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: JohnM who wrote (40017)	8/26/2002 3:47:31 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 281500

I think it should come from the US and Israel because, as Judt argues, the power imbalance, but I don't think it means that Arafat has to be a player. ...I think Edward Said has been right a very long time. Arafat was the wrong man for the times. This sounds as if you agree that it would be useless for Israel to try to "take the lead" as long as Arafat is in place and irreplaceable...don't look now, we may have found some common ground. btw, I think there are some other possibilities than the ones you list. The PA may slip into total anarchy (Daoud Kuttab says it's close to doing so), and the fall of Iraq may create some new Mideast realities. I don't think it's ever been useful to look only at Israel vs. Palestine without seeing the wider context.