|
Middle East – U.S. Fails Again
U.S. diplomacy under Rice: Mideast talks end with little progress
The first set of three-way talks among Secretary of State
Condoleezza Rice and Israeli and Palestinian leaders, initially billed as a new U.S. push to restart peace efforts, ended Monday with little progress other than a commitment to meet again.
In a 90-second statement following the two-hour meeting, Rice said the three discussed the changed political circumstances arising from a Palestinian power-sharing deal that includes Hamas militants.
Neither Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas nor Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert joined Rice as she delivered her statement, and she left the room without taking questions from reporters.
Rice said she would return soon, although she was not precise, and Olmert and Abbas said they would meet separately. State Department spokesman Sean McCormack said there is no date for another three-way meeting.
Think about that. The Secretary of State of the sole superpower convenes a meeting with two minor parties and gets snubbed by both of them. Not even the usual decorum of a joint press conference – nothing, nada, nil.
The influence of the U.S. in the Middle East under the current administration is now zero or below – except for the capacity to bomb anything or anyone to dust.
Thinking about it – that’s a real danger …
When will an Israeli government recognize Palestine, accept previous peace deals and renounce violence?
Obviously only when the U.S. puts up some pressure and stops paying billions of subsidies to Israel to make it do so.
Besides the logistics discussed here often enough (US troops, straits of Ormutz, US soldiers in Iraq sitting ducks, economy crash, etc. etc. that is disaster all round, mostly for the US) the posturing, very long lasting by now, is explicable by the fact that the Pres. of Iran, A, is in big trouble at home, and gets mileage from his oppo to the US, his insistence on Iran’s rights, his provocations, etc.
Behind the scenes, Iran’s behavior is different; taking into account, of course, that if A even wiggles a big toe the Western press accuses him of anti semitism and so on – much of what is reported is inaccurate.
Bush is in a different position. Belligerence towards Iran is not popular, except on the fringes (though they may be quite considerable numerically everyone knows they are nuts) and he is – as I read it – treading a line between appeasing and pleasing Israel, who plays the role of mad dog, either sincerely; through habit; or by skewed calculations (the latest Lebanon failure, the need to show strength, determination, efficient exploitation etc. etc.) vs. the need to show the ‘old guard’ that his decisions and politices are, at heart, US friendly, reasonable, good for business, condusive to maintaining US hegemony/image, intent on not destroying it for good.
Between the two hesitation and endless BS prevails; no real decisions can be taken, because the present US admin. is no longer capable of making far reaching policy decisions of any kind.
Preliminaries and posturings (Rice in the ME for ex) that have an announced but vague aim lead nowhere, they are temporising, holding measures designed to give the illusion of purposeful activity and control. Partners and opponents understand this and play the game, confident that if encouraged in this direction, nothing will be undertaken, nothing much will happen, as the danger of a nuclear attack is very real.
In such an environment, no grave decisions are taken. In a way, it is a face saving exercise. Iran, Israel, the US, all need to save face, and they will ultimately jockey to achieve (in their eyes) that.
For Iraq, the US press was unanimous in its reporting of war drum BS. For Iran, not so.
Posted by: Noirette | Feb 20 2007 16:52 utc | 12
|
