By Barry Rubin
Let's consider what has just happened. A farce.
What is shocking
is the lack of outrage by mainstream journalists and foreign policy
opinion-makers. This has required the slanderous consignment of normal and
proper and competent foreign policy practices--as would have been demanded and
done at any time in U.S. history--to silly partisanship that isn't even worth
discussing.
The United States of America
officially announced the resumption of negotiations when they are nowhere near
arranged. The mass media breathlessly followed each claim and got it WRONG.
No
one seems to have noticed. No one pointed out why there will NOT be serious
talks. No one pointed out that the Palestinians have refused to negotiate for
13 years.
No one pointed out the PA cannot negotiate peace because it cannot
commit the Gaza Strip to anything.
Nobody pointed out in the establishment that
the United States is supposed to be on Israel's side or why the settlements are NOT the
problem for peace.
Has this happened before? Yes, in
late 2010 when President Obama announced at the UN that the talks would soon
restart at Camp David. Prime Minister Netanyahu agreed; the Palestinians
refused. Is there a pattern here?
Does anyone notice that the
Palestinians keep demanding more preconditions, Israeli concessions but never
come to the tab;e?
Why, if Palestinians are so eager
and desperate to get a state do they not try to get one? Has anyone considered the non-logic of that claim?
Why should Israel have to again
make a concession of freeing Palestinian terrorists who murdered Israeli
civilians to get peace talks? Especially when the Palestinian Authority--and
even those previously released--have returned to murder!
Why dd the U.S. promise to Israel that it would support the 1949 ceasefire lines PLUS settlement blocks as its new borders, not even get mentioned in the coverage? The U.S. made a conflicting promise of the precise 1949 ceasefire lines to the Palestinians. This was a huge breaking of a promise to Israel--by unilaterally not supporting boundary changes in Israel's favoron settlement blocks (large settlements near the ceasefire lines) on which Israeli concessions that were made at the risk of lives had been based!
Why dd the U.S. promise to Israel
that it would support the 1949 ceasefire lines PLUS settlement blocks as its
new borders, not even get mentioned in the coverage? The U.S. made a conflicting
promise of the precise 1949 ceasefire lines to the Palestinians. This was a
huge breaking of a promise--not mentioning settlement blocks--to Israel on which Israeli concessions that were made at the risk of lives had been
based!
Why, then, should any future U.S
guarantee to Israel be believed? What if the U.S. decides that it doesn't want to respond decisively when the state of Palestine lets cross-border terror raids since, for example, it has not done very much about backing up Israel from attacks by Hamas or assaults from the intifadahs? If America is so neutral between the two sides will that always be true even if Palestine would commit aggression against Israel?
These are only some of the
questions that should be raised. This public debate is being conducted on a
false, sloppy, inaccurate basis in which the main news media and the U.S.
government can't even get their faces straight and remember what happened a few
years ago.
This article is published on PJMedia
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.