Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (17903)	2/2/2002 9:56:47 PM
From: Hawkmoon	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

What's amazing about all of this Nadine, is that these Arab "leaders" seem convinced that the establishment of a Palestinian state would somehow "fix" the problem. It may not even make a dent in it, but only provide a springboard for escalating to "state on state" violence. They are all far too quick to blame the current violence on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But they don't discuss the fact that its a battle of ideologies, westernization vs Islamism that is really the crux of the problem. They use the Israeli conflict as a distraction to deflect attention from their own corruption, or inability to stave off this grass roots "stealth revolution" represented by groups like the Moslem Brotherhood, Hamas, Hizbollah.. etc. The Arabs should fear that peace actually comes between the Palestinians and Israelis. Because without the conflict, they only ones left to be blamed for the economic state of the region will be their own leadership. Hawk

To: Nadine Carroll who wrote (17903)	2/4/2002 2:01:59 AM
From: tekboy	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

I think they are indeed puzzled, and distraught, but it doesn't bother me all that much, because it stems primarily from their lack of correct understanding of the situation on this end and that's not something we can do much about, IMHO. They thought U.S. policy toward Israel and the Palestinians would change because: a) they believe that policy contributed to the anti-Americanism prevalent in the Muslim world and thus to the September 11 attacks, and so changing the policy would be a way to reduce that anti-Americanism along with the risk of future attacks; b) they thought the Bush administration would try to buy their cooperation in the war on terrorism by adopting a much more pro-Palestinian line; and c) they have little real understanding of why U.S. policy is what it is and how it is determined, and so think changing it is simply a matter of an all-powerful president's shunning the nefarious influence of the Jewish lobby. In practice, the policy hasn't really changed much, both because the factors driving it are quite deep-rooted (intellectually, emotionally, politically, strategically) and because there's no even mildly attractive alternative out there at the moment (attractive to policymakers, that is, given all the pressures they are under). Aside from occasional flurries of diplomatic activity and a good amount of well-intentioned rhetoric, the U.S. has remained largely on the sidlines of events for about a year now, and will probably continue to do so for a while longer. It's hard to say that policy has been a success, since the situation has kept spiralling downward. But it's also hard for me to criticize it harshly, because I don't have anything much better to offer. tb@noexit.com