Amazon.com Widgets

Tuesday, December 7, 2010

[The following, by Barry Rubin, is crossposted from The Rubin Report.]

As I predicted here ten days ago, the Obama Administration has now given up attempts to get Israel to agree to a three-month freeze of construction on existing settlements.

Here is the most fascinating sentence in the New York Times' coverage:

"Officials said the administration decided to pull the plug because it concluded that even if Mr. Netanyahu persuaded his cabinet to accept an extension -- which he had not yet been able to do -- the 90-day negotiating period would not have produced the progress on core issues that the administration originally had hoped for."

Translation: They decided that a three-month freeze wouldn't do any good. In other words, as I've been saying since October, the administration put forward a policy that made no sense, offering big concessions in exchange for getting something worthless.

It is good that the U.S. government has recognized the silliness of what it has been doing the last six months.

Of course, the Times tried to blame Israel exclusively: "Mr. Netanyahu could face renewed pressure from the United States and the Palestinians as the hurdle to resumed talks." As happens so often, the newspaper's writers don't seem to be reading their own words.

After all, the reporter had just pointed out that Netanyahu tried but could not get the plan through his cabinet. Moreover, the administration messed up its diplomacy to the point that nobody in Israel could tell what it was offering.

And, of course, the Palestinian Authority has been refusing to negotiate with Israel seriously for two solid years. Yet the Times wants to blame Israel or the lack of talks.

At some point early next year the Obama Administration will have to decide whether to put this issue on the back burner or keep knocking its head against a stone wall. And that stone wall isn't Israel, it's the Palestinian Authority which, now that it has recognition from Brazil and potentially from other countries, will be more intransigent than ever.

1 Comment

I like Powerline's take on the matter:

Today, the Washington Post reported that "the Obama administration has abandoned its effort to persuade Israel to renew a construction freeze." Actually, the administration had persuaded Israel to renew the freeze for three months. It did so by offering certain incentives to Israel.

The sticking point was not the freeze, it was Israel's insistence that team Obama state the promised incentives to extend it in writing. As the Post acknowledges, "the United States ultimately decided not to comply with an Israeli request to put its offer in writing."

Why? There can only be one answer, and we all know what that highly embarrassing answer is.

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

[an error occurred while processing this directive]

Search


Archives
[an error occurred while processing this directive] [an error occurred while processing this directive]