it’s clear that the Post’s editors are critical of the administration’s efforts to pick a diplomatic fight with Israel. But that stance along with Friedman’s acknowledgement that diplomacy might not work between Israel and the Palestinians, makes me wonder if Abbas’s performance in Washngton has made people realize that the problems in the Middle East are not the fault of Israel.
Crossposted on Soccer Dad.
