he envision between Israel and the Arab states?
.
The reality is that even "successful" negotiations have not led to what people describe as "normalized relations" either at the state level or more importantly the people level.
.
Indeed, Egyptians both the populace at large and the elites cling to an ideology where Israel is still considered the enemy, more than 30 years after the first Camp David accords. In fact, outside of the ruling party, all oppositions have outright rejected the peace treaty with Israel and have a desire to see it scrapped. Such a vision can be seen in the former IAEA President, Mohammed el Baridai's comments voicing support for continued terrorist attacks on Israelis. And he's considered a voice of moderation
.
So too in Jordan, where its current Monarch, King Abdullah, voices shrill comments about Israeli actions at the Temple Mount/ Haram al Sharif complex.
.
Looking ahead, Syria's Bashir al-Assad has pointed out that even if Israel hands all of the Golan Heights to Syria, he will not enter into 'normal' relations, and rejects any abandonment of Iran or its proxy army, Hizballah, in Lebanon.
.
In light of the recent past 'successes', what is a future peace supposed to look like? The question arises because even if Israel does somehow reach an accord with the Palestinians, they will still be viewed as outsiders, non Arab, aliens, especially given the social conditioning advanced in the Arab world over the previous 150 years.
.
Given this dim outlook, how does one convince Israelis that giving up territory for a suspect peace, is in their interests.

The Thief has to return the stolen property only then the Thief can be admitted into the neighbouring civilisation.

Can you name who is the Thief?

Hint: The Thief has stolen land, water and the lives of countless unarmed, men, women and children for 60+ years.

No amount of apologia for Israel is helping Israel's cause. Return the stolen lands, make full apology, stop acting like a bully, start acting like a neighbour and in due time the Jews will be welcome.

But at the current rate: It's about 100 years away.

Unless the parties directly involved have something at stake, peace in the middle east is an illusion, not likely to be achieved through the investment of US diplomacy. Numerous US presidents have invested heavily in trying to achieve a peace only to be left standing outside in the cold.

Perhaps it is time to change course - withdraw our diplomats and our prestige from the arena and let the chips fall. Israel can maintain its own security only through a massive military and security apparatus, so long as its political leaders insist on stubbornly pushing ahead with policies that ignore the Palestinian problem at their doorstep while antagonizing their neighbors. Meanwhile the clock is ticking on the demographic catastrophe that awaits the Israelis down the road, when they find themselves walled in by the segregated state they have created and the unstoppable growth of a Palestinian people who have been inreasingly frustrated at being denied the state they have been told they deserve.

Arab leaders in the region will continue to achieve nothing for the Palestinians, while risking further military embarrasment and humiliation, so long as they refuse to recognize the reality that there is an Israel and it is not going to go away. At the same time, their own populations will become more radical, threatening the position of any rational leadership in the region.

Thirty, fourty, fifty years of trying have lead to little in the way of progress, and a continuing loss of face for the US. Maybe it is time to let them work it out without our help. We can only hope they decide that their own stakes are high enough to warrant a solution,

It's true. The abandonment of virtually every Jewish ethic by the sharp-suited ex-generals who bask - or used to bask - in the unreality of AIPAC supporters' adulation, is the saddest aspect of this manifestation of Israeli hubris.

A homeland for Jews with virtually no trace of Judaism.

A synagogue with no Ark; a mezuzzah with no scroll and a people with no moral compass.

It seems pretty sanctimonious to accuse the entire Israeli nation of having "no moral compass." I'm not sure whether the writer believes this is so because of the occupation or because he perceives it as having "no trace of Judaism." It's not clear to me why meeting the author's test of Judaism is a sine qua non for existence. While I certainly don't condone many of Israel's actions and believe that it's policies have been largely self-defeating, I wonder about the propriety of condemning an entire nation because one disagrees with is policies.

As for being a "thief," perhaps one might consider that refraining from shooting rockets into Israel might bring a more favorable reaction.

This is why the one state solution is the only solution.

Mr Miller says, "America is Israel's best friend and must continue to be." I have to ask, Why? What does friendship with Israel bring us? Some have posted here about the brilliance of Mossad and all that useful intell they supposedly give us, you know like the details on Saddam's WMD. Seems to me Israel spies on us as much as it gives us intelligence (see Pollard, Franklin inter alia). OK, so we support them because they share our democratic ideals? What, like apartheid, collective punishment, targeted assassinations, colonial seizures of land, killing American girls with bulldozers, refusal to join the NPT, imposition of religious and ethnic tests for citizenship etc...? That said, I agree with Mr Miller: time to back off, let the Israelis stew in their own juice. We'll see how happy they are to give the US the back of their hand 20 years from now when the reality of Palestinian demographics will be overwhelming them. In the meantime let's wean ourselves off the carbon-based economic model that not only is killing the planet but undermining our security and forcing us to police that misbegotten region of the world.

First Dennis Ross; then Robert Satloff; then Aaron David Miller. (And Foreign Policy seems to be giving an ample platform for the pro-Netanyahu and anti-Obama views of this "neoliberal" contingent.)

Bottom line: Miller is now running interference for Likud's settlements program and trying to obstruct the Obama administration from exerting pressure on the most right-ring regime in Israeli history. So: was Miller a neoconservative operative all along, pretending to support the Mideast peace process, or is he a recent convert to the camp of neocon true believers? There is an appearance of a double game being played here.

It is fascinating that Miller, in a heavy-handed, sophistical, specious and absurd way, is using fundamentalist religious imagery to ridicule the pro-peace faction in the American government that would be more appropriately applied to the messianic extremists (both Jewish and Christian) who are driving and supporting the settlements movement.

Perhaps the American government needs to clean house and rebuild its Mideast negotiating team from the ground up, with a single-minded pragmatic focus on the American interest in the region. Those who can't focus like a laser beam on the American interest, for emotional, cultural or ideological reasons, should find another line of work.

Binyamin Netanyahu is the leader of the right-wing, fundamentalist party known as LIKUD. The party agenda is for a 'Greater Israel' that would entail the 'transfer' of all Muslims and Christians out of Israel/Palestine into adjoining territories.

Netanyahu himself is, as are all Israeli politicians, and ex soldier. His elder brother was killed, together with one female airline passenger in a raid on Entebbe Airport, Uganda, over 40 years ago.

Likud and its current leader - former incumbent was Ariel Sharon, he of the infamous Sabra and Shatila massacre - need to maintain the status quo in which they remain as the illegal occupier of land and continues to 'put facts on the ground' i.e. illegal settlements, in the hope that these moves will form the basis of a new, expanded Israeli state that the UN will have no option but to accept.

Netanyahu was educated in the US and has many powerful allies within AIPAC. However, there is a consensus that Netanyahu is an ineffectual leader with a short 'sell by date'..

Pushing the peace process is exactly the right move for the US. This, of course, should not be confused with succeeding.

The chance of peace in Palestine is exactly 0.
1. The powerful (Israel) does not want peace.
2. It is politically impossible (domestically) for the US to stop supporting Israel, much less using some kind of force against them.
3. European governments won't go against the US (willingly).

So given this what should the US position be? "We support the continued incremental ethnic cleansing of Palestine"? Of course not. Stating reality would be expensive. The existing rift with Europe would widen even further. Eventually European governments might even be forced in to a corner by their own "we must never forget"-rhetoric (ironically about the Jews) and have to do something.

However, as long as U.S. continues to push the peace process, European governments and the EU can continue to use it as a smoke screen against its' citizens. Nothing needs to be done... Go to sleep... Negotiations is ongoing...

So, my conclusion is that what is done really serves US interests. Of course the Arabs aren't fooled, but this does not matter as long as they are weak and continues to be ruled by corrupt president-kings.

Zero out support for Israel and see how quickly we gets us some peace.

Not peace:

http://mideast.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/04/13/israels_latest_population_transfer_scheme
REPLY

I take great exception with the title of this article.

To write such a biased, anti-Obama article and to put the words *False Religion* in the title is an attempt at dog whistle politics. It's a subtle message meant to rile up Evangelical and other Zionist leaning Christians, helping to perpetuate the message that Obama is the *false prophet*.

To underscore his coded message, the author states that Obama, the *King of the World* is in no mood to let the *King of Israel* frustrate his plans on Middle East peace. The only time I've ever heard of a reference to THE *King of Israel* is when it's been about Jesus Christ.

Words are important. They can inspire, motivate, and lead people to positive action. They can also breed hate, fear and dangerous actions, as we witnessed with Radio Rwanda. We have enough anger and hate in this world, we do not need to add fanatical fuel to the fire.

I hope that Aaron David Miller, as an intellectual, is not providing the linguistic foundation for the irrational thoughts and actions of those who indeed believe Obama is the false prophet.

God helps us all if he is.

From the lead journal of neoconservatism, Commentary:

BEGIN ARTICLE
AUTHOR Jennifer Rubin
TITLE Stop Worshipping the False “Peace Process” Religion
PUBLICATION Contentions
DATE April 19, 2010
URL http://www.commentarymagazine.com/blogs/index.php/rubin/280431
END ARTICLE

Great Article, it illuminates many of the points that I and many other Americans have been thinking over the past 15 months. I think Obama's strategy for Israel/Palestine is a headless monster that will pay no dividends. I seriously dislike Israel, but even I know that being tough on Netanyahu for the sake of it is silly. Obama should focus on reuniting Hamas and Fatah more than the settlements for sure.

Do I like seeing Israel squirm? A little, but the end result should be the improvement of the lives of the Palestinians. It seems that the pols (as usual) have forgotten what they should really be trying to accomplish.

Is there a single comment here that has abandoned the assumption of Israeli-Palestinian peace as a core foreign policy issue? Regardless of your feelings on the conflict. the whole point of the article is that the Arab-Israeli status quo, problematic as it is, has been superseded in terms of importance even in the Middle East by other issues?
The problem is, as Americans, we see all Muslims and Arabs as one body politic with the same concerns. Saudis are as a whole much more concerned about the presence of US troops in sacred Islamic ground than support for Israel, whether or not they would admit it. Egyptians are concerned that we've been propping up a dictator in their country for 30 years. Iranians still resent our support of the Shah (and overthrow of Mossadegh) and our opposition to their nuclear program. And we've been supporting a corrupt regime in Pakistan that barely even has control over its own country. And our covert operations in Yemen are probably going to cause more problems for us down the road. All this does not even mention the Iraq and Afghanistan wars.
This very site shows disproportionate attention to the Israel-Palestine issue, because they know the strong feelings involved will generate more traffic. But general interest and realistic policy concerns have diverged.

Any fool that looks at Jihadist propaganda, Al-Jazeerah, or Mid East opinion polls will see that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is issue number one for most Arabs and even for many non-Arab Muslims. Whether we are trying to convince young Muslim men that the US is not at war with Islam or building an anti-Iran coalition from among Arab states, we are going to have to address the Israeli-Palestinian issue and the only effective way to do that is through the peace process.

Yes we are likely to fail in the short term which is why the US needs to come up with alternative measures of progress, such as decreasing the number checkpoints in the West Bank or settlement building freezes or more containers to Gaza. And most likely in the long-term we will succeed since most conflicts do not continue on forever. But whether we succeed or not, the US needs to be seen making those efforts. Even the Bush administration towards the end understood this and every administration after Obama will likely reach the same conclusion.

Aaron David Miller might be honestly committed to peace and just be throwing up his hands in disgust, but his conclusions are suspiciously similar to what you hear from many neo-conservatives and Likudniks: peace is not possible with the Arabs so let Israel retrench in the West Bank and maybe even reoccupy Gaza and continue with its policies forever. That might be ok with a majority of Americans now but I suspect it won't be in the future and support for Israel will become more and more confined to the Republican party. Even if America maintains its support for Israel, it is clear it is losing it elsewhere - Europe and Turkey and South America. That is not good for Israel, the US, or the region.

I thought the Northern Irish problem was completely intractable, and it was.

What ultimately led to its resolution was the passage of time and the growing conviction among the grass roots supporters of the key representatives, that they could no longer bear the cost in blood and waste that the confilct demanded.

No new arguments were advanced, no (exception for Clinton) bright personalities became involved. The miserable, careless, selfish, shambolic "leaders" on both sides were finally moved by the disgust of all the people around them.

Could this apply to the Middle East Israel conflict ?

No Because

1. Whilst many Arab govts (Iran, hitherto Iraq, Palestine (Hamas) etc want Israel "wiped off the face of the earth", then the Israeli people are going to prefer the status quo, even with a stonewalling idiot like Netanyahu, to being wiped off the face of the earth.

2. The Arab people demand a popular focus of hatred to justify their position which they feel to be inferior. I would like to be wrong about this, but I think it is true.

In Birmingham in the UK, some muslims danced in the streets after 9/11 as they felt it was a vicarious achievement. Like a national sporting victory, It gave them feelings of enhanced self worth and achievement.

Bearing in mind that very few Arabs outside Palestine, are seriously threatened by Israel, and that their leaders generally find it useful to keep their minds focused on non domestic issues, then what is in it for them, either ?

Nothing

Conclusion

I cant imagine the Palestinian or Israeli people ever having the courage to tell their leaders - "Enough !" like the Northern Irish and the South Africans.

If they prefer to live in conflict than to live in peace, what right do we have to deny them. They both have democratically elected governments and have democratically preferred to continue their shabby conflict.

Who are we to tell 'em what to do ?

Zero out US funding of the war criminal IDF and we shall soon have peace.

Words, plans, ultimatums don't talk like $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ do.

Life in the settlements -- 60 Minutes

CBS News' 60 minutes:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4752349n

Summation:

Anyone who believes that a US administration can single handedly lay the quite blanket of peace in the Middle East is a fool. Peace takes two sides and at this time neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis find merit in returning to the negotiating table.

The idea that the Israeli-Palestinian issue is (or should be) America's greatest concern is wrong especially when sized up with Iraq and Afghanistan neither of which can even touch the importance of America's economy. and other domestic issues. Goldman Sachs is bigger news than Iraq, Afghanistan, and Israel combined.

As far as US aid is concerned in 2004 Israel received 2.62 billion dollars compared with the +18.44 billion to Iraq, 1.87 billion to Egypt, and 1.77 billion to Afghanistan. (http://fpc.state.gov/documents/organization/31987.pdf) In 1994 the Middle East received nearly 60% of all US foreign aid, in 2004 the region received less than 40%. In fact if you read on as a percentage of GDP, US foreign aid has dropped to an average of below .2% (that's 1/5 of 1 percent, remaining near the all time low).

Just looking at numbers may be fine for some, but most values cannot be quantified with a simple $ sign. Even if you did, even if you thought that $ is all there is, then look no further than our banking system as to why America is where it is. Goldman Sachs dropped $10 billion in value on Friday when the SEC announced it was pursuing its investigation into widespread fraud even further...that's nearly 5x the amount of foreign aid invested in Israel in 2004, lost in less than a day.

In 1981 Israel destroyed the Osirak nuclear reactor in Iraq and the same naysayers had warned Israel before handnot to attack stating that a "catastrophic regional war would ensue that would consume the entire Middle East." Nothing happened. Iraq did not launch any counterattacks and there was no war.

In 2007 the Bush administration warned Israel not to attack the nuclear reactor being built by Syria with help from North Korea and the same "region wide war and conflagration" words were uttered. Israel destroyed the reactor and there was no regional war and there was no attack by Syria.

Israel arose from the ashes of the Holocaust when six million Jews, of whom one million were children, were murdered. Israel has learned to depend on its own people, not the false promises of others, to defend itself. It is the only country in the Middle East that never asked for one American soldier to defend it, despite the fact that it is the size of the State of New Jersey and has a population of only seven million people while the enemies who surround it have more than one hundred million people.

Iran's leaders have repeatedly denied the Holocaust ever happened, and have repeatedly threatened to wipe Israel off the map. They armed Hezbollah with missiles, of which more than six thousand fell on Israeli cities in the summer of 2006. Iran bombed and destroyed the Israeli embassy and Jewish cultural center in Argentina, arms and trains all the Palestinian terrorist groups that deny Israel's existence, and on a daily basis calls for the destruction of the State of Israel. The thousands of rockets Hamas fired in 2008 on Israeli cities, schools, hospitals, and homes all came from Iran and Iran has since sent Hamas and Hezbollah much more powerful weapons that can kill thousands of Israelis.

Israel cannot and should not rely on the promises of America. Israel should do whatever it can to stop Iran's development of a nuclear weapon. The naysayers, when not claiming an Israeli attack to be "a disaster" or cause "region wide war" also state that "at worst it will set back Iran's rush to the bomb by a few years." If you are a nation that saw six million of your people murdered while the world sat by and did absolutely nothing to stop it, and another country that is rushing to build a weapon of mass destruction threatens to annihilate you, then you take whatever steps are necessary to prevent another Holocaust, and delaying the murders of perhaps hundreds of thousands of your citizens for a few years is definitely preferable to doing nothing, especially as countries like China and Russia try to prevent you from defending your people because their main concern is solely about receiving Iranian oil and money to buy arms from them.

First thing, this thread started picking up spam posts almost immediately. FP needs to be more diligent in removing those, out of respect for its readers.

Miller's piece is interesting, making the case that the Mideast peace process can't be a central American priority if the chances of its resulting in peace are as small as they are right now. It's not a bad argument, or a wrong argument, but it's an argument against doing something previous administrations have done in the past. To the extent it's an argument for doing something, that something is what the Obama administration appears to want to do anyway.

I myself would argue that the peace process still does have value to us. Quarrels with the Israelis have value, too. Straightforward American statements as to the infirmities of the most difficult players in the region, including the Palestinian factions and the Syrian government, have value. The value of all these things resides in demonstrating that failure to progress toward a peace settlement that addresses everyone's grievances and fears in an equitable way is not the American government's fault.

This is putting it rather crassly, to be sure. Ground truth, however, is that who governs what part of the West Bank of the Jordan River is of very small relevance to the great destinies of the United States. Whether Syria gets the Golan Heights back doesn't matter that much to America. Whether Israelis get to build new housing developments in Jerusalem is nothing to do with us, either. The damage done by the Middle East situation to American interests consists in the perception that we are far more invested in its major issues than we have good reason to be, and always on one side.

The Obama administration may need to tread a lonely path here, because to the extent Americans are interested in the Middle East it is because they think one side or the other is right, and the other wrong; one side good, the other side evil. That's actually understating the difficulty, because the most zealous American critics of Israeli policy are not so much partisans of the Palestinians as people who object to the existence of Israel.

No American administration would want to associate itself with that crowd. Yet it's important for the Obama administration to get the United States out from under the perception -- an accurate one during the tenure of President Obama's predecessor -- that American policy toward the region is subject to an Israeli veto, and that no Israeli policy will ever be without full American support. Doing this would chill relations between Washington and Tel Aviv. We can live with that. The point of shared values among Israelis and Americans, frankly, is that they share our values, not the other way around. Democracy, free speech and the rule of law matter; Jerusalem, Judea and Samaria, well, less.

That applies, in spades, to the other side. That Palestinians, Arabs and non-Arab Muslims are all interested in the Middle East controversy does not mean they all hold the same views about it, or hold them with the same intensity. There are divisions among them that we are best off identifying and exploiting, and I think that starts by being more candid in public than we have been about what they are. Efforts to advance the peace process have sometimes sought to advance it by preserving the ability of its players to say one thing in public and something completely different in private (and sometimes, to say one thing in English and its opposite in their own languages). If we want participants and especially observers of the Middle East to stop blaming America every time something goes wrong there, that has got to change.

Ultimately the question of whose side we need to be on depends on what our own interests are. At the moment, American interests require engagement that does not cost us very much and reduces the number of issues on which we are seen to oppose without qualification something deeply desired by other peoples and governments to a minimum. As long as we don't deceive ourselves that the peace process is likely to produce peace, it can still be useful to the United States.

the article is in reality the sweetest on this precious topic. I harmonise with your conclusions and will thirstily look forward to your upcoming updates.
[url=http://www.lovember.com]Ed hardy[/url]
[url=http://www.comfortoes.com]mbt Shoes[/url]

the article is in reality the sweetest on this precious topic. I harmonise with your conclusions and will thirstily look forward to your upcoming updates
mbt shoes
Ed hardy

The fact is that Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been one of the stabilizing factors of the Middle East. Someone once said this conflict was the best thing that ever happened to the Arabs and to Israel. Assorted Arab leaders have used Israel as their scapegoat and to deflect anger away from internal strife. It has also led far greater Arab unity among nations. This is a key reason Arab nations see no reason to have peace with Israel. At the same time, this conflict has promoted political unity within Israel, tempering disagreements between left and right, religious and secular.

It is important to remember what led to the Oslo Accord. This was fallout from the first Gulf War. During the first Gulf war, Arafat chose to back Iraq, upsetting Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, and other Gulf states who were the PLO's biggest supporters and who also felt directly threatened by Iraq (In the case of Kuwait, overun). Following the war, these nations cut off funding for the PLO. Rapidly going broke and at risk of complete collapse, the PLO decided to negotiate with Israel to remain relevant and gain new financial supporters. This worked, and in a year or so, the PLO had good funding and no longer felt the need to negotiate and make compromises.

Everyone focuses on pressuring Israel. It is the PA/PLO who refuses to come to the negotiating table. How does one pressure them to compromise?

We talk to tell the truth and be fair and equal to all.

We talk not to pedal lies to gullible Americans who in their ignorance read the Jew incessant propaganda and lies; and haplessly send trillions of dollars in "aid" (over the last 60+ years in today's dollars) to the most oppressive, brutal and the most immoral foreign occupation army in the world, in modern history, viz. Israeli Defense Force (IDF) in Palestine.

Resignation as foreign policy. Neville Chamberlain would be proud. Cowards of the world unite.

I fear that we may be conflating knowledge of these subjects with the embittered perspectives of career bureaucrats, even if they do understand the process in and out. Aaron David Miller's views are so far removed from the facts on the ground.

The idea that resolving the Palestinian issue would do nothing to combat terrorism is far from reality. Jerusalem has been a rallying cry and a casus belli for the jihadi movement since the '50s, and continues to be until this day. It's a grievance over which many disenfranchised Muslims have been driven to violence. It is an issue that must be solved in order for Arab society to make progress. And as the situation is as intractable now as it ever was, it is--as we speak--raising anger across numerous Middle Eastern countries.

I appreciate Mr. Miller's commentary on his experience and critique of the process. But I also take exception with this notion that the region was never this complex -- it simply isn't the case. The leaders are not entirely different--in many countries like Egypt, Algeria and Yemen, the same leaders have been in power for decades. Mubarak has always followed Sadat's legacy. Lebanon has always been complex. Little has changed in Syria for decades. Etc. etc. It's out of touch.

Perhaps the process itself is so frustrating that even after decades in the midst of it, one sees it as absolutely pointless. Perhaps that is true of the process, but the issues are, in fact, driving terrorism and must be addressed. The blockade on Gaza is inhumane and little more than a live breeding project in radicalization. It must be ended and a basic quality of life must be restored to Palestinians. A sense of humiliation is a driving factor in an overwhelming number of radicalization case studies the world over. What Mr. Miller's commentary demonstrates, perhaps more than anything, is that fresh perspectives are needed to move this process forward.

Frankly "Peace is not the absence of war but the absence of rumors of war"
At some point it is the generations from both sides that will make the ultimate decision. The PEOPLE from both ends.

In my proffesion I don't decided jack! It is the customers that decide.
Politicians are but only representatives of the people.

The people decide. At one point both biblical brothers are going to have to show the courage together. . America nor any other country can do anything. It comes down to the Arab and Israeli people.

Like trying to breakup a bad family fight NO ONE is stopping that.

Darren Monroe
Online Business Ideas

Oslo didn't truly fail until the people who now rule Israel murdered Rabin. The Israeli people proved that they want nothing to do with peace when they danced in the streets to celebrate Rabin's murder. Until then, I was Israel's biggest fan. But now, shame on them!

I'm a believer. Been bred to believe in miracles. Seen my share happen in life, in politics, in the arts etc. I've been studying the Middle East for about a dozen years which clearly identifies me as a novice. I have read ADM's book along with hundreds of articles and come to my own conclusions. I believe that peace is more than possible if the process America helps to engender moves the primary actors toward each other rather than places them squarely at each other's throats. Drawing a line in the sand forced Netanyahu to say no and did not alow Abbas to answer in the affirmative. Mitchell said wait till the last day to judge his efforts, (as in Ireland), and I choose to believe him. But what is really important is to get the two sides to agree on a project that moves them closer, (as I said above). That project is an internationally led effort to prepare the Palestinian and Israeli people to accept the results of a two-state peace agreement. Neither side has undertaken this essential effort and both sides have clearly moved further away from a substantive belief that peace is truly possible in the forseeable future. To get the train moving in the right direction the US must underwrite a program which connects all the good intentioned dialogue and educational efforts into a national program for both peoples that draws everyone in Israel, the West Bank and even Gaza into a discussion of how and who we are even as it humanizes the "other." Without the belief of the people the policical process is always waiting to be victimized by any of the nearly endless number of forces fighting against peace.

There is an alternative view of President Obama’ s role in the Arab-Israeli confrontation.

First, he has been consistent in his earnest desire for a peaceful settlement and has made transparent efforts to advance it. In this he might be regarded as playing somewhat the hand played by Harold Macmillan during the most dangerous period of the cold war, a hand distinguished by apparent inertia and a tendency to retreat a step or two under extreme pressure. The inertia is only apparent, however, because a better simile would be the movements of a light-footed boxer awaiting the right opening.

Over the last eighteen months Israeli settlements have continued to expand but since this expansion is in direct opposition to Obama’ s expressed wishes it is no longer accomplished largely off-stage but in the full glare of the world media. World public opinion is furthermore mustering behind the Palestinians in Gaza, and against Israel. Within the period we have had Cast Lead and its anniversary, the Goldstone report, the Tzipi Livni warrant, the gratuitous treatment of the Turkish Ambassador, the Biden furore, and the affair of the passports. All these with nothing to counterbalance them but bluster and cries of anti-Semitism. Even monarchies and despotic governments attend to public opinion and it is emboldening some to a more critical response to Israeli activities.

Finally, the Israeli nuclear arsenal is about to pop up in the forefront of Obama’ s campaign for a nuclear free environment, particularly as the Arabs foster the notion of a nuclear free Middle East, something Obama can hardly decline to endorse.

Thinking Israelis are well aware what is happening and it is sobering. Soon, the only way back on board may be the peace process: Game, Set, and Match to Obama?

Meanwhile Netanyahu is drifting away from the mother ship in a manner quite impossible for Obama overtly to have engineered. There are some leaders in this world it is not wise to underestimate.

Pretty cool post. I just stumbled upon your blog and wanted to say that I have really liked reading your blog posts. Some great information to be absorbed in this post.Thanks a lot for sharing.Keep blogging.
dedicated web hosting-54

Brett, from your comment it is clear that the Thief and the Thug seem un-repented and expect to continue their barbarity and expect to live in peace.

My foot.

At this rate this war against the Thief and the Thug will at a minimum continue for the next 100 years and in all likelihood for the next 500 years.

By the way, who is the Thief and who is the Thug?

Mr Miller, you wrote that the world has changed since the faith in a peace process was promulgated, first by Carter and Reagan. What you neglect, Sir, is that the United States has changed, too. We were certainly a highly flawed democratic republic back then, but now we have no claim to such a description. We are now clearly an imperial power, which like others of the past have only the trappings of democratic institutions.

For you to write about our ideals, our belief in the rule of law makes me wonder whether you immerse yourself entirely in far off places and are unaware of the defiling of our Constitution by recent presidents and, most importantly, the permission tacitly granted by Congress for them to do so. Where is the idealism in our having ignored or supported genocides in Europe, Africa and East Timor; toppling of democratically elected governments in Asia and Latin America; aggressive invasions of foreign countries? Where is our respect for the rule of law in our continuing (under Obama) violations of our laws, treaties (also our law), Constitution in renditions, torture, suspensions of habeus corpus, invasions of privacy and the failure of this President to prosecute those who have?

When you express sympathy for President Obama's inherited problems of two wars and a financial crisis, are you ignorant of his continuation and extensions of these wars and his warring in Columbia (the futile war on drugs)? Is respect for law exemplified by Obama's support of the coup in Honduras? Were the unconditional giveaways (he recommended as candidate and effected as President) to AIG and Goldman Sachs et al. of our Treasury part of your sympathetic assessment.

With all of your blindness as prologue, I read on through your lengthy discourse but found nothing positive suggested with regard to your subject, the failure of the M.E. peace process. You assessment of failure is probably correct, but that was worth one paragraph of introduction IF followed by something substantive.

You ARE a believer, Mr Miller, but in a United States that once could be argued a democratic republic, but that day has passed even more clearly than the prospect of a M.E. peace process. Welcome to the corporate kleptocracy, to the rule of a corrupted one-party state. Some, on the left, call it fascist, but it is missing something: the bizarre patriotism that fascist states evince. Our governance is theft, from foreign countries and from Americans who work for a living, purely and simply.

Thievery, thuggery, butchery, barbarity, uncivility and hypocrisy thou have new names: Israel, India, Russia and America.

Oh, what a fine family.

Personally I can't see an end to the violence, such a shame, but religion is largely to blame.
Very Interesting

The solution to the middle east conflict is difficult but simple and requires about 30-40 more years of patience--but only assuming we in the west begin dealing with the real problems starting today.

The reason the peace process has failed for 40+ years is because its foundation rests on the absurd assumption that one can make peace with people who teach their children that Jews are the most vile and contemptible and detestable creatures on the face of the earth; having some odd cross species relation to pigs and monkeys. And sadly, our liberal friends in Europe and the US have basically allied themselves with some of the most racist vile hateful people on the planet since the Nazis, and who also often treat women in their societies as objects whose value is not quite on par with a camel. Or who riot and murder in the streets over cartoons, while ignoring scores of much greater human atrocities.

I have news for everyone--including and especially the Obama administration--If Israel disappeared from the earth tomorrow, hundreds of millions of girls and women would still live like slaves. As many as 10,000 of them would still be murdered every year as a result of honor killings. Millions would continue to have their genitals cut off or mutilated, causing thousands more deaths and millions with chronic health problems. So even if peace could be achieved in the middle east between Israel and every single Arab and/or Muslim country including Iran, how would it help all of the girls and women in the Arab Muslim world, including Palestine? And again, why is the "problem of Israel" somehow more serious to liberals in Europe and the US compared to the millions who suffer as a result of these insane, ancient, misogynist conditions?

Somehow, this is all never taken very seriously in the west, either because we can't quite comprehend what it's like to (still) retain such deep, historical, racist, religious perspectives; because the suffering of millions of girls and women is irrelevant so long as we continue to get our oil; and/or because people can't quite comprehend what it's like to be a reasonably well-educated and well-intentioned group of people that happen to fall on the wrong side of two of the world's largest religions.

Jews are anathema to 99% of Muslims in the middle east, purely because of their religion, the Koran, the Hadiths, and especially because they are not dissuaded by the US or the west from continuing such horrible teachings (I don't want to say it's because they're Christian, but...) the 30-40 years I mentioned above is roughly the time it would take for people to die off and to deal with a new generation of Muslims who were not quite as brainwashed on antisemitism and Jew hatred.

But for those of you who would still like to blame Israel outright, I would urge you to go back and do your homework (for a change) and note that this hatred and this perspective predates the very existence of Israel. The fact is, the grandfather of Palestinian nationalism--Mohammad Amin al-Husayn--led many violent pogroms against Jews in Palestine (who, yes, have been there for thousands of years), was friendly with Hitler, and even asked him for permission to create death camps in Palestine. Am I making this up? No, The Grand Mufti writes about this with pride in his autobiography. And look at the Palestinian Coat of Arms, which you may notice has a remarkable resemblance to the German Coat of Arms. Never mind, probably just another coincidence.

For the record, as a cultural Jew (who is an atheist), I happen to disagree with Israel's settlement policies, as do a great deal of Jews and Israelis. But then, in the grand scheme of things, I think honor killings and FGM and the non-existence of womens' rights throughout the globe is 1000 times more significant, if only measured in sheer numbers. Remember folks, Jews make up .2 percent of the population. We're not that important, even if by some stroke of luck we account for approximately 179 Nobel prizes while Muslims account for about 10--despite the fact that there are 100 Muslims for every Jew! Israel represents less than .1 percent of the global population.

And even if Palestinians are suffering (Partly because of Israel, partly because of their own martyrdom, and partly because the Arab/Muslim world is not interested in peace), how much more serious is the suffering of hundreds of millions? And while we're at it, I find it ironic how many tens of millions of Muslims are alive today (to hate Jews) because Jews have been a significant force in the development of science and medicine in the 20-21st century. I would hazard to guess that there are more Muslims alive today because of that participation than Jews that even exist on the planet.

But back to my original point, which is that we in the west start putting pressure on Muslim governments to ban the teaching of genocide and racism and hatred of Jews and Christians (et al) or absolutely nothing changes...EVER. End of story. I think this mindset is worse than Iran's nuclear program.

Of course, we also have to make some changes ourselves and begin addressing our own failings and hypocrisies, including bullying smaller nations or peoples, economic irridentism, and just amoral geopolitical tinkering in general. The chickens always come home to roost, and it's about time we learned our lesson.

In the meantime, I urge some of you to go to Amnesty International, Borders Sans Frontiers, and other human rights organizations and see what's going on in the world that you are willfully ignoring and perhaps unwittingly perpetuating as a result of your best intentions.

With Hamas, who is committed to Israel's destruction based on unbending Jihadist dogma?

Or with Fatah, who aspires to same results in stages, and would be overrun by Hamas soon after Israeli military vacates the West Bank anyway?

2-State Plan doesn't make sense only if you think its aim is Peace. It makes a lot of sense if you realize its aim is to destroy Israel!

In fact, by reducing the Jewish state to militarily indefensible borders, it is a necessary next step for the Arabs in order to advance from Phase II to Phase III in their 1974 Phased Plan for dismantling of Israel. http://www.acpr.org.il/resources/plophased.html

If Arabs really wanted Peace, they would not invent a separate Palestinian identity, while Jordan already covers nearly 80% of Mandatory Palestine and most Gaza Arabs are indistinguishable from Egypt's Sinai Bedouin.

They would instead pursue the only logical coexistential path:

A 3-state solution composed of Israel, Egypt, Jordan!

Peace between Israel and the Arabs will only be possible when they stop denying pre-islamic history. To most Arabs history before Muhammad does not exist and Islam and the prophet sprang miraculously from the desert sand.
Until such time as an Arab ecumenical movement there will be no peace with Israel, or Christians for that matter.
If the 10 most notable Islamic religious leaders arise and proclaim the debt of the Muslems to the Jews and speak of a Jewish-Islamic Theology the Arab Israeli conflict would be solved in a day.
The Israeli Palestinian conflict springs from a different myth the myth of a Palestinian people. There has never been a Palestinian people. There were Philistines (Greek Sea People) in ancient times but they are no longer. The Romans renamed the country after them to spite the Jews for repeated revolts. Since then there has never been a "Palestinian" culture, government or people in the land called Israel. There were Arab families and clans who inhabited the area since the Muslem conquest. Some of these were descended from converts of the original Hebrews. There were Beduin clans who settled in Jordan. There were also many Arabs who were drawn to Israel after the Jewish Settlers arrived at the turn of the last century and created a modern economy. The British adapted the name during the UN Mandate and Yasser Arafat sealed the falsehood in 1968 by Naming his group the "Palestinian Liberation Movement". West Bank and Gaza Arabs speak different dialects and barely understand each other. If anyone can show me a "Palestinian" (rather than an "Arab")
prior to Yasser, let them do so!

Make that "Judeo-Islamic Theology".

Make that "Judeo-Islamic Theology".

Your peace process was suprememly flawed.
I quote:
" Today, issues such as Jerusalem (as a capital of two states), borders (based on June 1967 lines), and refugees (rights, return, and compensation) present gigantic political and security challenges for Arabs and Israelis. One accord will be hard enough. The prospect of negotiating a comprehensive peace; concluding three agreements between Israel and the Palestinians, between Israel and Syria, and between Israel and Lebanon; dismantling settlements in the Golan Heights and West Bank; and withdrawing to borders based on June 1967 lines seems even more fantastical."

Why should Israel give up secure positions won at great cost to achieve fake peace, while going back to borders that were proven insecure by repeated attacks ?
Why should they let overtly hostile forces, thrown out of at least two other neighboring countries settle in their country?
Why should they give up any part ro soveriegnty over the capital city of Israel and the Holy city of the Jewish religion ?
What was in your fantasy for them ?
Where was the requirement that Arab and Palesatinian hostility and attacks be authoritatively stopped ?
Where was the requirement that the Palestinians and Arabs accept and declare their acceptance of the existence of the state of Israel ?
What was in it for them at all ?
What mental defect made you think any of this would work ?
Diplomats need to get their heads out of their behinds and figure out who is who and who needs to do better.

That I read in your article that made any sense was that the leaders have to be THE leaders.
Only Sharon and Arafat could have made peace.
No one else has the authority.
Plus , it is my impression that the entire Palestinian enterprise has been
a tool of the Islamic Radical agenda.
It was such before we even understood that such existed.
I didn't know who Bin Laden was before 9/11.
You know who DID ?
Arafat, Saddam.
They knew which way the wind was blowing for them, and catered to it.
Unless the peace process recognizes this thumb o the scales and addresses it ( As GW Bush attempted to do) any ridiculous dealings are just window dressing, not worth pursuing.
Making the case that one should reward international criminals with a nation
and a victory over a another nation, at our behest and coercion, is just craven.

statement that shows the onesidedness of your strategy
"And that remains the president's challenge after the Biden brouhaha over housing units in East Jerusalem. In the spring of 2010 we're nowhere near a breakthough, and yet we're in the middle of a major rift with the Israelis. Unless we achieve a big concession, we will be perceived to have backed down again. And even if the president manages to extract something on Jerusalem, the chances that Netanyahu will be able to make a far greater move on a core issue, such as borders, will be much reduced. Unless the president is trying to get rid of Netanyahu (and produce a new coalition), he'll have no choice but to find a way to cooperate with him."

Where are the Palestinian Concessions ?
What are they expected to concede ?
Why should a an overtly criminal group get their demands met in toto with NO
concessions at all ?
Haven't they stated and lost this war 4 times ?
Should they not be prepared to get less rather than more ?

Maybe you were pushing the wrong side.

the Talmud and Torah:

* It is allowed to cheat a gentile and take usury of him (Baba Mezia 61a, Abhodah Zarah 54a).

* The goyim [Christians] are regarded as unclean (Schabbath 145b, Abhodah Zarah 22b).

* It is not allowed to rob a brother Jew, but to rob a gentile is allowed (Baba Mezia 61a; Sanhedrin 57a).

* The goyim are not like men but are as animals (Kerithuth 6b). The seed of a goy is worth the same as that of a beast (Kethuboth 3b; Baba Mecia 114, 6).

* A Jew must not enter the home of a Christian (Gittin 62a).

* The goyim are not to be cured or helped when sick, even for money (Abodah Zarah 27b; Iore Dea 158, 1).

* It is permitted to deceive a goy (Babha Kama 113b). Jews must try to deceive Christians (Zohar I, 160a).

* A Jew may lie and perjure himself to condemn a Christian (Babha Kama 113a-113b).

* A Jew shall not do injury to other Jews, but the law does not prohibit injury to a goy (Mishna Sanhedryn 57).

* Those who do good to the Christian . . . will not rise from the dead (Zohar I, 25b).

* All the festivals of the followers of Jesus are forbidden, and we must conduct ourselves towards them as we would towards idolaters (Abodah Zarah 2a, 78c).

* Do not save a goy in danger of death (Hilkkoth Akum, XX, 1).

* When a Jew and a goy come to court, you must absolve the Jew and take his side as far as possible according to Jewish law. If, however, the Jew can be absolved according to gentile law, absolve him (Babha Kama 113a).

* A Jew may keep anything he finds belonging to the Akum [Christian], to return it is a sin (Choschem Ham 266, 1).

Of course, some perspective is useful in interpreting old texts in modern contexts --- for all monotheistic religions.

Deuteronomy 20:10-17:
"When you march up to attack a city, make its people an offer of peace. If they accept and open their gates, all the people in it shall be enslaved by you. If they refuse to make peace and they engage you in battle, lay siege to that city.

When the Lord your God delivers it into your hand, kill all the men. As for the women, the children, the livestock and everything else in the city, these are your possessions to dispose of as you wish.

This is how you are to treat all the cities that are at a distance from you and do not belong to the nations nearby. However, in the cities of the nations the Lord your God is giving you as an inheritance, exterminate all that breathes. Completely destroy them—the Hittites, Amorites, Canaanites, Perizzites, Hivites and Jebusites—as the Lord your God has commanded you."

Surprised there is a mideast problem?

Perhaps what you are saying is that peace is impossible because of Islam appropriating and memorializing in action the most intolerant
and bigotry driven outdated parts of judaism, which were largely written in response to the hatred poured upon them in Europe.
These distatsteful tenets the Muslims have made their rock, while Jews have forgotten them.

Here is what its former education minister says:

http://www.counterpunch.org/aloni01082007.html

Shulamit Aloni is the former Education Minister of Israel. She has been awarded both the Israel Prize and the Emil Grunzweig Human Rights Award by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.

January 8, 2007
This Road is for Jews Only
Yes, There is Apartheid in Israel

By SHULAMIT ALONI

Jewish self-righteousness is taken for granted among ourselves to such an extent that we fail to see what's right in front of our eyes. It's simply inconceivable that the ultimate victims, the Jews, can carry out evil deeds.

Nevertheless, the state of Israel practises its own, quite violent, form of Apartheid with the native Palestinian population.

The US Jewish Establishment's onslaught on former President Jimmy Carter is based on him daring to tell the truth which is known to all: through its army, the government of Israel practises a brutal form of Apartheid in the territory it occupies. Its army has turned every Palestinian village and town into a fenced-in, or blocked-in, detention camp. All this is done in order to keep an eye on the population's movements and to make its life difficult. Israel even imposes a total curfew whenever the settlers, who have illegally usurped the Palestinians' land, celebrate their holidays or conduct their parades.

If that were not enough, the generals commanding the region frequently issue further orders, regulations, instructions and rules (let us not forget: they are the lords of the land). By now they have requisitioned further lands for the purpose of constructing "Jewish only" roads. Wonderful roads, wide roads, well-paved roads, brightly lit at night--all that on stolen land. When a Palestinian drives on such a road, his vehicle is confiscated and he is sent on his way.

On one occasion I witnessed such an encounter between a driver and a soldier who was taking down the details before confiscating the vehicle and sending its owner away. "Why?" I asked the soldier. "It's an order--this is a Jews-only road", he replied. I inquired as to where was the sign indicating this fact and instructing [other] drivers not to use it. His answer was nothing short of amazing. "It is his responsibility to know it, and besides, what do you want us to do, put up a sign here and let some antisemitic reporter or journalist take a photo so he that can show the world that Apartheid exists here?"

Indeed Apartheid does exist here. And our army is not "the most moral army in the world" as we are told by its commanders. Sufficient to mention that every town and every village has turned into a detention centre and that every entry and every exit has been closed, cutting it off from arterial traffic. If it were not enough that Palestinians are not allowed to travel on the roads paved 'for Jews only', on their land, the current GOC found it necessary to land an additional blow on the natives in their own land with an "ingenious proposal".

Humanitarian activists cannot transport Palestinians either.

Major-General Naveh, renowned for his superior patriotism, has issued a new order. Coming into affect on 19 January, it prohibits the conveyance of Palestinians without a permit. The order determines that Israelis are not allowed to transport Palestinians in an Israeli vehicle (one registered in Israel regardless of what kind of numberplate it carries) unless they have received explicit permission to do so. The permit relates to both the driver and the Palestinian passenger. Of course none of this applies to those whose labour serves the settlers. They and their employers will naturally receive the required permits so they can continue to serve the lords of the land, the settlers.

Did man of peace President Carter truly err in concluding that Israel is creating Apartheid? Did he exaggerate? Don't the US Jewish community leaders recognise the International Convention on the Elimination of all Forms of Racial Discrimination of 7 March 1966, to which Israel is a signatory? Are the US Jews who launched the loud and abusive campaign against Carter for supposedly maligning Israel's character and its democratic and humanist nature unfamiliar with the International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid of 30 November 1973? Apartheid is defined therein as an international crime that among other things includes using different legal instruments to rule over different racial groups, thus depriving people of their human rights. Isn't freedom of travel one of these rights?

In the past, the US Jewish community leaders were quite familiar with the meaning of those conventions. For some reason, however, they are convinced that Israel is allowed to contravene them. It's OK to kill civilians, women and children, old people and parents with their children, deliberately or otherwise without accepting any responsibility. It's permissible to rob people of their lands, destroy their crops, and cage them up like animals in the zoo. From now on, Israelis and International humanitarian organisations' volunteers are prohibited from assisting a woman in labour by taking her to the hospital. [Israeli human rights group] Yesh Din volunteers cannot take a robbed and beaten-up Palestinian to the police station to lodge a complaint. (Police stations are located at the heart of the settlements.) Is there anyone who believes that this is not Apartheid?

Jimmy Carter does not need me to defend his reputation that has been sullied by Israelophile community officials. The trouble is that their love of Israel distorts their judgment and blinds them from seeing what's in front of them. Israel is an occupying power that for 40 years has been oppressing an indigenous people, which is entitled to a sovereign and independent existence while living in peace with us. We should remember that we too used very violent terror against foreign rule because we wanted our own state. And the list of victims of terror is quite long and extensive.

We do limit ourselves to denying the [Palestinian] people human rights. We not only rob of them of their freedom, land and water. We apply collective punishment to millions of people and even, in revenge-driven frenzy, destroy the electricity supply for one and half million civilians. Let them "sit in the darkness" and "starve".

Employees cannot be paid their wages because Israel is holding 500 million shekels that belong to the Palestinians. And after all that we remain "pure as the driven snow". There are no moral blemishes on our actions. There is no racial separation. There is no Apartheid. It's an invention of the enemies of Israel. Hooray for our brothers and sisters in the US! Your devotion is very much appreciated. You have truly removed a nasty stain from us. Now there can be an extra spring in our step as we confidently abuse the Palestinian population, using the "most moral army in the world".

[Translated by Sol Salbe]
Shulamit Aloni is the former Education Minister of Israel. She has been awarded both the Israel Prize and the Emil Grunzweig Human Rights Award by the Association for Civil Rights in Israel.

Listen to this pro-Zionist Jewish member of parliament (who has been knighted):

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMGuYjt6CP8

Try this CBS news 60 minutes episode, and let me know hwat you think:

http://www.cbsnews.com/video/watch/?id=4752349n

When Mr Miller writes that "shared values are at the core or our relationship", does he include in that statement the endemic corruption that is part and parcel of Israeli life and politics?

In regard to the conclusion that America is impotent to move any peace process forward and that conflict is inevitable, does not this casually ignore the effect of the huge arms shipments that the US makes to Israel every year thereby provoking the very conflict that it is claimed to want to avoid?

There seems to be an intention to 'wordwash' the hugely dangerous situation that pertains in the Middle East, with an essay and the throwing up of hands.

Unfortunately, this will not avoid the nuclear war that seems imminent.

One of the major reasons why Oslo, Madrid, Wye River, etc wound up being failures is the continued expansion/ incursion of Israeli real estate into the West Bank. This has continued regardless of the ideological nature of Israeli government. In addition, the composition of the Israeli electorate has moved significantly rightward since the days of Ben-Gurion. And Israeli policies towards the Palestinians have become ever more repressive.

You are right about the expanded focus of American involvement in the Middle East. Much of this has been because of the neocons, who have been closely associated with Israel and AIPAC. The neocon predictions about what would take place from aggressive actions in Iraq, Afghanistan, and elsewhere have shown themselves to be bad predictions and failures.
Therefore, the is less incentive for the US to continue along the neocon line.

It's obvious that Netanyahu's slaps in the face to Biden's visit and Netanyahu's visit to Washington merely highlight the bankruptcy of current American foreign policy in this area. And the decisionmakers in Washington seem to think that by pretending to do something along the old lines,= (while not really doing anything) is the only viable strategy in the area given the number of issues that Obama has on his plate and the uncertain prospects of the 2010 election.

However, the inevitables of a major game plan change for the Middle East will assert themselves on us sooner or later. Our withdrawal from Iraq appears to be on schedule, and there is certainly an end game in Afghanistan that will necessitate our withdrawal from that country without getting any successful outcome.

The fact that Ahmadinejad has made an offer of a "grand bargain" in the Middle East will show itself publicly sooner or later as the only viable course of action for the American government. If the United States recognizes Iran as an independent entity free to pursue its own foreign policy, then Iran will do everything in its power to smooth the waters in Iraq and Afghanistan.

A move by the Palestinians towards independence will also further isolate Israel from the rest of the world. The United States might as well start the steps necessary to adjust the new reality, as these changes will necessitate heavy lifting on the part of every party in the Middle East. Perhaps most significantly will be the creation of a regional defense pact similar to NATO that includes the countries of the Arabian peninsula, Iraq, and anyone else that is capable of joining from Egypt to India.

And Israel will be forced with the new facts on the ground that will require that country to break its foreign policy line (and treatment of the Palestinians) that it has pursued for so long.

It'll be a new world. Get over it. Get used to it, and start dealing with the inevitability of it all.

Here's why.
you say
" Perhaps most significantly will be the creation of a regional defense pact similar to NATO that includes the countries of the Arabian peninsula, Iraq, and anyone else that is capable of joining from Egypt to India.
And Israel will be forced with the new facts on the ground that will require that country to break its foreign policy line (and treatment of the Palestinians) that it has pursued for so long.
It'll be a new world. Get over it. Get used to it, and start dealing with the inevitability of it all."

Firstly, Israel and India are already aligned.
Secondly, the Plaestinians, even given the opportunity will NEVER declare nationhood.
The terrorist groups that run the Palestinian "movement" , are all descended
from two sources.
#1 source is the Muslim Brotherhood, and #2 source is Iranian backed terror mobs like Hezbollah.
These groups hew to the Islamic Radical line.
That line of thought, like the PAn-Arab nationalism ( Baath) before it, does not recognize nationhood.
For the Palestinians to establish a nation would be for them to lose the support of the international criminal organizations that support their efforts.
Nor will the countries mentioned join in a regional defense org.
Given the character of the opposition parties in the mideast states
and the tenuous nature of the current ruling parties we should have no wish for them to do so, it would be bad for US.
At best, they would join together to pursue the worldwide Islamic Jihad whose purpose is to Islamicise as much of the world as possible.
India will not be joining this movement.

How do you think that you can make such blanket assertions and assumptions and completely ignore the facts on the ground as they actually exist in these places, and are even now ramping up to a century of warfare that we have tried to short-circuit in Iraq ?
The blindness of it all astonishes me, as much as the similar blindness of the writer of the original article.
You must live in some kind of fairyland.

They do whatever they want. They have a strong economy and a belligerent attitude. And they openly manipulate and insult the United States.

Why do we give this rich, ungrateful country billions?

All we need to do for a win is back out.

It is our unilateral support for Israel that is the problem.

If Israel wants money from the USA, they can request a welfare check like a record number of Americans. And apply it to peaceful infrastructure instead of nuclear weapons that put Iran and everyone else under pressure in the region.

We created this mess, but it is too late for anything but true multilateral support and distancing from militant Israeli goverments.

For those who seek peace inside and outside of Israel, the invasions of Gaza and Lebanon should be seen as just another excuse to avoid resolution of the conflict. For there to be a real peace effort, there must be disarmament on both sides. To achieve this end many are calling for an international embargo on weapons and aid to the region. Many Israeli and western hardliners argued in the 60s to the 80s that Soviet support for the Palestinians made peace impossible as no one could cut off Soviet aid. Today the Soviet Union is gone and it is time to take the necessary steps to end the conflict and to do that we must take the weapons off the table.
However, modern experiences with arms embargoes have demonstrated, as in the former Yugoslav civil war, that the better armed combatants fare better than their less prepared victims. Also, past embargoes in the Palestinian/Israeli struggle have favored the success of the Israelis and Israel today is one of the world’s foremost arms produces and international distributors of arms and munitions. An embargo alone would do little and would be difficult to enforce.
An embargo combined with an international freeze of aid and assets would cut down the ability of Israel and the Palestinian factions to wage war. If a boycott of investments and products from Israel and Palestine were added there would be significant pressure applied as Israel’s economy is fragile and depends substantially on US foreign aid and private donations. Such economic pressure would substantially tip the balance inside and outside Israel toward the peace movement. But to be successful there has to be some guarantee for the survival of Israel and for Palestinian freedom and equality, both economically and politically.
We can realistically reach such a goal by modifications of French President Sarkozy’s proposal of a Mediterranean EU (MEU). The Middle East and North Africa have substantial climate, water and employment problems. Israel cannot depend on the support of America forever, nor will American Jews always be able or inclined to send the sums they are in the future. The current strategy of the radical Israeli right is to use military force to make Israel so odious to her neighbors that peace will be impossible at any date and war will be the future inevitable foreign policy. Such a path can only lead to the use of weapons of mass destruction by some desperate faction in the future leaving Israel uninhabitable. Like the baby in Solomon's dilemma, we should all be trying to save this land not possess it at all costs. If Sarkozy’s proposal were to be amended and Israel were to be an equal member with all other Mediterranean states, whether Christian, Moslem or Jewish, then a basis for a resolution to the conflict and future economic and political stability could be achieved. To do this, however, Turkey would have to be a leading force and current boundaries in some nations would have to be changed to create stable conditions. For example, Iraq must disappear. The Shia east and south should be joined to Iran and the Sunni west to Syria while the northern Kurdish area made into a new Kurdish state by joining the western Kurdish areas of Iran to it in exchange for the Shia areas Iran would gain. This would not be a perfect solution, but might go far to create a foundation for peace there.
Why Turkey? Turkey has substantial democratic institutions and these would be essential to sustain the foundations of an MEU. But the next question concerns Iran. Would Iran join? Some western scholars have argued in recent years (Bernard Lewis being one of the most vociferous) that there is an essential conflict between “east” and “west” cultures. While there is no anthropological support for such a contention, history and archaeology argue firmly against it. As Gordon V. Childe noted in his summary of the archaeology of the Near East, New Light on the Most Ancient East , Iran has always, since even before Sumer been a part of the development of one civilization of the Fertile Crescent. It has played a central role in the economic and political development of modern institutions since before Troy and the rise of Greek cities and Darius. As Parthia it has been a powerful transition state from those Alexander created, and engaged with Rome in a long political and economic development. This is a history that was no more contentious than that between Germany and France. Iran’s participation would be central.
For those extremist Israelis who argue that Israel would be out numbered, one can answer that North Africa and the Middle East are filled with minorities that would be protected, as in the EU, by the MEU charter. Either NATO would have to be extended to the MEU or the MEU would have to form a NATO-like, or EU-like military organization to augment and eventually replace independent military forces. A MEU would bring stability and justice to the region, a uniform economic system, judicial foundation and political unity. This is not a dream, but a plan and a better one than all the current failed models being proposed again today.

Niccolo Caldararo, Ph.D.

Israel depends on the EU for the bulk of its trade. Without the European market, it's a very dead duck indeed.

However, it's very naughty in treating its current agreements with contempt as it is continually in breach of human rights clauses and also international law.

There is every possibility now that unless Israel behaves in a democratic manner and respects the rule of law, then the EU may very well decide to dump the problem child.

In which event, it will demand a hell of a lot more aid from the US than at present. Just work out the figures from the stats.

Aaron,

Your title is the most telling part of the essay. Yes a religion is what what this "peace pursuit" is, and like all religions it is built upon myth. You mention one fundamental core myth, and leave out the second.

The one you mention is ". Shared values are at the core of the relationship"--since when, or should I say since the Civil War apartheid is not an American value. The subjugation of one people by another is not one of my values. And more specifically the granting of one group special rights because of religious claims (god gave this land to the hebrews) is so far from what I view as an American value as to be laughable, if it had not brought so much tragedy. Most simply put, any nation which displays a religious symbol on its flag is not a democracy, no matter how many times one repeats the lie.

The second is the idea of a 2-state solution. This myth could only be promulgated in a geographically illiterate country like the US. One look at a map suggests otherwise. And upon closer inspection it becomes an even bigger joke. Who controls all the fresh water under this solution; who gains the vast majority of arable land; who controls the sea ports? The answer is always the same. In fact this part of the Levant is just too small to accommodate 2 states.

A solution can only come with the realisation that these peoples must unit and form a single country with equal rights and opportunities given to all--now those are American values.

It is amazing to read the comments of American Jews here; they write as if their heart, mind and soul belongs to Israel; if so, why don't they give up their US citizenships and move en masse to Israel.

American Jews are like a woman with two husbands, who claims loyalty to both; knowing one is rich and the other perhaps just a parasite.

Best to give up the farce and just move to Israel.

I am no political scientist, former minister/politician, or former peace ambassador of any kind. I do, however, understand real estate development and read a lot about human psychology. I believe that understanding these two seemingly unrelated fields could shed light on the primary reason behind the failure to date of the Middle East (ME) peace process, and what are the future prospects for it.

First to real estate.

Building an enduring peace between two parties is similar to constructing a major apartment building. There are many retirements that must be fulfilled for such a building to endure for a long time, including sound structural design, proper building materials, proper construction execution and strong foundations. But the most important and basic element, the one without which the building will collapse sooner or later (especially in an area prone to periodic earthquakes,) is the requirement for appropriate quality of the land/soils upon which the building is constructed.

My first argument is that the ME peace process to date attempted to build a monumental structure on shifting sands dunes, while sometimes violating the most basic rules of sound construction.

The Oslo Agreement was an attempt to build a building from the top floor down, i.e. ignoring the core issues whose resolution is vital to ME peace. The attempts since then have been more appropriately focused on trying to lay a foundation and build up slowly, while discussing core issues. Unfortunately, I think the peace builders are wasting their time as they are building on unstable shifting sand dunes. Yes, it is important to "keep the momentum going" and to have diplomatic initiatives that will prevent a military eruption, but unless one solves the issue of the shifting soils below the structure, the building will not last long. There are well known techniques to treat shifting soils and make sound construction feasible.

Which brings me to the second point about human psychology.

Human behavior seems to be a product of both DNA and memories. We cannot do much (yet) about our DNA make-up, but our behavior and actions are also heavily influenced by memories stored in our brain cells - not unlike software programs that drive computers. Memories are in a large measure a function of one's education, what one hears and sees at school and at the university , at houses of worship, in the media, in the neighborhood and at home. Memories which are not re-enforced, tend to last for three generations (60 years), much longer - if they are re-enforced.

I submit that the soils upon which the ME peace structure has been attempted to be built upon over the years (and in the future) is called "memories." Existing memories are rendering the soils very unstable and they must be modified first, so that a future peace structure could last.

This observation about soils and memory leads me to a sad conclusion.

Schools and universities, media outlets, and mosque sermons in the Islamic and Arab world are constantly spewing hate and de-legitimization of the State of Israel, its citizens and its supporters (I am privileged to be both) while attempting to rewrite the history of the region. All this has (by design) an ongoing negative impact on the memories of the Arab population in the ME and elsewhere. This must be stopped immediately if the sand dunes are to be turned into a rock solid foundation in the future.

Until then, the formula for peace in the ME is quite linear:

Year of true peace= The year when hate spewing stops+60 years.

The overall timing is in the hands of the Islamic/Arab world who could stop the incitement tomorrow, if they choose to do so.

This is the typical view of the US (Jewish) Left.
It shows deep understanding of the US view of the issue, but absolute zero understanding of what makes the Middle East tick.
The author does not grasp how the world views Obama as treacherous to his friends and weak to his enemies.
he does not grasp how the Israeli public granted the US and European Left their fate in the hope of peace only to be harshly awokened to the Western response (or lack of it) to the Hizbollah attacks on Israel after the 2000 withdrawal, the ultra violent Palestinian 2nd Intifada after Israels' massive Oslo concessions, the 2006 Lebanese war or the Hamas rockets and abductions after the 2005 withdrawal and mass destruction of settlements and population cleansing of the Gaza strips' Jews.
Israel has learned that Land for Peace means Land for War.
The Israeli public is sick of bleeding for the peace experiments of the Western Left.
The Palestinians believe that they can always achieve more than they are being offered, and Obama has willingly been the major supplier of this dangerous addiction.

Mr Miller understands nothing of this.
His article is a tale of tragedy and misspent virtuous intent - but its greatest manifestation of sadness is the extent of the gullible and naive misunderstandings and ignorances of the (Jewish) US Left.

It is little wonder that the US is such a mess, and creates such miser around the world if this is a sample of the advice being given.

To suggest that you can ‘negotiate’ between murderous thieves and their victims is nonsense. The only answer is to destroy the thief.

In the case of Israel, the US simply has to withdraw all support, financial, military and diplomatic and Israel either negotiates in good faith with its neighbours, or perishes.

Interesting indeed the claim that : ‘U.S.-Israeli relations: America is Israel's best friend and must continue to be. Shared values are at the core of the relationship’. So the Us acknowledges that the ‘American’ way is invasion, occupation, the thieving of the resources of others and the slaughter of unarmed populations?

‘Even before the Gaza war exploded three weeks prior to his inauguration, Obama had been bombarded by experts sagely urging a renewed focus on Middle East peace as a way to regain American prestige.’

The assault upon Gaza was not a ‘war’, the slaughter of an unarmed, imprisoned population is not war, but murder or genocide.

“It does not help, for example, that China associates with regimes around the world that others seek to isolate because of their assault on the integrity of international system – from the Sudan to Burma. China can – and should – do more to support wider international efforts against destabilising regimes and on global security challenges such as Afghanistan and Iran.”

The greatest destabilising force in the world today is the US, followed by Israel and including those who blindly support the US in its ill conceived adventures. Neither Afghanistan nor Iran pose any threat to the world, they simply refuse to grovel to the US, or acknowledge them as their overlord.

To those who believe this harsh, a few quotations.

"We must make clear to the Germans that the wrong for which their fallen
leaders are on trial is not that they lost the war, but that they started
it. ": U.S. Supreme Court Justice Robert Jackson,U.S.
representative to the International Conference on Military Trials, Aug. 12,
1945
=
To initiate a war of aggression, therefore, is not only an international
crime; it is the supreme international crime differing only from other war
crimes in that it contains within itself the accumulated evil of the whole:
Nuremburg War Tribunal regarding wars of aggression.

In his Complete Diaries, Vol.II, Page 711, Theodor Herzl, the founder of Zionism, says that the area of the Jewish state stretches: “From the Brook of Egypt to the Euphrates”.

Rabbi Fischmann, member of the Jewish Agency for Palestine, declared in his testimony to the U.N. Special Committee of Enquiry on July 9, 1947:
“The Promised Land extends from the River of Egypt to the Euphrates. It includes parts of Syria and Lebanon.”

1938
"Let us not ignore the truth among ourselves … politically we are the aggressors and they defend themselves… The country is theirs, because they inhabit it, whereas we want to come here and settle down, and in their view we want to take away from them their country."
–David Ben Gurion, quoted on pp 91-2 of Chomsky's “Fateful Triangle”, which appears in Simha Flapan's "Zionism and the Palestinians pp 141-2 citing a 1938 speech.

Before [the Palestinians] very eyes we are possessing the land and the villages where they, and their ancestors, have lived… We are the generation of colonizers, and without the steel helmet and the gun barrel we cannot plant a tree and build a home.
– Israeli Army Commander Moshe Dayan

1969
" Jewish villages were built in the place of Arab villages. You do not even know the names of these Arab villages, and I do not blame you because geography books no longer exist. Not only do the books not exist, the Arab villages are not there either. Nahlal arose in the place of Mahlul; Kibbutz Gvat in the place of Jibta; Kibbutz Sarid in the place of Huneifis; and Kefar Yehushua in the place of Tal Al-Shuman. There is not a single place built in this country that did not have a former Arab population."
Moshe Dayan Date: 4 April 1969

2002
"We enthusiastically chose to become a colonial society, ignoring international treaties, expropriating lands, transferring settlers from Israel to the occupied territories, engaging in theft and finding justification for all these activities. Passionately desiring to keep the occupied territories, we developed two judicial systems: one - progressive, liberal - in Israel; and the other - cruel, injurious - in the occupied territories. In effect, we established an apartheid regime in the occupied territories immediately following their capture. That oppressive regime exists to this day.
Michael Ben-Yair Article/book #: 3837 Title: The war's seventh day

As of 1946 the Arab owned land in Palestine was 94 percent, arab population 65 percent with the Arabs owning almost all of the cultivated land. The 35 percent of Jewish population owned the remaining six percent of the land.
Today the Palestinians are crammed into less than 13 percent of their country.

Tell me again. Who are the aggressors?

The tendency, your tendency, to give history lessons, is to say the least naive.
History does not decide the future although it may have shaped the present.

Israel is not an island, it cannot exist for six months without trade with the outside world.

This fact has NOTHING to do with the Mufti of Jerusalem or Hitler or the parting of the Red Sea or the Likud party.

Currently, without the EU, Israel is stuffed. YOU may not like that fact, but that is not the point.

Israel must export arms, guns, bombs, diamonds, chemicals, computer chips and oranges to pay for all the guns, bombs, diamonds and chemicals she imports and even then she is dependent on AIPAC/ US funding.

AND, as we are reminded above, Israel also needs virtually ALL the water from the Jordan for her crops as well as all the arable land and all the seaports and all .....

IOW a non-self-sustaining state that exists courtesy of the EU and the US.

Religious dogma never trumps facts. And that's a fact.

Sometimes lying is the only thing that the Jews can do.

It seems a callous thing to say but their names are not what their parents gave them at birth, their language is an umpteenth rehash and a plastic re-creation, their country is somebody else's country, their myths are totally unsubstantiated and heck 95 percent of these New Jews are not even Semites as they very strongly insist to be: These are of Eastern European extraction variety.

No wonder they can’t even name the country, much less the actual mountain that Moses had his schizophrenic hallucination at. Similar problems with the “exile” from Egypt as no records exist, 40 year wandering in the desert as no empirical evidence supports that, or even the parting of the sea; where, how, all bogus.

Now what can one trust about the Jews or their empty boastful claims?

Israel endangers the lives of US soldiers everyday.

Every drop of water stolen from Palestine by the Jews strengthens the Resistance.

Every inch of land stolen from Palestine by the Jews strengthens the Resistance.

Every Palestinian innocent life snuffed by the Jews strengthens the Resistance.

Every Palestinian innocent tortured by the Jews strengthens the Resistance.

Every Palestinian innocent arrested by the Jews strengthens the Resistance.

Every Palestinian humiliated by the Jews strengthens the Resistance.

Every Palestinian innocent arrested by the Jews strengthens the Resistance.

Every Palestinian home bulldozed by the Jews strengthens the Resistance.

Each of these Pavolovian "shaping of the enemy" actions, according to the Jews, by the Jews and for the Jews harms America in a million ways and it endangers the life of American soldiers everyday.

The American Jews are indeed foremost in screwing the American soldiers. But do the Americans know who is screwing them?

There is only one argument:

is the state of Israel a light unto other nations, or a bringer of darkness and a threat to world peace?

There are very few mistakes in this article and many truths. Problem is the mistake is huge, and overlooking the mistakes might cost the US dearly.

Let's start with the mistakes:
1) Pressing Israel to the point of crisis in relations - Pressing Israel to the point of losing relations is a mistake (mainly if you read the truths below). They are not the reluctant side here as they have proven so many times before with many unreciprocated concessions for peace (think Gaza, Yamit, WB and talking of E Jerusalem). If the Israelis feel US abandoned them or is unable to fulfill its functions they will walk away! (again see truths why this is bad)

2) The Jewish Lobby - whenever commonsense triumphs, resulting in something similar to what Israel has said, the famous "boogieman" comes out of the closet and its name is "The Jewish Lobby". How strong is the Jewish- Israeli Lobby? Not too much if you consider the fact that the community is divided between JStreet and AIPAC, and that contrary to the Arabs, pluralism is allowed in the Jewish Israeli community. Ever thought why no one raises the "Arab Lobby" holding America captive with oil and investments (consider the fact Saudis, from whom Wahabi terror emanates, are not required to give fingerprint ID like all other tourists to the US because they threatened to pull out 500B$ in investments from the US)?

3) US hold on Israel - is not as big as some think. Yes Israel gets US support and more than the rest, but not the way the rest of the world gets it. Most of the support to Israel is in the form of loan guarantees, loans Israel faithfully returns. The "Loss" to the US is that this money has to be DEPOSITED (as in returned later) at the world bank. But Israel must use 90% of the money it BORROWS to buy US products like the failing F35 who even the US military did not want and the sale of which to foreign Air Froce's depends on the credible IAF buying it. If not, approx 350K jobs will be lost in the US. Also remember that this US "Hold" allows the US to ask that better Israeli military companies like Elbit back down of contracts and become subcontractors in the same contract they won to American companies (5 years ago, huge example, Turkish 600 M60 Tanks deal. Elbit won, to become subcontractor to competing Genral Dynamics)

The Sad Truth:
1)America is not as powerful anymore - it is in huge debts, overstretched and what not. If god forbids it is under threat, it will need every friend it can get.

2)Israel is really the US only friend in the region - The cliche that we share values is not really a cliche. The Muslim world does not believe in "foolish" things like democracy. Imagine King Abdullah in Saudi Arabia pronouncing elections tomorrow... As long as the US is powerful and buys more, they are "friends" . No money? no friends (see recent oil price crisis and how the Arabs "helped" the US pay more) as one Muslim American once told me: "I like the money, not so big on the lifestyle". Contrast that with Israel buying 200M$ a day to save the credibility of the plunging US dollar during the crisis...

So now that you heard some common senseyou can decide to act by it, or label it "Jeiwsh/Israeli Lobby BS" and see where that takes you. The fact that in light of Obama's display of weakness towards Islam the UK has opted to reconsider its "special relationship" with the US, tells volumes about how much they belive this humility before Islam policy is going to work...

International politics must always be played with one eye on the domestic scene. The Jewish community in the US were slow to warm to Obama, so he needed to show for them early, hence Sen. Mitchel's assignment. Unfortunately, as AIPAC's key demand is unconditional support of Israel, acting as an honest broker difficult.

I agree with the UK Jewish member of Parliament that Israel is acting like Nazis:

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=qMGuYjt6CP8

http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/8257446.stm

Below are extracts from a UN statement accompanying the Goldstone report:

" [The report ] concluded there is evidence indicating serious violations of international human rights and humanitarian law were committed by Israel during the Gaza conflict, and that Israel committed actions amounting to war crimes, and possibly crimes against humanity.
The report also concludes there is also evidence that Palestinian armed groups committed war crimes, as well as possibly crimes against humanity, in their repeated launching of rockets and mortars into Southern Israel…

The Mission found that, in the lead up to the Israeli military assault on Gaza, Israel imposed a blockade amounting to collective punishment and carried out a systematic policy of progressive isolation and deprivation of the Gaza Strip. During the Israeli military operation, code-named "Operation Cast Lead," houses, factories, wells, schools, hospitals, police stations and other public buildings were destroyed… More than 1,400 people were killed during the military operation…

The report concludes that the Israeli military operation was directed at the people of Gaza as a whole, in furtherance of an overall and continuing policy aimed at punishing the Gaza population, and in a deliberate policy of disproportionate force aimed at the civilian population. The destruction of food supply installations, water sanitation systems, concrete factories and residential houses was the result of a deliberate and systematic policy which has made the daily process of living, and dignified living, more difficult for the civilian population…

The report underlines that in most of the incidents investigated by it, and described in the report, loss of life and destruction caused by Israeli forces during the military operation was a result of disrespect for the fundamental principle of "distinction" in international humanitarian law that requires military forces to distinguish between military targets and civilians and civilian objects at all times…

[The ]report describes a number of specific incidents in which Israeli forces launched "direct attacks against civilians with lethal outcome." These are, it says, cases in which the facts indicate no justifiable military objective pursued by the attack and concludes they amount to war crimes…

A number of other incidents the Report concludes may constitute war crimes include a direct and intentional attack on the Al Quds Hospital and an adjacent ambulance depot in Gaza City.

The Report also covers violations arising from Israeli treatment of Palestinians in the West Bank, including excessive force against Palestinian demonstrators, sometimes resulting in deaths, increased closures, restriction of movement and house demolitions. The detention of Palestinian Legislative Council members, the Report says, effectively paralyzed political life in the Occupied Palestinian Territories…

The Fact-Finding Mission also found that the repeated acts of firing rockets and mortars into Southern Israel by Palestinian armed groups "constitute war crimes and may amount to crimes against humanity," by failing to distinguish between military targets and the civilian population. "The launching of rockets and mortars which cannot be aimed with sufficient precisions at military targets breaches the fundamental principle of distinction," the report says. "Where there is no intended military target and the rockets and mortars are launched into civilian areas, they constitute a deliberate attack against the civilian population."

The Mission concludes that the rocket and mortars attacks "have caused terror in the affected communities of southern Israel," as well as "loss of life and physical and mental injury to civilians and damage to private houses, religious buildings and property, thereby eroding the economic and cultural life of the affected communities and severely affecting the economic and social rights of the population."

The Mission urges the Palestinian armed groups holding the Israeli soldier Gilad Shalit to release him on humanitarian grounds, and, pending his release, give him the full rights accorded to a prisoner of war under the Geneva Conventions including visits from the International Committee of the Red Cross. The Report also notes serious human rights violations, including arbitrary arrests and extra-judicial executions of Palestinians, by the authorities in Gaza and by the Palestinian Authority in the West Bank.

The prolonged situation of impunity has created a justice crisis in the Occupied Palestinian Territory that warrants action, the Report says. The Mission found the Government of Israel had not carried out any credible investigations into alleged violations.

It recommended that the UN Security Council require Israel to report to it, within six months, on investigations and prosecutions it should carry out with regard to the violations identified in its Report. The Mission further recommends that the Security Council set up a body of independent experts to report to it on the progress of the Israeli investigations and prosecutions.

If the experts' reports do not indicate within six months that good faith, independent proceedings are taking place, the Security Council should refer the situation in Gaza to the ICC Prosecutor. The Mission recommends that the same independent expert body also report to the Security Council on proceedings undertaken by the relevant Gaza authorities with regard to crimes committed by the Palestinian side.

As in the case of Israel, if within six months there are no good faith independent proceedings conforming to international standards in place, the Council should refer the situation to the ICC Prosecutor.

On page 55, do you possibly mean "Larry King-like" not Rodney King? Please clarify.

The UN Fact Finding Commission alleged that Israeli troops were guilty of war crimes in Gaza in January 2009.

Those responsible for the actions of the IDF during that 3 week attack on Gaza and its civiilian population were:

EHUD OLMERT
EHUD BARAK
TZIPORAH LIVNI

all ministers in the Kadima administration that authorized the action in which over 900 non-combatants including hundreds of women and children were killed.

They must be brought before the ICC to answer these charges. If innocent they will be discharged in accordance with the law.

Should the US and others continue to collude in keeping these persons out of reach of international law, then democracy is dead and justice treated with contempt.

To achieve peace in the Middle East, integrity is an absolute requirement.

I wanted to read this, i really did but the author asks the root question: “So Why Have We Failed?” He then grinds on for a few thousand words. C’mon man it ain’t that complicated.

_I am finding jobs for 15 year olds or jobs for 15 year olds , if you can help me, please contact with me.

This conflict between Israelis and Palestinians has been around for generations. In most of that time, neither side seems to have moved the situation onward to any meaningful degree, their fundamental positions having proved all too static, too entrenched to allow for any serious wriggle room.

There again, there are those other, more powerful and external players drawn to this drama who have likewise exhibited an equal inability to further any real improvement. Apparently, there is no recourse that will serve, no common ground to be had in satisfying the competing interests of so many parties.

And just who are these players?
The answer must be that they constitute the rest of us, we who are not so immediately involved, who can place some distance between ourselves and the grim nature of the struggle. This fortunate circumstance should provide the necessary impartiality and judgement needed to pronounce and act upon the matter. That it seems not to have done so tends to confirm our status as mere observers, onlookers in a scenario over which we exert little control and can impart even less direction.

If such is always to be our station in life, then, maybe, it's about time we make the most of it.

http://yorketowers.blogspot.com

Could 'mere observer status' have a lot more going for it than that previously supposed?

Mr. Garbuz,

All the modern day war criminals hail from Israel.

In fact, many modern thinkers are of the opinion that the ENTIRE "leadership", if these thugs can be called as such, of Israel since it's mistaken inception, and before, till the present day is nothing more than genocidal army generals from IDF, Mossad, Shin Bet in uniforms or ill-fitting suits, unmatching ties and unpolished shoes masquerading as presidents and prime ministers.

Now who said that Israel is an army with a country?

Israel is the only real friend of America, not only in Arabia, but the whole world.

With friends like these, who needs enemies?

Really? Muslims *expect* ruthless behavior from their rulers?! But don't Muslims and the countries claiming to be "Islamic" also live up to creeds as well...i.e. those set forth by Islam and its claim to be the "perfect, most complete system and way of life"? So why should Muslims expect *more* from Israel for its western, democratic, non-Islamic credal claims, all while expecting *less* from those that claim to live by the creeds of Islam? That's very odd....and rather embarassing for Muslims, don't you travesti think?

Those governments - whether elected or unelected, whether claimed to be democratic or otherwise - who kill civilians in order to terrorize the population, must be excluded from the councils of true democratic societies.

That means a complete TRADE EMBARGO against such regimes.

There are virtually no regimes in the world that can exist without some bilateral trade in order to survive. Deny rogue regimes the economic power to buy weaponry that they can use to stay in power , and they COLLAPSE within a few months.

It merely needs co-ordinated effort. However, where there is a major power that continues to feed and fund such regimes with military equipment and dollars, then the state that funds the terrorism is as guilty as the one that shoots the gun that kills the innocent civilian.

There are people in America, and elsewhere, who would not sleep at night if they acknowledged the bloodshed that their dollars have made possible in the hands of religious and/or political bigots.

But they do sleep because they have convinced themselves that as the blood shed was not theirs or their families, they must be doing God's will. These are the dangerous ones in any society.

Root them out, and we expunge the lifeblood of support for regimes that work against humanity and the good of society. There is no one superior race. We are all born equal. Black, white, Christian, Muslim, Hindu or Jew.

The killing of innocents must stop and the UNSC must be made truly representative of the global community. The power of veto must cease, as soon as is practically possible.

People of the world unite! You have nothing to lose but nuclear war.

"Reuven Rivlin, the speaker of Israel's Knesset, has said that he would rather accept Palestinians as citizens of one country than divide Israel and the West Bank into two separate states." Aljazeera.
The speaker is a member of Likud.
US media has totally ignored the news.
............Israel will not relinquish West bank/Jerusalem.
............The solution lies within this box.

I would ascribe blame, to the "Palestinians" and the Arabs, as well. They really don't want a peace agreement with Israel. They want Israel gone. A recent Palestinian poll found that a vast majority of Palestinians do not want to share Jerusalem with Israel; and an equally vast majority want all the land, from the Jordan River to the sea.

The current "negotiations" are emblematic of the situation. There is a peace process but one side won't even be in the same room as the other. What kind of peace is that?

Obama has made it much worse by giving the Palestinians hope that they can achieve their goals by waiting for the US to do it.

links of london charms
links of london jewelry
links of london bracelets

The peace process more than likely will not be advanced for many more years. Perhaps it will never be resolved. Until every last Israeli, average citizen and politician who is either a Holocaust survivor or child of one is gone. Yet the legacy of antisemitism remains deeply rooted in their offspring. And in the national psyche. When Israel further augmented its population with new immigrants who suffered discrimination in their homelands, it guaranteed successive generations of citizens informed by these experiences who will be similarly resolved NEVER TO LET IT HAPPEN AGAIN. And that means at ALL costs despite world opinion, incrimination and recriminations. The national will to survive is primal and therefore potent, even beyond reason.

To outsiders Israel's reactive policies, belligerence and aggressive actions in the region appear to be a conundrum given that Jews (like the Palestinians now) understand the murderous consequences of being the universal OTHER. But Israel believes in the maxim "if you give them (your enemies) an inch they will take a mile." Israel will never accede to that mindset again. Israel today is as much in the mold of Judas Maccabeus who defeated Syria and ruled Palestine in 167CE. When dealing with the seemingly intransigent Israelis, one might remember Bar Kokhba's revolt against the Roman's in 70 CE and three years later the intrepid 987 defenders who held off the Romans at Masada. The former lost the war and so did those at Masada. But the latter, refusing to concede defeat, all committed suicide.

The negotiations between Abbas and any Israeli government are pointless because Gaza is run by Hamas ,an extremist Islamic fanatical organisation who will never accept Israel even if a Palestinian state is established on the West Bank. In reality Abbas & Netenyahu cannot compromise because Hamas and right wing opposition in Israel will not allow them to. In 1921 Winston Churchill the newly appointed Colonial secretary was subject to a torrent of abuse on a visit to Gaza. The mob shouted '' death to the Jews. Cut their throats '' Then, there were , few Jews , no Jewish state , no refugees , no occupation, no wall but the hatred was the same then as now. So the answer is clear ,unless Hamas ( Islamic Jihad ) do a complete turn round in their policy , all negotiations should cease.

There is no sacrifice or concession, or series of concessions, which Israelis will make to placate Arab demands. They don't want a secular state, both the concept of secularism and statehood being foreign concepts to a society which organizes itself by tribe. They just like killing. If Israel weren't there, they would simply slaughter one another, as they do now, though their Arab-on-Arab suffering goes unnoticed by the people in this comment section who pretend to care about them.

I don't see how there can ever be peace in the middle east until religion is removed from government there. You can rationalize with a rational man, but you cannot rationalize with a zealot.

The only other solution is perhaps free trade. A muslim who has jewish customers that facilitate the profit of his business may not want to kill as many jews. Or shiites sunnis, or kurds, or whatever. compost tumbler