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 : Stockman Scott's Political Debate Porch -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: T L Comiskey who wrote (20011)	6/5/2003 10:52:14 AM
From: abuelita	Read Replies (2) \| Respond to of 89467

it's still about that "U.S. vital interest" ... OIL A burning Bush speaks again in the Middle East By NORMAN SPECTOR UPDATED AT 10:41 AM EDT Thursday, Jun. 5, 2003 Ignore George W. Bush's rhetoric about Palestinian dignity. Forget the talk about security for Israelis. This week's summits in Egypt and Jordan -- the first tentative legs on the road map to Mideast peace -- were about oil. That's not to doubt the sincerity of Mr. Bush's remarks, or to question the faux morality that infuses U.S. foreign policy. It's simply to observe that altruism is not in a U.S. president's job description. As in Iraq, Mr. Bush has plunged into the Mideast peace process for one reason -- to pursue U.S. interests. Oil is why Americans came to the region, and it's why they'll fight to stay. Mr. Bush understands that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict jeopardizes the U.S. position in the world's gas pump, the Persian Gulf. Daily images of death and destruction inflame public opinion throughout the Arab world. Every attempt in the past 32 months to halt the violence has failed. The projection of hard power deposed Saddam Hussein and changed the balance of power; by occupying Iraq, the U.S. has become the 26th country in the region. It's being taken seriously, as it turns to the softer power of diplomacy. This week's summits demonstrated how much has changed. Israelis and Palestinians may finally have tired themselves out. Moderate Arab regimes now understand that the intensity of the violence threatens their regimes, too. Mr. Bush is showing a steely determination to make progress. Sure, he could have made more. It's regrettable that Ariel Sharon did not break bread with Crown Prince Abdullah of Saudi Arabia in Sharm el-Sheikh. Neither summit ended with a common declaration. And, though Israelis and Palestinians are finally embarked on the road map, nothing was said about the bumpy parts -- Jerusalem, refugees, borders -- leaving one to speculate whether the Americans are truly interested in resolving the conflict or simply in lowering its temperature. Still, one should not underestimate Mr. Bush's achievements. He used some very blunt language in a closed session that was inadvertently, but fortuitously, broadcast through an open mike. He gave Arab leaders his personal commitment to establishing "a Palestinian state that is free and at peace." He made it clear Israel "must deal with the settlements" in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. Speaking on behalf of his colleagues, Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak rejected "the culture of extremism and violence in any form or shape no matter what the motive." He promised to dry up the funding of terrorists by channelling all contributions directly to the Palestinian Authority. Tellingly, he did not mention the name "Yasser Arafat." Gone, too was the traditional equivocation about terrorism. Only the Syrians, who were not invited, are now hewing to the distinction between terrorists and freedom fighters. Yet, even their interests in a comprehensive peace were not forgotten at Aqaba -- clear evidence that the Americans were intimately involved in drafting the closing speeches. All week long, there was speculation about how much Mr. Bush would be able to squeeze out of the protagonists. In the end, he exceeded expectations of what Ariel Sharon and Mahmoud Abbas could, or would, say. The new Palestinian prime minister pledged to be a full partner in the U.S. war against terrorism -- in the name of his own national interests. He renounced blowing up babies in pizzerias -- as counterproductive, to be sure, but also as inconsistent with Islamic morality. He pledged to apply all resources to end the militarization of the intifada, and to resolve the Israeli-Palestinian conflict through peaceful means. Mr. Sharon reiterated his commitment to Mr. Bush's two-state vision, including the need for territorial contiguity in Palestine. Interestingly, he stressed that Israel's overriding interest in security could actually be enhanced by Palestinians governing themselves. In the meantime, he committed to respecting their human rights and dignity, improving living conditions, dismantling settlement outposts and to eschewing "unilateral actions" -- code for a settlement freeze. It was left to Mr. Bush to emphasize their commitments, and he promised to remain personally engaged in monitoring each side's performance. Significantly, however, while he reiterated his commitment to Israel as a "vibrant Jewish state" -- telegraphing U.S. opposition to any right of return of Palestinians to Israel -- he failed at either summit to mention the road map or its destination of 2005, promising only to "move toward true peace as quickly as possible." globeandmail.ca