The New York Times and yet another editorial on Israel. Doesn't Tom, Friedman and Co. ever give up?
Excerpts:
In Washington this week, Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu of Israel sounded two different notes about peace negotiations...he enthusiastically advocated a peace agreement as a means to improve Israel’s ties with its Arab neighbors...But at other moments, a more familiar skepticism was apparent. He demanded that Palestinians recognize Israel as a Jewish state with “no excuses, no delays.”...
...In remarkably blunt comments, Mr. Obama said that he had not heard a persuasive case for how Israel survives both as a democracy and a Jewish state absent a negotiated two-state solution...
...In his Aipac speech, Mr. Netanyahu declared, “I’m prepared to make a historic peace with our Palestinian neighbors.” But, really, what other just and durable choice does he have? What is his long-term answer for Israel, if not a two-state solution?
My off-the-cuff comment:
Why jump to a state? Even the Zionists had to suffer 30 years of Mandate regime.
Let's try autonomy.
Then we do a Jordanian confederation.
Then a joint Israel-Jordan condominium.
Then, well, then maybe a Pal. state but probably the one-state solution. So why draw this all out?
^
No comments:
Post a Comment