SI
SI
discoversearch

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: neolib who wrote (228732)4/25/2007 10:20:43 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
The problem so far is that the US is not viewed by pretty much any other country on the globe as being fair handed. The USA needs to make it clear that the screws will be tightened on both Israel and the Pals to achieve a deal.

Same old hogwash. Gotta play fair between the arsonist and the fireman, so the arsonist's club will see you as fair handed.

Clinton already tried it. He discovered he had no leverage on Arafat. Now the Pals don't even have the semblance of a government. It's pure gang rule. But you don't care, because the theatre of being seen to pressure Israel to give up vital interests is all that matters, right?

Everybody knows that an actual deal is not the end game here. Well at least the Arabs know it.



To: neolib who wrote (228732)4/25/2007 10:30:53 PM
From: Nadine Carroll  Read Replies (2) | Respond to of 281500
 
Yes, with the real help of the Arab states, pressure could be brought to bear on the Pals, and the US could bring pressure on the Israelis. Just one small problem: the Arabs won't do it because they don't actually want the conflict to end; it's far too useful. Besides, it's too much fun watching the US squeeze just a little something more out of Israel during each go-round of the "piece process."

Maybe Barry Rubin can explain it to you:

The Region: Dead-end paths
By BARRY RUBIN


The world's approach to the Middle East is largely based on resolving the Israel-Palestinian conflict. Thousands of diplomatic hours, plane tickets, innocent reams of paper, and posh hotel rooms are being devoted to this effort. The pace of time, cost, and attention is accelerating.

But what if the problem cannot be fixed, at least for decades? Doesn't this require serious thought?

Instead the actual, unpleasant, reality is denied. This approach, while ultimately unsatisfactory and even dangerous, makes some sense. Spending lots of time trying out various unworkable options might keep these issues from becoming worse. It also covers those who do so from being blamed for the inevitable failure and future crises we can expect.

Still, there should be a lot more people explaining the true situation. Here is what we are told about the range of current policy options:

Talk a lot. A good dialogue never hurts and they might even serve food. So Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will meet Palestinian Authority nominal chief executive Mahmoud Abbas every couple of weeks. No harm. Let's both sides look cooperative and eager for peace. But nothing will come out of this either.

Throw in lots of money. Estimates are that around $1.2 billion was given as aid to the PA last year. This is more than during several previous years before the declared sanctions against the Hamas-led regime, not including money smuggled in by Hamas itself. Palestinians are the biggest per capita aid recipients in the world, even in a period when aid has supposedly been reduced.

And yet this does not mean that Palestinians are living well. The aid disappears into corruption or paid to PA employees who do nothing useful or as welfare payments to people prevented by bad regime policies and chaos from anything economically productive. At best, aid maintains the status quo, thus preventing material pressure for change (a more moderate government, peace with Israel, a crackdown on corruption and lawlessness). At worst it subsidizes terrorist gunmen, schools that teach Jews are sub-humans who should be killed, and continued Hamas rule.

Sanctions to put pressure for moderation, peace, and change. See previous item. If such sanctions have failed it is partly because so much money is being provided any way. While there is an attempt to target the sanctions against Hamas itself, funds can simply be moved around too easily to really fulfill this goal. European governments seem to feel that aid originally provided on condition that the Palestinians achieve a full and lasting peace with Israel should continue after they have rejected this option.

Build up "moderate" Fatah to counter radical Hamas. This is a clever strategy which would be very appropriate except for one small problem - Fatah does not support it. Of course, in saying this I don't mean that Fatah opposes Western help to itself (in fact, it is largely waiting around for outsiders to solve its problems and put it back into power).
The first problem is that Fatah is not doing anything to help itself. Since Hamas took power in January 2005 it is impossible to detect any effort by Fatah to reform itself, strengthen its leadership, fight corruption in its ranks, or develop its unity. All the shortcomings that led Fatah to defeat in the January 2005 elections are still present. Nobody can save an organization that acts as if it is so bent on its own destruction.

The second problem is that Fatah's main strategy in "combating" Hamas is to imitate it. Not that everyone in Fatah is radical and certainly not Islamist. But aside from the statements of a few, including Abbas himself, there is no big difference between them.

The third problem is that Fatah has accepted a role as Hamas's junior partner. The two groups are rivals. But at present they are allies.

Make Hamas moderate. Take one percent of Hamas leaders' statements in English. Discard the rest and everything said by them in Arabic. Throw in the belief that no one can really be radical. Ignore the fact that they think they are divinely directed and need not change since they are winning. Mix well with ignorance and - voila, Hamas Moderation Stew, makes millions of portions.

SO IF the two-state solution won't work, what does one do? Here, too, there is a bad back-up plan: the one-state solution. Since the Palestinians have produced a failed state, this brilliant concept proposes that having wrecked Palestine one might as well wreck Israel, too. Sort of expand outward the corruption, hatred, violence, and chaos. No, thanks.

However, the good news is that since this is unsolvable, the Middle East, with whatever appropriate help from the world, could try to solve a few other problems like terrorism, dictatorship, economic and social backwardness, inequality for women, inadequate educational systems, and so on.

For now, however, we are out of space or I would tell you how the United States can simultaneously stabilize Iraq; win Iraqi Shi'ites away from Iran; keep the Sunni happy; reconcile US with Iranian and Syrian interests; and defeat an insurgency by those happy to see the country levelled and millions murdered as long as they could claim to rule it.

jpost.com



To: neolib who wrote (228732)4/26/2007 9:45:14 AM
From: michael97123  Read Replies (1) | Respond to of 281500
 
"Then go to the Pals with united international support and say, "Guys, this is it, you screw this, and we will buy up a small section of northern Mali, and dump the lot of you there.""

With the pals the west has said "screw this" many times but still comes back for more. Thats what you dont get Neo. There were numerous opportunities to settle this under past presidents. The Pals are always fighting the old war. So what happens is no relocation to northern mali but more concessions considered. Much like iran and nukes. The west keeps saying dont cross this line and then iran does and the line gets moved back. The boot to northern mali must be really clear to them and we need saudi and egyptian ships in the harbor and ready to take them if they dont get real.

PS After the ambiguity of the outcome of the last war, you can bet the next one will be fought by the israelis to win and without regard to western sensibilities which react against what the israelis do even when they are most careful. If hamas indeed is starting the terror once again, all hell will soon break out there.