Saturday, December 01, 2007

PeaceMaker

News sources are offering cautiously optimistic reports about the prospects for success in the Middle East peace talks. (I like that people refer to these as Middle East peace talks when Iran isn’t invited and the Mid-East countries embroiled in war – Iraq and Afghanistan – are not on the agenda.) NPR’s Daniel Shore said this morning that Israel’s Olmert has said there can be no Israel without a Palestine. (That, of course, could be interpreted in more than one way.)

Wouldn’t it be ironic if a (semi-) lasting peace between Israel and Palestine could be brokered this time when George Bush, who hasn’t seriously involved himself in the issue in his whole time as President, has finally participated? He, of course, would then walk away claiming credit.

At least one Syrian state-owned newspaper doesn’t share any of the optimism. As reported by the International Herald Tribune, the paper claims:

"While the Bush administration and Israel may consider what happened and what could happen to destroy the Palestinian cause a victory, we consider it a defeat for a just and comprehensive peace," Tishrin said. That peace, it added, can only be achieved by ending Israel's occupation of Palestinian territories.

Which is why if George can claim any credit for success, it will only be a quick “Mission Accomplished” type affair, and not something real and lasting.

On the other hand, if the two countries could make some lasting peace efforts, George might indeed be able to take credit, considering he has been instrumental in creating such chaos in their neighborhood that the entire region is threatened with extinction if they don’t get a handle on it.


....but hey, do what you want....you will anyway.


No comments:

Post a Comment

Comments are moderated. There may be some delay before your comment is published. It all depends on how much time M has in the day. But please comment!