There is a lot of talking going on in the Middle East for a change. And the press is clear that the US is not happy.
Advice From White House Is Not Always Followed
Israel is talking to Syria. Abandon the Golan Heights and you shall have peace say the Syrians. Syrians examine prospects for peace Yet as the BBC says. Israel would want Syria to cool its relationships with Iran, Hamas and Hezbollah. Yet for that to happen there would need to be major movement across the region and for the the US cooperation is necessary.
Lebanon seems to have an agreement, and that gives Hezbollah a lot more say in things in Lebanon. Time: Lebanon Agreement Buoys Hizballah. Yet: "For real stability to take root, the foreign countries fighting for regional supremacy in the cold war for the Middle East will have to stop using Lebanon as a battlefield." And of course that is a part of things between Syria and Israel. Time goes on:
The U.S. government may find a Hizballah-dominated Lebanon hard to swallow. Disarming Hizballah and securing Lebanon's independence from Syrian and Iranian influence was one of the Bush administration's major Middle East policies; it garnered broad support among European governments, including France, that were not on board in Iraq. Nor will Israel be keen to live with the fact that its most formidable adversary is now in de facto control of almost an entire country, with a sophisticated banking system, an international airport and a varied mountainous terrain in which to train and prepare for war. But Israel and America have few options. They can't isolate Lebanon like the Hamas-controlled Gaza strip, and the last two Israeli invasions of Lebanon were disasters. Like the American-backed government, they may have to admit defeat in Lebanon.
So as the NYT points out there is not a lot of consistency in what is said and done: Only last week President Bush was in Israel exhorting everyone not to talk to terrorists, and yet here it is talking to Syria who talk to Hebollah, and also talking to Hamas via Egypt, Thats OK, its good to make peace. But one gets the feeling the guys in the White House are not very happy at what that peace looks like. To quote last week:
A week ago, President Bush delivered a speech to the Israeli Parliament likening attempts to “negotiate with the terrorists and radicals” to appeasement before World War II. “We have heard this foolish delusion before,” Mr. Bush said. “As Nazi tanks crossed into Poland in 1939, an American senator declared, ‘Lord, if only I could have talked to Hitler, all of this might have been avoided.’ We have an obligation to call this what it is: the false comfort of appeasement, which has been repeatedly discredited by history.”
Only time will tell. But surely its worth a chance?
Comments