[Peace] interesting Novak article

[Belden Fields]

A Missed Opportunity for Peace
By Robert D. Novak
Thursday, April 5, 2007; Page A17
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2007/04/04/ 
AR2007040402317.html

JERUSALEM -- An overriding melancholy here this Holy Week follows  
Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice`s mission to Jerusalem last week.  
To Arabs and Jews seeking meaningful peace negotiations, it confirmed  
that no progress toward a two-state solution is likely for the  
remainder of George W. Bush`s presidency.

Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rejected Rice`s offer to  
participate in Israeli-Palestinian negotiations for a permanent peace  
treaty. The word in the Olmert government is that the prime  
minister`s reluctance even to begin talks at this time is fully  
shared by Bush. Rice is sincere in her desire for peace, but she can  
accomplish nothing important without the full support of her chief.

The aphorism (originated by Israeli statesman Abba Eban) that Arabs  
`never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity` now can be applied  
to Israel. Last week`s Riyadh declaration indicated the willingness  
of the Arab world to consider a peaceful solution. Now, belief here  
among peace-seekers is that nothing will happen until a new president  
enters the Oval Office in 2009.

That was the consensus Tuesday at a conference here on Middle East  
policy in which I took part. Deal W. Hudson, executive director of  
the Morley Institute in Washington, which held the conference,  
expressed hope that Bush might yet grasp the reins of peace. But a  
diverse assemblage of Palestinians (both Muslim and Christian),  
Israelis, Americans and other foreigners held little hope for a Bush  
initiative in the closing months of his administration.

The atmosphere has changed since I was here for Holy Week a year ago.  
Israeli self-confidence was at a peak then, with the newly installed  
Olmert openly avowing the unilateral solution to the Palestinian  
problem developed by his predecessor, Ariel Sharon. Behind that  
posture was confidence in military superiority. The unhappy results  
of the Lebanon incursion have modified Israeli expectations and  
caused a different tone.

Olmert publicly indicates a willingness to talk, and the Haaretz  
newspaper quoted him as saying the Arabs` Riyadh summit `is evidence  
of a change.`

But the moderates attending Tuesday`s conference viewed this as  
rhetoric. Olmert told Rice last week that any negotiations must be  
preceded by the release of the Israeli soldier Hamas fighters seized  
last June 25.

The broader conditions for talks are Olmert`s refusal to include in  
negotiations any discussion of a return of Arab refugees to greater  
Palestine and a withdrawal of Israel to its 1967 borders. Negotiating  
those points does not mean that they will be conceded. Indeed, in  
2004 Bush assured Sharon of U.S. guarantees against a massive return  
of Palestinian refugees or a rollback to unsafe borders. But setting  
conditions for talks is a classic mechanism for escaping talks  
altogether.

Indeed, Olmert continues a boycott policy against the Palestinian  
Authority because of Hamas`s election victory and the selection of  
Ismail Haniyeh as prime minister. The presence of Hamas in the  
Palestinian government is cited as justification for absence from the  
negotiating table.

It surely is up to Bush. When Rice visited Israel about six weeks  
ago, the Israeli government announced that Olmert had been on the  
phone with Bush a day earlier and that they `see eye to eye.` That  
ensured that the three-way talks in Jerusalem between Rice, Olmert  
and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas would accomplish  
nothing substantial.

Haaretz political columnist and editorial writer Akiva Eldar, a  
speaker at Tuesday`s conference, wrote in Monday`s newspaper: `As a  
rare and historic opportunity appears on the horizon, a leadership of  
different dimensions is needed.` He was talking about Olmert, but he  
could have been referring to Bush.

Nothing could be accomplished now without Bush pressuring Olmert.  
Bush`s original intentions to broker Israeli-Palestinian peace were  
sidetracked by the Sept. 11, 2001, attacks and subsequent U.S.  
military operations. The many American presidential candidates of  
both parties do not want to take risks on this issue. A mere  
statement of sympathy for the Palestinians by Sen. Barack Obama  
brought massive criticism. The question is whether Eldar`s `historic  
opportunity` will be gone when a new American president takes office.

© 2007 Creators Syndicate Inc.

THIS IS INTERESTING SINCE NOVAK IS GENERALLY REGARDED AS A JOURNALIST  
CLOSE TO THE ADMINISTRATION.
RICE WAS UNDERMINED BY BUSH HIMSELF.
IT ALSO CASTS A LIGHT ON THE CONCESSION PELOSI THINKS SHE GOT FROM  
OLMERT TO TALK WITH THE SAUDIS.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: http://lists.chambana.net/mailman/archive/peace/attachments/20070408/34a2d484/attachment.html