Remember That Irish Peace?

Remember when the US sent over here a peace negotiator who had succeeded in Ireland?

George Mitchell.  He issued the report and then he became later Obama's "Special Envoy" who said

"From my experience there, I formed the conviction that there is no such thing as a conflict that can't be ended...Conflicts are created, conducted and sustained by human beings. They can be ended by human beings."

Remember that?

Well, read on

Three of the four main dissident republican terror groups in Northern Ireland are to merge and reclaim the banner of the IRA, in an escalation of attempts to de-stabilise power sharing..the new organisation claimed it had formed a "unified structure, under a single leadership". It said the organisation would be "subservient to the constitution of the Irish Republican Army". This is the first time since the 1998 Good Friday Agreement that a majority of the forces of dissident republicanism has coalesced...the new paramilitary force included several hundred armed dissidents, including some former members of the now disbanded Provisional IRA...The new organisation is planning to intensify terror attacks on the security forces and other targets related to what it regards as symbols of the British presence, according to the source.

^

After Ireland Success, Mitchell in Israel

"Success"?

You remember this:-

George Mitchell's patient diplomacy shepherded Northern Ireland to peace. Now for the Middle East ...

Barack Obama's envoy will bring the same quiet determination to negotiations on the Israeli-Arab front that he did as Bill Clinton's intermediary in the Troubles

Try the latest Ireland news:

Northern Ireland violence erupts after parades

BELFAST, Northern Ireland - Police battled Irish nationalists for control of a Belfast road yesterday as a day dominated by peaceful Protestant parades across Northern Ireland turned violent when night fell.

Riot police in helmets and body armor dragged kicking, flailing protesters from the pavement of Crumlin Road even as other protesters packed into side streets pelted police with rocks, bricks and Molotov cocktails.

and

55 officers injured in N. Ireland clashes

(CNN) -- Fifty-five police officers were injured in clashes that marked a controversial holiday march in Northern Ireland, authorities said Tuesday.

One officer, a female, remained hospitalized in stable condition, police said in a statement. Police said Monday she had been struck in the head by an object thrown at her.

Police Service of Northern Ireland Chief Constable Matt Baggott condemned the disorder in the Ardoyne area of Belfast, the statement said.

"A number of my colleagues have been injured and I wish them a speedy recovery," he said. "It places a great burden on my colleagues who exercised superb restraint, superb professionalism and superb courage. Last night we had people working for 24, 36, 48 hours and I would like to take this opportunity to thank them all."

The violence began on the eve of July 12, known as "The Twelfth" by Protestants who march to celebrate the victory of England's King William III over his ousted Catholic predecessor James II in 1689. The holiday has previously been marred by violence, and has been a source of tension between Catholics and Protestants.

More than 100 riot police removed Catholic protesters from a road in north Belfast to allow the march to take place, said journalist Peter Taggart. Rioters pelted police with Molotov cocktails and other explosives, and officers fired baton rounds and used water cannons in attempts to break up the crowds, police said. Several vehicles were carjacked and set ablaze, police said.

and

Children behind worst riots in Northern Ireland, says police chief

More than 80 police officers have been injured in clashes with young rioters in one of the worst outbreaks of street violence in Northern Ireland in the last decade, the police said on Tuesday.

“We are going through difficult times,” police chief Matt Baggott said in Belfast. The men and women of the police force had been faced with “attempted murder” during the riots on Monday and Tuesday.

The protests, which spread from Belfast to other parts of the British province, were linked to the traditional July 12 parades of the Protestant Orange Order.

Police said they suspected that dissidents from pro—Irish Catholic groups were behind fermenting the street violence.

Mr. Bagott said the chief objective of his force during the riots, which went on through the night, had been to “protect life.” Police took the unusual step on Tuesday of releasing footage shot from a police helicopter which showed youngsters showering police with missiles and petrol bombs, overturning police vehicles and swinging large wooden sticks at riot shields.

Police fired 70 baton rounds and used water cannon during the riots in Belfast, Londonderry and Lurgan, he said. A female officer attacked was still in hospital after being hit on the head with masonry during the riots in north Belfast.

So, that's the best George Mitchell did for Ireland?

And he wants us to follow his lead?

Mitchell Returning; More Talk on Not Talking

...U.S. Middle East envoy George Mitchell is expected back in the region this week, and senior PA negotiator Saeb Erekat confirmed that U.S. President Barack Obama has personally asked PA Chairman Mahmoud Abbas to agree to direct talks with Israel for a new Arab country within Israel.

and

US envoy Mitchell to return to Mideast in talks push

WASHINGTON — The United States said Monday that envoy George Mitchell will return to the Middle East this week in hopes of helping start long-dormant direct talks between Israelis and Palestinians.

"He'll be in the region in a couple of days," State Department spokesman Philip Crowley told reporters.

"We want to get them into direct negotiations as quickly as possible," he said. "Until we get in direct negotiations, there's little prospect of reaching a just settlement for everyone concerned."

Wait! Didn't Mitchell Solve the Ireland Situation?

Nope:-

Hillary Clinton, US Secretary of State, could be called in to break the impasse between Northern Ireland’s two largest political parties after a fruitless night of talks between Gordon Brown and his Irish counterpart, Brian Cowen.

Sinn Féin said that US intervention may be necessary as negotiations resumed at Hillsborough Castle in an attempt to rescue the power-sharing institutions.

Conor Murphy, a Sinn Féin minister, said this morning: ”Certainly the Americans are keeping a very close watching brief on this. I know she [Mrs Clinton] has spoken to people involved.” Sources from Ms Clinton’s office confirmed that she had been in touch with those involved in the negotiations.

Mr Murphy added: “This needs to be sorted out within hours, not days.”

What? Will we be in trouble?

Maybe:

Almost 12 years after the Good Friday agreement marked the high-water mark of the peace process, the complex and costly edifice of government in Northern Ireland apparently teeters and threatens to fall yet again.

Nobody could have predicted the bizarre revelations — the First Minister’s wife’s toyboy and the Sinn Féin leader’s paedophile father — that have helped to sweep the Province towards the rocks, but it will come as no surprise that the roots of the latest crisis are deep.

...The technical reasons for the rupture merely disguise the mutual antipathy that exists between parties whose political goals — Irish unity on the one hand, strengthening the union with Great Britain on the other — are irreconcilable.

irreconcilable.

Remember that.

Who's On First? Or, Is That Last?

I'm breaking this story up, or is that I'm deconstructing it?

1)

Special US envoy to the Middle East George Mitchell has called off a meeting scheduled for Thursday in Paris with Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu on the backdrop of the ongoing dispute over West Bank settlements.

2)

Defense Minister Ehud Barak is expected to leave for Washington for an unplanned meeting with Mitchell on Monday in order to mediate.

3)

The Prime Minister's Office. however, clarified Wednesday morning that Israel was the one to cancel the meeting.

According to a senior official on Netanyahu's entourage to Rome, "Israel is the one that called off the meeting with Mitchell due to the need to collect data and present them to him in an organized manner. The claim that the Americans canceled the meeting due to a disagreement is unfounded."

4)

According to the official, "The French confirmed this yesterday in a preparation talk ahead of the prime minister's arrival, and said that the Americans informed them that Mitchell would not arrive following an Israeli request."

5)

US State Department Spokesman Ian Kelly said that Mitchell's meeting with Netanyahu had been cancelled in order to give the special envoy an opportunity to meet with Barak. He added that Washington hoped to advance discussions on a variety of issues during Monday's meeting.

Does it make sense?

More on Mitchell Muckup

The pride of George Mitchell in his achievement of an Irish peace, was quite noticeable in his approach to the last month Israel-Arab conflict. The killings of two policemen in Ireland did dampen things.

Today, the London Times is reporting that:

A republican was charged last night with the murders of two soldiers shot dead by the Real IRA in Northern Ireland.

Colin Duffy, 41, will appear at Larne Magistrates’ Court today in connection with the murders of Sappers Mark Quinsey, 23, and Patrick Azimkar, 21, outside the Massereene barracks in Antrim on March 7. Shortly after the shootings the Real IRA claimed responsibility.

Mr Duffy has also been charged with five counts of attempted murder and one count of possession of a firearm and ammunition with intent to endanger life.

First of all, I'm glad to see the police are striving and being successful, if he is indeed involved.

However, this renewed violoence had me thinking and two weeks ago, I blogged about the murders, and wrote that if what Gerry Adams claimed - "that the British Government must resist 'any temptation or any demands for a return to the bad practices of the past. This would be equally wrong. It would also sideline the peace process and political leaders'.” - is acceptable to George Mitchell, then:

Does this mean that if Hamas, Fatah or Islamic Jihad or some other "Martyrs' Brigade" starts up again with the suicide-bombing, Israel would be prohibited from carrying out drastic but necessary action?

Well, it seems the parallel's been twisted:

Republican Sinn Féin...held a press conference...Richard Walsh, the organisation’s main spokesman, said of the killings: “I don’t accept the use of the term murder. They are acts of war.”

Josephine Hayden, general secretary of Republican Sinn Féin, who served a six-year prison sentence in the 1990s for weapons possession, said: “Once you have an occupation force in a country you would have resistance to it. It was inevitable, and it was resistance as far as I would be concerned. It wasn’t murder, no.”

...“Ireland is no different from any other country in the world; it has a right to defend itself and its sovereignty. It is regrettable that loss of life occurs but sadly an inevitable fact.”

So, it would be okay for Hamas and Fatah to continue killing Israelis according to the Mitchell Paradigm?

I'm mixed up.

More Irish Parallelism

Since the appointment of George Mitchell as Obama's special envoy to resolve the Israel-Arab conflict with Hillary Clinton's enthusiastic support, the issue of Ireland is important. The peace agreement Mitchell achieved is held up as a sign of success, to be an example.

Well, after the recent terror murders there, which pointed to a little problem (see here), I now read this:

Gerry Adams intensified a row over the use of special forces in Northern Ireland when he suggested that sending them to the Province would “sideline the peace process” and provide fresh impetus for republican splinter groups.

The Sinn Féin leader declared that while the significance of the recent murders should not be minimised, neither should it be exaggerated, because “the vast majority of people, including the people I represent, are opposed to what happened”.

Speaking in Washington, he said that the British Government must resist “any temptation or any demands for a return to the bad practices of the past. This would be equally wrong. It would also sideline the peace process and political leaders.”

Does this mean that if Hamas, Fatah or Islamic Jihad or some other "Martyrs' Brigade" starts up again with the suicide-bombing, Israel would be prohibited from carrying out drastic but necessary action?

Mitchell Messed in Ireland; And The Middle East?

Oh, my, Mr. Mitchell, there goes the Irish peace?

an attack on a British army base in Northern Ireland...killed two soldiers...Gunmen fired on an army base in Country Antrim, 16 miles north of Belfast Saturday night. The victims were the first British soldiers to be killed in Northern Ireland since 1997.

No one has claimed responsibility, although suspicion immediately fell on dissident Irish republicans.

Refresh your memory.

Does this portend a possible failure for him here in Israel?

I'm guessing yes.

They're Coming To Take Me Away

AFP reports:

Clinton to visit Israel, West Bank next week

US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton will visit Israel and the occupied West Bank from March 3 on her first official trip to the region, a senior Palestinian official told AFP on Monday.

Clinton will visit after attending an international conference in Egypt to help rebuild Gaza after the Israel-Hamas war in December and January, said senior Palestinian negotiator Saeb Erakat. It will be Clinton's first visit since she became President Barack Obama's secretary of state.

Obama's Middle East envoy, former US senator George Mitchell, is expected in the region this week and is due to hold talks with Palestinian president Mahmud Abbas in Ramallah on Friday, Erakat said.

I hope America wakes up to the dangers it's officials are perhaps forcing on Israel:

Hillary: Possible Hamas Connections in Future

George Mitchell reported to Hillary Clinton today and then they both met with the press.

I selected this portion to highlight:

QUESTION: -- (inaudible) it’s clear...that the Administration is making a concerted effort to send a signal of the priorities and the balance, and perhaps a rebalancing. Is that enough going in? Or, eventually, does there have to be a path, a diplomatic path to Hamas, in order to resolve Gaza?...

SECRETARY CLINTON: Well, Andrea [that would be Andrea Mitchell of NBC, Mrs. Allan Greenspan],



you know, we have a very clear policy toward Hamas, and Hamas knows the conditions that have been set forth. They must renounce violence. They must recognize Israel. And they must agree to abide by prior agreements that were entered into by the Palestinian Authority.

...Hamas knows that it must stop the rocket fire into Israel. There were rockets yesterday, there were rockets this morning. And it is very difficult to ask any nation to do anything other than defend itself in the wake of that kind of consistent attack. So that’s not new news. You know what our position is. It is something that the President has set forth.

We are not able to, you know, look into the future to see whether there will be changes on the part of Hamas that would meet our conditions. But you know, certainly, that would be a clear path for them to follow.

Hillary is hinting to Hamas.

P.S. The JPost, for example, didn't pick up on this.

Another Missive to Mitchell

From Adi Mintz's op-ed, former Yesha Council chairman:

We sobered up, Mr. Mitchell

Dear Senator Mitchell,

...A long time has passed since you left us with the report named after you, in May 2001...Along with your colleagues, you declared that violence will not resolve the region’s problem...Oddly, you compared the terrorists and their victims, while demanding the halt of violence on both sides. Back then already we were surprised to discover that you immorally adopted the same attitude to raging Palestinian terror and to Israel’s response, aimed at curbing and averting terrorism.

In that report, you also demanded to curb the “natural growth” in the settlements, at the heart of the Land of Israel, as if the settlers’ babies were the terrorists preventing peace.

Your successor, CIA Director George Tenet, detailed the recommendation and wrote that the Palestinians must completely end the violence, detain terrorists, cooperate with Israel in thwarting terror, siege illegal weapons, and prevent arms smuggling. We won’t deal with all the other recommendations here, yet we wish to inform you that none of these Palestinian obligations was met.

...We listened to you, we tried many ceasefires, and all of them blew up in our faces.

For a long time, too long, we refused to admit the failure of the Oslo process. However, by now almost every child in Israel knows that Oslo failed...The reports prepared by you and by Tenet are premised on the fundamentally flawed assumption that the Palestinians will fight terror, and that Arafat or Abbas’ troops will prevent the launching of Qassam rockets from Tulkarem to Tel Aviv or the mortar attacks from Qalqiliya on Kfar Saba.

Well, you should know that this never really happened. In the few cases where terrorists were detained, they were jailed for a brief period and later released in line with the “revolving door” policy...We tried in the past the brilliant idea you proposed – “joint patrols” by IDF forces and Palestinian security forces. These patrols ended when Palestinian forces firing at their Israeli “colleagues.” Our sobering up process continued when our Navy stopped the Karin A arms smuggling ship...

So, George, we first ask you to examine the results of the previous ideas you proposed...We hope that during your visit here you were reacquainted with reality and with the sobering up process we personally experienced, so that you won’t force us to repeat the mistakes of the past.

Tell Me This Isn't A Silly (Stupid?) Thought Process

U.S. envoy George Mitchell said on Thursday that opening the Gaza Strip to commercial goods would help to choke off the smuggling that Israel fears could replenish Hamas's weapons stocks.

But he said the Palestinian Authority of President Mahmoud Abbas must help to supervise the crossings, a demand that has been a major sticking point in Egyptian-brokered negotiations with the Gaza Strip's Hamas rulers for a long-term ceasefire.

"To be successful in preventing the illicit traffic of arms into Gaza, there must be a mechanism to allow the flow of legal goods, and that should be with the participation of the Palestinian Authority," Mitchell said after meeting Abbas.

If I have that right, we're supposed to open the crossing wide and that will stop smuggling?

Smuggling goes on either because one can get a higher price for something or because it's illegal: like guns, bullets, mortars, rockets - you know, the "luxury goods".

So, it doesn't make a difference if the border is open for the smuggler unless, of course, with the border open, it'll be easier to get the war materiel in. More places to hide it.

On Mitchell's Irish Success

Alex Massie was the Washington correspondent for the Scotsman, Alex Massie writes a blog for The Spectator. He lived in Dublin during the 1990s, asserts that

...the lessons of Northern Ireland cannot be easily applied to the Middle East-nor can Mitchell's Belfast template be readily transferred to Jerusalem.

There are some similarities...Sinn Fein and the Republican movement explicitly identified with the Palestinian cause, leaving the Unionists, for better or worse, to be associated with the Israelis. Both sides persuaded themselves that they, not their opponents, were the victims.

Mitchell's insight was to perceive that there could be no piecemeal deal. Instead there would have to be a grand bargain...This took years. When Mitchell arrived in Belfast the two parties would not even sit at the same table. Their discussions were relayed via a third party--Mitchell.

Mitchell was eventually able to persuade each party that it was unrealistic to suppose they could negotiate without giving ground. But the nature of what they were required to concede differed widely. Sinn Fein and the Republican movement acknowledged, for the first time, that not only did Northern Ireland exist as a political entity but that is also had a right to exist...In a similar fashion, it is hard to imagine Israelis being enthused by any putative recognition of their state's right to exist on the part of the Palestinians. That's the bare minimum they may feel like expecting.

...[what resulted was] the consequence of giving Sinn Fein the better end of the bargain. To Mitchell, the most important objective was keeping the Republicans on board. If replicated in the Middle East, this would be to pacify Hamas at all costs.

At the heart of the dilemma in northern Ireland was what came to be known as "constructive ambiguity": that is, the IRA signed on to an agreement that seemed to pledge them to disarm, but precious little pressure was put upon them to do so for fear that the IRA might wreck the agreement and return to war. The failure to hold Sinn Fein and the IRA to their commitments would eventually render the entire peace process hollow.

That wasn't Mitchell's concern, however. Throughout the process he was a patient, determined, cordial facilitator. A deal would be a deal. He overcame initial suspicion and was, in the end, regarded as a dogged, honest broker. There's no reason to suppose that he won't demonstrate similar qualities in his new role...

...Equally importantly, negotiations in Northern Ireland were the product of exhaustion. Most of the IRA leadership had realized there was no prospect of a military victory. They could not bomb "the Brits" out of Northern Ireland. Thirty years of paramilitary warfare had taken its toll: The Republican movement was tired and ready...But right now, in the immediate aftermath of the latest military engagements, that seems a dubious proposition...

And from a comment there:

The difference between the Northern Irish Peace Process and Middle East peace negotiations is even greater than acknowledged by Massie. By the time Mitchell had become fully engaged as a mediator, the IRA had declared a cease-fire, which essentially held throughout the process and afterward. Hamas is not ceasing its anti-Israeli "physical force" actions. Sinn Fein controlled the IRA and was the only radical faction standing in the way of peace. Hamas and the PLO now compete for the status of spokesman for the entire Palestinian movement, and there is no telling what further splinter groups may arise out of the cauldron of Palestinian discontent. On the other side, Israel is not analogous to the United Kingdom...Israel and Israeli territory is the whole game. Israel does not have to concede affairs in only one appendage of its territory to achieve peace, as London had. Israel requires recognition of its legitimacy and its territorial integrity to assent to a workable peace deal; there is no sense that Hamas, constitutionally committed to the exact opposite, is in any way prepared to do that. Thus, the circumstances are so different between these two situations that it is unhelpful to forecast the degree of Mitchell's likelihood of success based on Northern Ireland. Were that it was only so.

Mitchell's "Ireland Peace" Credit Starts to Unravel

As reported in the NYT:

A long-awaited reconciliation plan for Northern Ireland provoked a wave of anger across the province on Wednesday — and in the House of Commons in London — with a provision for payments of about $16,800 to families of all of the 3,700 people killed during 30 years of sectarian violence, including paramilitaries killed by their own bombs.

A news conference accompanying the release of the plan in Belfast, Northern Ireland’s capital, became the stage for an eruption of the anger and grief still burning among those who lost relatives in the sectarian violence. The struggle cast Protestant paramilitaries loyal to Britain against armed groups with roots in the Roman Catholic minority, including the Irish Republican Army, that campaigned for a united Ireland.

As the authors of the plan prepared to speak at a crowded Belfast hotel, Protestant hard-liners jumped up to shout insults and trade recriminations with others in the audience with links to the I.R.A. Those involved in the protests included men and women who lost relatives in the violence, or were wounded in the I.R.A. attacks that accounted for more than 60 percent of the deaths in the strife.

I can just imagine what the Arabs would do with this development.

If they had less than 4,000 victims, there's quadruple that, at least, here.

And who is identified of worthy of reconciliation payments here.

And is that enough money?

Oh my.

Obama.

Notice How Kadima Get's Into the Ambassador's Statement

In early 1971, for almost half a year, I was Sallai Meridor's youth movement leader, in Hebrew: madrich. He was maybe 15 or so then.

Here's Sallai's statement, as Israel's Ambassador to the United States, on the Mitchell appointment:

As the United States and Israel continue to work jointly on achieving peace and stability in the Middle East, and of countering the common threat of terrorism and state sponsors of terror from acquiring nuclear weapons, we warmly welcome and congratulate Senator George Mitchell on his appointment as special envoy for Middle East peace.

“Israel holds Senator Mitchell in high regard and looks forward to working with him on taking the next steps towards realizing a future of peace and security for Israel and her neighbors.

Looking forward, in Hebrew is מסתכלים קדימה or mistaklim kadima.

Kadima?

And by the way, I wouldn't be so excited and anxious about his mission.

And neither is Daniel Pipes:

First, how can one hold in high regard someone who came out with the wretched Sharm El-Sheikh Fact-Finding Committee Report also known as the "Mitchell Report" of April 2001? I did an analysis of it when it appeared at "Mitchell report missed it." I called it "a great disappointment." A couple of excerpts:

it reveals the would-be peacemaker´s typical unwillingness to judge right and wrong.… Not wanting to offend, in other words, creates an illusionary balance of blame ("Fear, hate, anger, and frustration have risen on both sides," says the report) that makes it impossible to distinguish between aggressor and victim, between right and wrong.

the Mitchell report suggests that Israel "should freeze all settlement activity" to mollify the Palestinians. This is a step the Israelis never agreed to, even when negotiations were under way. To do so now rewards the Palestinians for engaging in violence, something objectionable in principle and ineffectual in practice.

the report emphasizes getting the two parties back to the negotiating table, as though this were an end in itself. It seems oblivious to the important fact that negotiations over the past eight years did not bring the parties closer to a settlement but, to the contrary, exacerbated differences and had a role in the outbreak of violence.

I found that Mitchell and his committee were "myopically unaware of the real issue at hand, which is not violence, or Jewish settlements, or Jerusalem. It is, rather, the enduring Arab reluctance to accept the existence of a sovereign Jewish state." I suggested that, the real solution "lies not in getting the parties back as fast as possible to diplomacy, but in instilling in the Palestinians an awareness of the futility of their use of violence against the Jewish state."

George Mitchell's Joke

But will it be on him?

The Secretary mentioned Northern Ireland. There, recently, long-time enemies came together to form a power-sharing government, to bring to an end the ancient conflict known as the “Troubles.” This was almost 800 years after Britain began its domination of Ireland, 86 years after the partition of Ireland, 38 years after the British army formally began its most recent mission in Ireland, 11 years after the peace talks began, and nine years after a peace agreement was signed. In the negotiations which led to that agreement, we had 700 days of failure and one day of success. For most of the time, progress was nonexistent or very slow. So I understand the feelings of those who may be discouraged about the Middle East.

As an aside, just recently, I spoke in Jerusalem and I mentioned the 800 years. And afterward, an elderly gentleman came up to me and he said, “Did you say 800 years?” And I said, “Yes, 800.” He repeated the number again – I repeated it again. He said, “Uh, such a recent argument. No wonder you settled it.” (Laughter.)

And by-the-by, where is that "Palestinian state" to be?:

The Secretary of State has just talked about our long-term objective, and the President himself has said that his Administration – and I quote – “Will make a sustained push, working with Israelis and Palestinians to achieve the goal of two states: a Jewish state in Israel and a Palestinian state living [in ???] side by side in peace and security.”

Source

Following Condi, Hillary Goes Robust

I have noted the too-many times Condoleeza Rice used the adjective "robust" (see here and here, for example).

Now, Hillary seems to be adopting herself to State Dept. lingo despite claiming otherwise:

As I said yesterday in the State Department, we are going to work toward robust diplomacy. And I challenged my colleagues in the State Department to think more broadly, more deeply, outside the proverbial box, to let us know the ideas you have that will make what you do more effective for us.

P.S.

I have asked [Senator George Mitchell] to be the Special Envoy for Middle East Peace. He will lead our efforts to reinvigorate the process for achieving peace between Israel and its neighbors. He will help us to develop an integrated strategy that defends the security of Israel, works to bring an end to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict that will result in two states living side by side in peace and security, and to achieve further agreements to promote peace and security between Israel and its Arab neighbors.

Mitchell: A Miffed Maneuver of US 'Aggression'?

President B.H. Obama has announced that

George Mitchell, the former US senator from Maine who helped negotiate peace in Northern Island, will try to do the same between Israelis and Palestinians...Obama called on the Palestinian militant group Hamas to end its rocket attacks but declared that Israel must reopen its border with Gaza - an underlying factor in the recent flare-up in violence...

and, ominously, he added more, on his first visit to the State Department:

"It will be the policy of my administration to actively and aggressively seek a lasting peace between Israel and the Palestinians,"

The face of "US aggression":



Funny, over at the White House site, can't find anything on this appointment or even a Press Release tab.

But found this:

Israeli-Palestinian Conflict: Obama and Biden will make progress on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict a key diplomatic priority from day one. They will make a sustained push -- working with Israelis and Palestinians -- to achieve the goal of two states, a Jewish state in Israel and a Palestinian state, living side by side in peace and security.

Which sounds better: 'sustained push' or 'aggressively seek'?

Shmuel Rosner kicks in (or is that kicks Mitchell?) over at TNR - excerpts:-

George Mitchell's contribution to the peace process dictionary of lost causes is the link between "end of violence" and "settlements."...rereading his report to President Bush from eight years ago is like reading an old, outdated newspaper clip...Can Mitchell forget his 2001 report and start fresh? Can he overcome the human tendency to rehash one's previous conclusions without paying attention to change of circumstances?

...His report was adopted, but not wholeheartedly adapted, by both parties. It had something for everyone: The Palestinians got their demand (rejected by Israel) for a freeze of settlements, while Israelis got their unequivocal demand for "ending the violence" launched by Palestinians in 2000...Mitchell wrote that "a cessation of Palestinian-Israeli violence will be particularly hard to sustain unless [Israel] freezes all settlement construction activity," the first phase of the road map required that "Palestinians immediately undertake an unconditional cessation of violence."...When Mitchell comes to the region, he is going to hear contradicting stories, exactly the way he did in 2000: The Palestinians will still focus on settlement activities, while Israel will argue that violence is still a threat. Palestinians will try to convince him that the West Bank and Gaza should be handled separately, while Israel will try to argue that you can't fix one area without fixing the other.

But while most people will focus on Mitchell's supposed position regarding settlements (and the possibility that such position will make it hard for him not to pick a fight with the most probable next Israeli prime minister, Likud leader Binyamin Netanyahu), the Mitchell Report finding that seems much more problematic today is the conclusion that Palestinian violence was not planned by the Palestinian leadership (namely, Yasser Arafat). The report says that "we were provided with no persuasive evidence that the [Ariel] Sharon visit [to Temple Mount in 2000] was anything other than an internal political act; neither were we provided with persuasive evidence that the PA planned the uprising." This was, arguably, the most devastating rebuke of Israel's claims--what most Israelis believe today, and what the Bush administration eventually came to believe --that Arafat wanted, initiated, planned, and executed this terror campaign...

...As long as those forces working to destabilize the Middle East--Hezbollah, Hamas, and their enablers--control the pace of events and inspire the Arab masses, it is very hard to envision a "road map" that will take this track to its final destination...