Thoughts on the Middle East summit
Hey, the figurehead president (Bush) and I agree on something. I'm cautiously optimistic too about the Middle Eastern nations' summit the US is sponsoring. I am cautiously optimistic because these nations' leaders know how incompetent and craven this administration is, so maybe they are thinking to themselves, "You know, we might as well do this peace talking ourselves. The US leadership is sooooo pathetic these days." Really. I am cautiously optimistic about this, and wish these nations' leaders would take some chances for peaceful overtures to each other. They might be happily surprised at the answers.
Yossi Beilin agrees with me, and not for the first time.
Yossi would likely laugh at this statement from Hamas (i.e. that Abbas is a traitor and that Hamas will not abide by any peace agreement), and say this shows how the majority of Hamas' leadership is deathly afraid of peace above all else.
Olmert is also so low in the polls in Israel, and so much a lame duck, that he now has nothing to lose by trying to create a peace settlement with Abbas and maybe somebody from Hamas, eventually. I see it this way: When oppression and war fails, you might as well try peace.
Yes, I am cautiously optimistic about this summit. More than I've been in a long time. Let's hope Bush stays on the side lines and lets Condi walk through this--and let the Middle Eastern nation leaders take the initiative themselves.
ADDENDUM AND UPDATE: My, my, aren't Hamas and the current leader of Iran a nervous bunch? They make threats because they are afraid a peace agreement might occur, and that worse for them, people in the streets in Gaza and the West Bank, as well as in Israel, will rejoice. I'm at work and I couldn't link, but I couldn't resist this one!
MUCH LATER IN THE EVENING: Okay, now I'm home and here is a link about Iran and Hamas blasting the peace conference.
(Edited)
posted by Mitchell J. Freedman @ 9:07 PM
2 comments
2 Comments:
Mitch, I wish I could share your optimism.
In my opinion, the chance for a peaceful solution died with Rabin.
Since then, the West & Israel focussed their attention on demonizing & marginalizing Arafat (Fatah) - with disastrous consequences.
Just like invading Iraq radicalized potential Al Queda recruits, isolating Arafat showed Palestinians that they would never have legitimate political power.
I am so tired of hearing that Arafat was corrupt - I can think of many leaders who were (are) much worse.
He was attacked by both sides - Israel & Hamas. Also, he was clearly committed to the establishment of a Palestinian state in peaceful co-existence with Israel.
Isn't that the US position?
Every time Israel killed or weakened his security forces - then blamed him for not stopping suicide bombers - I could only shake my head.
He was the last best hope for a Palestinian state - I see only suffering ahead.
Sorry to be such a downer - I truly hope I am wrong.
Paul,
It's not that you're wrong or that I'm wrong. I just figured why not say something positive about something that hasn't happened yet, which was then the start of a peace conference? I also think there is a sense among Olmert and Abbas that they've tried war and violence, and maybe they are both weary and tired enough of fighting that peace sounded like a decent idea to try.
And really, the leaders of most of the nations who showed up, such as Syria, Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Lebanon are fairly tired of war and violence too.
Also, the vehemence in which Hamas and Iran denounced the conference indicated to me at least that they were afraid something positive might actually happen.
Still...so many previous opportunities have been missed, haven't they?
Post a Comment
<< Home