In what could prove to be a damaging moment for the McCain campaign, Former Clinton Administration State Department spokesman James Rubin has written an op-ed highlighting an interview he conducted with McCain a few years ago for Sky News in the UK. In the interview, conducted shortly after Hamas’ victory in Palestinian elections, the following exchange occurred:

[Rubin] asked: “Do you think that American diplomats should be operating the way they have in the past, working with the Palestinian government if Hamas is now in charge?”

McCain answered: “They’re the government; sooner or later we are going to have to deal with them, one way or another, and I understand why this administration and previous administrations had such antipathy towards Hamas because of their dedication to violence and the things that they not only espouse but practice, so . . . but it’s a new reality in the Middle East. I think the lesson is people want security and a decent life and decent future, that they want democracy. Fatah was not giving them that.”

Here is the video of the interview:

There are a couple of striking things about this revelation.

1) McCain’s charge today that Barack Obama’s willingness to meet with foreign dictators is a sign of naivete and unfitness for office looks like pure hypocrisy. Ironically enough, Barack Obama has actually drawn the line at Hamas, refusing to go along with Jimmy Carter. Obama will only meet with Hamas after they renounce terrorism and their commitment to the destruction of Israel. McCain now has egg on his face for supporting negotiations in the past that he now opposes.

It isn’t like the situation between Hamas and Israel is substantively different now than two years ago either. Hamas is just as dangerous to Israel now as then. The only difference seems to be that John McCain thought he could skewer Barack Obama for his support for diplomacy. It looks like McCain skewered himself.

2) Another striking aspect of McCain’s comments is his seeming rationalization for Hamas’ election. McCain sympathizes with the Hamas voter, it seems, citing the Palestinians’ desperation for prosperity and security that Fatah could not deliver. Well, Fatah may not have been able to deliver it, but that doesn’t mean Hamas was the answer.

If the McCain of 2008 had answered James Rubin’s question he would have said, “No, we will not treat Hamas diplomatically the way we did Palestinian governments of the past. Hamas is a terrorist organization and until they renounce terrorism and recognize Israel we have nothing to negotiate with them.”

Instead, McCain cited the “new reality in the Middle East,” and the need to “deal with [Hamas] one way or another.” And the context of the interview clearly suggests that McCain did not mean dealing with Hamas through force.

It seems the only new reality John McCain faces is his own hypocrisy.

With Lebanon in a state of siege and the pro-West government in control on paper only, how is President Bush’s visit to the region being viewed?

Here’s a paragraph from Wednesday’s editorial in Beirut’s The Daily Star:

“Bush is the delinquent foreign-policy maestro of an otherwise great country. He has failed to deal honestly and rationally with the realities of the region, preferring wishful thinking and simplistic black-and-white threats to the hard work and nuanced sensibilities that are needed to grapple with the problems, challenges and opportunities of the Arab-Asian region. His desperate, last minute, pull-the-rabbit-out-of-the-hat attempt to achieve Palestinian-Israeli peace at Annapolis was clearly insincere - because he didn’t invest the required political capital to get it done, and lacks the intellectual clarity and moral gumption to make it happen. He hoped to ride a runaway horse to the finish line and ended up in a horror house of mirrors. His peace partners have proved illusory, his necessary impartiality is nonexistent, and his sense of how Palestine and Israel fit into the wider picture in the Middle East is totally absent. ”
Read the rest of this entry »

As President Bush visits an Israel celebrating its 60th anniversary, Arabs and Palestinians commemorate the “Nakba,” which in Arabic means “the catastrophe.”

For a sampling of what all nations in the region outside of Israel think of the events and President Bush’s visit, a good place to start would be this editorial from Jordan’s Jordan Times.

It reads in part:

“U.S. President George W. Bush yesterday arrived in Israel to cheer that country’s independence and celebrate Israeli democracy. … Bush hailed Israel as an example to the region. One wonders which example Bush was referring to. How to get rid of a pesky native population? How to create a democracy for 80 percent of its people, based on their ethno-religious backgrounds, and present itself as a haven for progressive values? Or could it have been how it has occupied a neighboring territory and people and blame the victims for their oppression?”
Read the rest of this entry »

So what’s the global prognosis for George W. Bush’s latest and last trip to the Middle East as President?

Judging from this account from Le Figaro’s Jerusalem correspondent Patrick Saint-Paul, one might diplomatically call European expectations “modest.”

The lede of Saint-Paul write-thru reads:

“The American president could hardly have envisaged a more unfavorable climate for his Middle East tour. Expected this morning in Jerusalem to participate in celebrations for the 60th anniversary of the State of Israel, George W. Bush will have few other reasons to rejoice during a tour that will also take him to Saudi Arabia and Egypt, and which is likely to illustrate the failure of his policies in the region. The Israeli-Palestinian peace process is on the brink of collapse. In Lebanon, the pro-Western government of Fouad Siniora is suffering a Hezbullah onslaught, while the Shiite movement is supported by the two black beasts of U.S. policy in the region, Iran and Syria.”

By Patrick Saint-Paul, correspondent in Jerusalem

Translated By Sandrine Agoerges

May 13, 2008

France - Le Figaro - Original Article (French)

The American president arrives in Israel in midst of political uncertainty and with the peace process is at a standstill.

The American president could hardly have envisaged a more unfavorable climate for his Middle East tour. Expected this morning in Jerusalem to participate in celebrations for the 60th anniversary of the State of Israel, George W. Bush will have few other reasons to rejoice during a tour that will also take him to Saudi Arabia and Egypt and which is likely to illustrate the failure of his policies in the region. The Israeli-Palestinian peace process is on the brink of collapse. In Lebanon, the pro-Western government of Fouad Siniora is suffering a Hezbullah onslaught, while the Shiite movement is supported by the two black beasts of U.S. policy in the region, Iran and Syria.

For his second visit to Jerusalem since last January, Bush will be forced to note that since he undertook to revive peace negotiations between the Israelis and Palestinians at Annapolis in late 2007, no progress has been made. “Unless he has a rabbit in his hat, this will be the third time in the past half year that the U.S. president shows the Palestinians and the entire Arab world that they are wasting their time by trying to end the occupation by peaceful means.” says Akiva Eldar in an editorial entitled Bush should stay home .

The hope of the American President to see an agreement before the end of the year seems illusory. According to his entourage, the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, told Bush during his visit to Washington last month that upon discovering the positions of Israeli negotiators, he thought it was a joke - so far where they from the parameters set by Bill Clinton at the time of the previous talks.

According to the Palestinians, Israeli negotiators sought to retain, in addition to large areas with Jewish settlements, the Jordan Valley up to the outskirts of Nablus - amounting to about 10 percent more territory. In Jerusalem, there would be no question of splitting the old city - home to the sacred sites, nor the restoration of the Arab districts that border it. Israel merely proposed Palestinian control over an “Esplanade of Mosques” and some of the suburbs surrounding East Jerusalem. The talks were jeopardized by programs to enlarge Israeli settlements in the West Bank and violence in Gaza strip, where missiles launched by Hamas activists have led to an Israeli military response.

READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing foreign press coverage of President Bush’s trip to the Middle East.

Now that the pro-Western government in Lebanon has been “put in its place” by Hezbollah - and by extension Iran and Syria - what is Israel up against - and what narrative will the Islamists use to heal the wounds and consolidate their victory?

Yasser Al Zaatera of Palestine’s Samiddon newspaper outlines the likely approach.

Explaining why Lebanon’s Pro-West Sunni government is afraid of Hezbullah and Iran, Zaatera writes:

“The people of the Umma [the Muslim Nation] and in particular the Sunnis, are as captive as they are perplexed. On the one hand, they know that what’s happening in Lebanon is an integral part of the battle that the Americans and Israelis are waging against forces of resistance and opposition in the region. Read the rest of this entry »

Credulous, likely-senile Jimmy Carter had tea with the terrorist group Hamas and now, according to MSNBC, Hamas is asking for a 10-year “truce” while refusing to recognize the State of Israel on the condition that said State of Israel return to the nearly-indefensible 1967 (read 1949) borders.

This is nothing new from Hamas, which would love to import offensive weaponry for the next 10 years while ruling both the West Bank and the Gaza Strip. Hamas’ terrorist attacks will simply be farmed out to (or conveniently blamed upon) Islamic Jihad, Hezbollah, Al-Qaeda, Al-Aksa Martyrs’ Brigades etc…while Hamas claims to be at peace and that Israeli self-defense violates this ‘hudna’ (an Islamic temporary truce until victory can be attained over an unwary enemy).

Hamas had its chance to give up violence and become a constructive political organization when it won that so-called election. Hamas could have suppressed violence and dismantled the other terrorist groups (see above list) while working with Israel and the world community to ease the plight of its subjects. Did Hamas choose to grow up? No way! Hamas chose to blow its big chance and continue to bring misery to the Palestinian Arabs.

Only an ignorant, politically-correct, self-righteous moralizing fool would buy-into this nonsense.

Mike Lester, The Rome News-Tribune

I don’t have a ton of faith in this effort, but I don’t imagine it could be any worse than having members of my own synagogue intimate that I’m an anti-Semite because I don’t unequivocally support Israel.

From Ynet:

The [Israel] Foreign Affairs Ministry has long since been exerting considerable efforts to bring the prominent writers for an extensive tour of the country, in recognizing the influence many of the writers wield and the fact some of them represent websites that are less-than-friendly towards the Israel.

While Israel enjoys relatively balanced coverage in American mainstream media, there are numerous blogs identifying with the liberal left who are unwaveringly critical of Israeli policies, often referring to Israel as an apartheid state which, among other things, is responsible for Washington’s decision to go to war in Iraq.

The unique tour was organized by the Solomon Project, which was founded in 1996 to “educate the American Jewish community about its rich history of civic involvement.”

The bloggers, along with leaders from various progressive organizatios, will meet with Israeli bloggers, journalists and Knesset officials. They will also be briefed on the security situation in the region and Israel’s civil society.

The group will be taken to view Sderot and Israel’s ‘narrow waistline’ by helicopter in an effort to convey the true meaning of a return to the borders of June 4th 1967. The guests are also scheduled to visit with the top negotiator for the Palestinian Authority, Saeb Erekat and may also meet Prime Minister Ehud Olmert or Foreign Affairs Minister Tzipi Livni.

“We are looking forward to an informative and educational trip,” said National Jewish Democratic Council (NJDC) Executive Director Ira Forman, director of research for the Solomon Project Research.

“It is important that progressive bloggers and leaders of progressive organizations learn first-hand about the current situation in Israel. We also want to provide them with an eye-opening experience that will help them better understand the complexity of the Arab-Israeli conflict.

I haven’t written much about this, but I will be traveling to Israel for two weeks later this year. What saddens me is that the government of Israel thinks that a visit to Israel might be able to accomplish what none of us who have tried to be reasonable on sites such as Daily Kos about Israel have been able to accomplish.

On the other hand, I’ve often remarked to people who have never been there that you just cannot fully understand how gut-wrenching the conditions are there - throughout the country and the occupied territories, from a humanity level and from an anthropological level, unless you go there.

You also come away realizing why belief in and talk of refusal to recognize one’s existence has no place in a peace plan of any type for the Middle East.

Hattip to Holly in Cincinnati.

A birthday celebration of a nation should also be an occasion for sober introspection. Israel and Palestine have become such emotive issues that few are ready to discuss the plight of these two (and their people) without taking sides.

I have great love, admiration and sympathy for both Israelis (Jews and others) and Palestinians who have been caught up in a vicious circle of geo-political ambitions of other nations, as also historical developments, several decades before the birth of Israel.

This post would attempt to first highlight the circumstances leading to the birth of Israel. Later, what best can be done to alleviate the suffering of the people of Israel and Palestine. But before that, an introductory remark as to why I suffer at the continuing agony and pain of Israeli/Palestinian men, women and children, and the prevailing madness. Imagine there was a time when Jews and Arabs lived in that region peacefully, and both had objected to the settlement of outsiders there.

My first hand introduction to Israel was through a friend who went to study there in the early 1980s. He was totally impressd by the warmth and sincerity of the people. He told me of the hard work put in by the people who had settled there from different countries and turned the once barren land into a prosperous one. I was not surprised that he fell in love with an Israeli girl, and would gladly return there given a chance. My other friends who visited Israel had similar stories to tell.

My encounters with Palestinians were during my journalistic stint in Saudi Arabia in the late 1970s. I learnt that they were not welcome there, or any other Arab country, and looked upon with suspicion, as happens to any people who are rootless and thrown out of their lands. I found them as warm, sincere and emotional as the Israelis.

So why are we witnessing decades of horrible fights between two wonderful peoples…the likes of whom you may find with great difficulty in the present day world?

First, the history. Let me quote from an article by Tim Llewellyn discovered recently while surfing the net: “In many minds, the birth of Israel is closely identified with the Nazi terror in Europe and the Holocaust, but in fact the conception of and planning for a Jewish state had begun some 60 years earlier (before the birth of Israel). The state of Israel was proclaimed by the Jewish leader, David Ben Gurion, on May 14, 1948, and officially came into being on the 15th, after British Mandatory rule ended at midnight.

“The Messianic idea of returning the Jews to their ‘promised land’ had been a Puritan religious belief since the 16th Century. In the mid-19th Century, British politicians saw another value: that of having in place in the Middle East a Jewish entity sympathetic to the British Empire.

“Two phenomena made real these and the Jews’ own previously vague aspirations of ‘return’: the burgeoning European nationalism of the time, from which the Jews felt excluded; and the massacres, or pogroms, carried out by Tsarist Russia against its six million Jews, the largest single Jewish population in Europe, which spread into the Ukraine and Poland.
Read the rest of this entry »

We just posted at WORLDMEETS.US something that anyone interested in global affairs simply must watch.

Nearly every year at the annual Arab Summit, Libyan despot Muammar Qadhafi gives a speech to the collected rulers of the Arab world who in stony-faced silence, sit and listen to him. Invariably - it is absolutely priceless.

From the good people of the Middle East Media Research Institute, I offer to you, Libyan Strongman Mu’ammar Qadhafi

While President Bush likes to think that sooner or later, historians will regard the Iraq War at one of humanity’s great turning points, many informed observers are skeptical. William Waack, chief global affairs columnist for Brazil’s O Globo writes, ‘Can one now anticipate the judgment that will be made within the space of a generation of the Iraq invasion? In my opinion, yes. … the Iraq War seems to have precipitated a succession of events over which the United States has little control … in 20 years, the invasion of Iraq will be judged in even more severe terms than it is today.’

By William Waack

Translated By Brandi Miller

March 20, 2008

Brazil - O Globo - Original Article (Portuguese)

One comprehends President George W. Bush’s confidence that history will judge the Iraq invasion kindly, say in about 20 years. It’s a fairly well-known fact that the contemporary nature of an event doesn’t necessarily allow one to understand the magnitude and consequences of the occurrence. Would you like two good recent examples? It was easy to anticipate what would happen after the fall of the Berlin Wall in 1989. But few anticipated the consequences of the Soviet Union’s invasion of Afghanistan in 1979.

Can one now anticipate the judgment that will be made within the space of a generation of the Iraq invasion? In my opinion, yes. I see the invasion of Iraq in the same category as the 1967 war (the Six-Day War) between Arabs and Israelis, which profoundly transformed the Middle East and the consequences of which we are still living with today, over 40 years later.

[Editor’s Note: In the Six Day War of 1967, the Israelis vanquished the combined Arab army of Egypt, Jordan, and Syria - long with troops from Iraq, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait and Algeria ].

There is an interesting parallel between the Israel political and military leaders who fought the war of 1967 and what is happening with the Americans today. Forty years ago, Israel judged attack as their best defense, believing that a “preventive” war (I’m pushing the concept a little, for clarity) would guarantee the security of the State, and principally, they felt that they would only briefly remain in Arab-occupied territory (especially the West Bank) - for they had not the slightest plan to remain.

In the case of Iraq, these five years have shown that above all, the Americans lacked a strategic long-term vision. Judging by the ample and well-researched literature already available, there was adequate planning only for the short term. They ran a brilliant, high efficiency, low cost military operation (I refer only to the first 20 days of the campaign). The rest can be summarized in one phrase: dilettantism marked by impressive ideological bias.

[Editor’s Note: Dilettantism is defined as the act of being an amateur or a ‘dabbler.’]

Does Bush have reason to suggest that the “strategic results” of the Iraq invasion will be duly appreciated at a time when newspaper headlines aren’t subject to short-term political interests? He does, but not for the reasons he claims. There are two long-term transformations that only began with the war, but that will probably play out over the next 20 years or more.

READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing translated foreign-press coverage of the Iraq War.

From the TimesOnline (UK):

In an extraordinary development in New York, an emergency session of the United Nations failed to agree on a condemnation of the killings, the first major attack in Jerusalem in four years.

Ban Ki-moon, the UN Secretary General, Britain, France, the European Union, Canada, Israel and Mahmoud Abbas, the Palestinian President, condemned the strike, while President Bush assured Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, of full US support.

But any hope of an agreement was lost as Israel and Libya traded insults and accused each other of terrorism.

The United States had drafted a statement which read: “The members of the Security Council condemn in the strongest terms the terrorist attack that took place in Jerusalem which resulted in the death and injury of dozens of Israeli civilians.” It had hoped the 15-nation council would unanimously support the text but Libya, backed by several other council members, prevented its adoption.

“We were not able to come to an agreement because the Libyan delegation with the support of one or two others did not want to condemn this act by itself but wanted to link it to other issues,” Zalmay Khalilzad, the U.S. Ambassador to the United Nations, told reporters after the council meeting.

The Libyans wanted to include in the statement language condemning the recent Israeli incursions into Gaza, which have killed over 120 Palestinians, many of them civilians. Khalilzad rejected the move, arguing that killing students in a school was different from the unintentional killing of civilians.

Dan Gillerman, the ambassador of Israel, which is not on the council, referred to Libya as the country responsible for the 1988 bombing of Pam Am Flight 103 over Lockerbie, adding: “Unfortunately, this is what happens when the Security Council is infiltrated by terrorists.” Libya, a long-time enemy of Israel, was elected to the council last year after the United States dropped its objections.

Someone remind me - how is it that Libya is on the council in the first place? Oh - yeah - there it is in that last line. The U.S. dropped its objections to having Libya on it.

And who exactly objects to Israel being on it?

Disclaimer: Other than being on a Model UN ICJ court, I know little about the inner-workings of the U.N. (though I’ve eaten at a great French restaurant just around the corner from it). Feel free to educate me, in an objective way before lunging into the subjective ways.

Ynet: Terrorists kill 8 in Jerusalem

Two terrorists infiltrate rabbinical seminary in Kiryat Moshe quarter, open fire at dozens of students. At least eight people reported killed. Police still in pursuit of second gunman. Celebrations already underway in Gaza

This is why Egypt should take over Gaza and Jordan should take over most Arab portions of the West Bank. Neither country needs encouragement to rule with an iron hand.

This is why Israeli Arabs (who are Israeli citizens) should swear a loyalty oath to the State of Israel (and not commit crimes against the sovereignty of the state) or face deportation with revocation of citizenship.

Jerusalem Post:

Eight people were confirmed dead in a terror attack at Merkaz Harav Yeshiva, near the entrance to Jerusalem on Thursday evening. According to Channel 2, the “Galilee Freedom Brigades”, which claimed responsibility for the attack, is a Hizbullah-affiliated organization.

Magen David Adom have confirmed 10 wounded civilians, including three seriously. One terrorist was said to have been killed by a student.

Witnesses said that only one terrorist had entered the building and that he managed to fire 500-600 bullets over the course of 4-10 minutes before he was killed.

Although witnesses said only a single terrorist carried out the attack, police were searching the building for an additional terrorist, preventing the entrance of rescue workers. Later Police Chief David Cohen confirmed that there were no additional attackers.

The terrorist entered the Merkaz Harav Yeshiva in the neighborhood of Kiryat Moshe carrying weapons. He was not wearing a suicide-bomb belt as earlier reported.

The gunman entered the library where about 80 people were gathered, witnesses said, and opened fire.

Statement from Hamas:

We bless the operation. It will not be the last

Haaretz Report: East Jerusalem resident behind attack

Nine Mercaz Harav students hurt, three in serious condition; most students are high school age

AND

In Gaza City, residents went out into the streets and fired rifles in celebration in the air after hearing news of the attack on the yeshiva.

Is the Bush Administration hoping for or perhaps even egging Israel on - to invade the Gaza strip and destroy Hamas’ power base there? Political Commentator Maria Appakova writes for Russia’s Novosti, ‘Sixty four percent of Israelis consider it necessary to hold a dialogue with Hamas to obtain a truce. But this is hardly in the interests of the United States. Nor is a truce likely to lead to peace. … Thus, just one option remains - the destruction of Hamas power in Gaza.’

By Maria Appakova

Translated By Igor Medvedev

March 5, 2008

Russia - Novosti - Original Article (Russian)

MOSCOW: U.S. President George W. Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice have simultaneously announced that they continue to believe in the possibility of establishing peace in the Middle East by the end of 2008.

These statements were made the day after Israel concluded ground operations in the Gaza Strip which resulted in the deaths of over 120 Palestinians. What price will Palestinians and Israelis have to pay before Washington realizes that its hopes have been dashed?

Bush’s words of hope, expressed during a press conference in Washington on the results of talks with King Abdullah II of Jordan, could perhaps have been dismissed as diplomatic politesse. But Rice was at that very moment visiting the Middle East and could see for herself what was going on in the region. In parallel with her meetings in Israel, rockets continued to fall; and the Israelis continued surgical strikes in Gaza on the eve of withdrawing its troops.

So what is the source of such faith that peace can be established in the next 10 months - and at a time when it seems that all international efforts to return the two sides to the negotiating table, especially those of the United States, have failed?

Yes, of course Israeli and Palestinian leaders maintain that peace remains their strategic objective, but statements on the resumption of talks have been sluggish. On the contrary, Israel is actively discussing new full-scale operations in the Gaza strip. For his part, President of the Palestinian National Authority, Mahmoud Abbas, announced on the eve of Rice’s visit on Sunday that he was freezing negotiations with Israel, which were launched late last year in Annapolis under the patronage of the United States.

Recall that meetings between Israeli and Palestinian delegations resumed over the past few months, including those headed by Abbas and Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert. The purpose of the meetings was to discuss the parameters of a Palestinian-Israeli settlement. Before that, there had been no talks on a peace agreement since the fall of 2000. They were at best not about peace, but about a truce and a ceasefire. Now the situation has returned to what it was over seven years ago.

READ THE REST AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing translated foreign press coverage of the Mideast crisis.

Is Israel’s latest incursion into Gaza an attempt to put an end to the firing of rockets from Gaza into Southern Israel, or is it something much more? According to this analysis from Algeria’s French language Le Quotidien, what people in Gaza and Lebanon are now witnessing is the build-up to a joint U.S.-Israeli ’settling of accounts’ to ‘reconfigure the balance of power in the Middle-East and enable them to achieve their political agenda in the region.’ Kharroubi Habib writes, ‘Everything suggests that Israel and the United States are creating the conditions for a new war in the region, at the end of which they will finally establish ‘peace’ on their terms. And although they don’t openly say it, even Arab forces in the region are pushing for this Israeli-American plan. That includes the Palestinian Authority of Mahmoud Abbas, who is counting on regaining control of the Gaza strip.’

By Kharroubi Habib

Translated By Sandrine Ageorges

March 2, 2008

Algeria - Le Quotidian - Original Article (French)

Since Wednesday, the Israeli air force has been conducting raid after raid over the Gaza strip. These are no longer “targeted” strikes, but are operations meant to claim the largest possible number of victims in a population that has been declared a “hostile entity,” and to which the principle of “collective Punishment” applies.

In just a few days, hundreds of Palestinian men, women and children have perished, having been engulfed in fire. But the worst is unfortunately still to come for the people of Gaza, as the Israeli government prepares for a major operation against their territory. It is this that the air raids are preparing, with the aim of “breaking” the morale and capabilities of the popular resistance in Gaza.

One should not view the ongoing aggression against Gaza as a response to rockets being fired on the Israeli village of Sderot. It is rather, in our view, the prelude to a much larger operation, planned jointly by Israel and the United States, to reconfigure the balance of power in the Middle-East and enable them to achieve their political agenda in the region.

It is by no means fortuitous that just as Israel launched its raids over Gaza and warned of plans to begin ground operations, the United States announced the presence along the Lebanese coast of one of its warships, the USS Cole.

READ ON AT WORLDMEETS.US, along with continuing foreign-language coverage of events in the Middle East that relate to the United States.

Some recent polling demonstrates what many of us have suspected: it’s the leadership, not the people, who are the barriers to lasting peace with Israel.

Is there any real point to President Bush’s trip to Israel and Palestine this week - his first ever? According to the op-ed article from France’s Journal du Dimanche au Quotidien, ‘When he flies off to Israel and Palestine on Tuesday, his Arab and Israeli counterparts will be glued to their television sets watching the New Hampshire primaries.’

The Chronicle of Gilles Delafon, Translated By Pascaline Jay, January 6, 2008
France - Le Journal du Dimanche au Quotidien - Original Article (French)

It seems so long ago that George W. Bush and his neoconservative friends promised, with great confidence, to redraw the Middle East along more democratic lines. The final tour of the region that the American president will begin this week will highlight above all the extent that his foreign policy has failed.

The proof of this is that when he flies off to Israel and Palestine on Tuesday, his Arab and Israeli counterparts will be glued to their television sets watching the New Hampshire primaries to find out how the United States intends to turn the page. Will it be by electing a woman or a Black person; a Baptist pastor or a Mormon governor?

Even the White House admits that nothing much is to be expected from this visit. Read the rest of this entry »

Are the Israelis intentionally trying to derail progress on President Bush’s trip to the Palestinian territories and Israel - his first visit to the country? According to this op-ed article from the largest newspaper on Palestinian territory, Alhayat Aljadeeda, the Israelis are introducing issues of dispute and causing turmoil that have never been part of the peace talks, so that President Bush will be too busy putting out fires to make any real progress.

“Israel is preparing for President Bush’s visit by reshuffling the cards and by demonstrating that there are problems that were not included in any discussions before, such as the verbal escalation over political and security relations with Egypt!!!”

By Yehia Rbah, Translated By Jenny Oliver, Palestine - Alhayat Aljadeeda - Original Article (Arabic)

It appears that the Israeli ruling coalition led by Ehud Olmert isn’t satisfied with the bloody military escalation in the Gaza Strip that amounted to eight air-raids in one day. The air-raids target civilians, such as the Fayyad family [photo, right], as well as resistance fighters and homes. Additionally, dozens have been injured and abducted and the vicious encroachment of Jewish settlements continues. Meanwhile, statements by Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni and Defense Minister Ehud Barak have roiled relations with Egypt, which shows the real trend of Israeli policy.

[Editor’s Note: Israel has complained to Egypt that it isn’t doing enough to stop weapons smuggling into the Hamas-cntrolled Gaza strip. Foreign Minister Livni said on Monday, “What they [the Egyptians] are doing at Philadelphi is deplorable and problematic.” Egypt has promised to end the smuggling and says it is doing all it can].

This all shows quite clearly that the Israeli government is intent on putting huge obstacles in the path of George W. Bush’s visit to the region on the 9th of this month. His visit will not be confined to Israel and Palestine, as he will also tour the region in general. But the focus for this visit is to promote the opportunities for peace opened up after Annapolis conference and the donor’s conference held in Paris. However, Read the rest of this entry »

The good news is that our President will be elsewhere much of next year, giving him less time in Washington to start disastrous wars and subvert the Constitution.

The bad news: He will be abroad, winning hearts and minds for America with his wit, warmth and incomparable charm.

In early January, Bush makes his first visit to Israel with side trips to the West Bank, Kuwait, Bahrain, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia and Egypt…

Cross-posted from my blog. More here.

Venue: Annapolis, Maryland.
Subject: Middle East Peace Conference.
Major Participants: The USA, the Israelis, the Palestinians, the Syrians, and the Saudis.

This week, beginning Tuesday, will see President George Bush make his first, and almost certainly his only, major attempt to bring an end to the world’s most intractable conflict, reports The Independent.

How will President Bush fare in a belated attempt to play peacemaker? “The reasons propelling the various parties to attend the conference are well known. They include the common domestic weaknesses of Ehud Olmert, the Israeli Prime Minister, the Palestinian leader Mahmoud Abbas, and Mr Bush himself. For all three, a genuine and concerted push for peace would improve their standing at home.

“For Mr Bush especially, and his Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, major progress in their remaining year or so in office would put a positive gloss on a ‘legacy’ that now consists primarily of the debacle in Iraq, and the huge strategic victory the 2003 invasion presented to Iran. Indeed, Tehran’s growing power in the region, feared by Israel and moderate Sunni Arab states alike, is a main reason why the gathering is taking place.

“At the same time, US negotiators hope that the very number of Arab countries attending (16 in all as well as the Arab League) will be seen by Israel as an assurance that any deal with the Palestinians that does ultimately emerge from the process initiated at Annapolis will have broad Arab backing – hastening final acceptance in the region of the legitimacy of the Jewish state.

“But if the moment is unusually propitious for negotiation, never have the obstacles to a peace deal been higher. It was not clear yesterday whether even a joint document would be agreed. The Saudi foreign minister is refusing to shake hands with the Israelis…

“Belatedly, the Bush mindset seems to be changing. Moreover Ms Rice, who has visited the region repeatedly to urge a visible ‘horizon,’ not empty promises, for Palestinian aspirations, has more clout in the Oval Office than her hapless predecessor Colin Powell, whose efforts to push Palestinian-Israeli peace efforts were always thwarted by Dick Cheney and Donald Rumsfeld. Mr Rumsfeld may be gone, the vice-President remains, even more unpopular than his boss, but still vastly influential…”

More here…

The Guardian says: “”Confirmation that President Bashar al-Assad (of Syria) is sending his deputy foreign minister means that the Maryland meeting will be the best-attended Middle Eastern summit since the Madrid conference in 1991 - although the stakes are higher and expectations far lower.

President George Bush and his team is working overtime to achieve success by meeting in advance both Israeli and Palestine leaders, and others. “President Bush said last night that the broad attendance ‘demonstrates the international resolve to seize this important opportunity to advance freedom and peace in the Middle East’.

“The question is, what can happen beyond tomorrow’s ritual speeches? Both leaders face powerful opposition - Abbas from Hamas and Olmert from coalition partners and opposition parties against concessions on settlements, Jerusalem and easing restrictions in the West Bank…”

More here…

(Photo above: President Mahmoud Abbas and President George Bush)