It has long been an article of faith among our more pragmatic foreign policy cognoscenti that the true third rail of American politics is the Israel-Palestine divide.
In addition to eschewing a knee-jerk allegiance to Aipac and questioning Israel’s brutal assault on Gaza, these elders of realpolitik have spoken out against the Jewish state’s creeping irredentism in the West Bank. And now they are urging President Obama to marshal his considerable negotiating skills on behalf of a viable two-state solution.
The time has come for Mr. Obama to shed his stridently pro-Israel rhetoric of 2008 and return to the notion of evenhanded diplomacy. Before the presidential campaign, he had expressed genuine concern for the plight of the Palestinians. What better way to mitigate their suffering than to declare his unswerving commitment to an independent, sovereign and geographically contiguous Palestinian state within one year?
Indeed, Mr. Obama should seize the opportunity afforded by the 10 signers of the “Bipartisan Statement on U.S. Middle East Peacemaking” and begin unity talks between Hamas and Fatah — under full American auspices.
Such a bold stroke would demonstrate American resolve, defang Islamic fundamentalists and provide Israel with a full-fledged partner for peace.
I wrote to him and declared:
a. your phrase "a knee-jerk allegiance to Aipac" is a bit knee-jerk itself.
b. you write of "Israel’s brutal assault on Gaza" but have you ever condemned the Hamas' brutal assault on Israel?
c. you write of "the Jewish state’s creeping irredentism in the West Bank" Judea and Samaria, as you surely know being it appears quite well-versed in the Bible being a Catholic, are very much Jewish territory.
d. no one will ever "defang Islamic fundamentalists" so as to "provide Israel with a full-fledged partner for peace".
If he replies, I'll surely let you know.
Posts
