That's How They Describe It

The New York Times analyzes Secretary of State Rice's brokering of a deal between the Palestinians and Israelis and calls it "a risky dive into Middle East politics." That's not news. That's acceptance of the fact that in more than 60 years, there's been precious littlefew [ed: fixed grammar] diplomatic breakthroughs to show for US diplomacy.

President Bill Clinton hoped that a brokered deal between the Israelis and Palestinians in 2000 would be his lasting legacy. Instead, it highlighted just how screwed up the US priorities were - to get a deal on paper rather than actually effecutate change. From 1993 through 2000, the US tried to push the Oslo Accords as the breakthrough document. That got Arafat and Rabin a Nobel Prize for Peace, but little else.

There was no peace, and the Palestinians started up with the suicide bombings each time they were asked to live up to their obligations.

It is interesting that Rice is getting involved in direct mediation between the Palestinians and Israelis, but the Times hones their alarmism over why the Administration is getting involved now.

Until now President Bush and Secretary Rice have avoided taking risks in the conflict, confining their diplomacy to consultations, exhortations, drive-by visits to the region and documents like the "road map" to a Palestinian state, which calls for several steps by Palestinians and Israelis, few of which have occurred.

What changed this week, State Department officials said, was mounting alarm at the bitter impasse over the Gaza Strip after the Israeli withdrawal last summer and fear of more instability and frustration that could lead to a rebuke of the Palestinian president, Mahmoud Abbas, in parliamentary elections in January.

It's not a bitter impasse when the Israelis must maintain their security. There was a reason that they withdrew from Gaza and sealed it from Israel proper. Security.

The Times seems to discount that each and every time. Yes, the sealing of Gaza presents Abbas with problems, but it's of his own (and his organization's) making. The PA has steadfastly refused to crack down on terrorists operating in Gaza and West Bank areas under its control. In fact, they've often worked with the terror groups. This isn't an honest partner in a peace process, but a group hellbent on Israel's destruction.

The problem for the Palestinians is that their leadership has different goals - to destroy Israel immediately or to wait them out over a period of years. Hamas and Hizbullah want the immediate destruction - the PLO takes the longer path. The PLO, even though it has the international recognition despite its existence as a terrorist organization that has killed Americans in the past, gets a pass each time because the fear is that Hamas and Hizbullah will fill the void.

Note that the crux of the diplomatic initiatives being called for by the EU and Palestinians are all to stop Israel from doing what it needs to do for its own security. In fact, this following paragraph is a howler:

Israelis and Palestinians are now likely to demand more American involvement on a range of issues, from the Palestinians' call for Israel to ease its presence in the West Bank to the Israeli demand for a crackdown on Hamas and other militant groups. Ms. Rice took office early this year amid criticism that the Bush administration had relied largely on force in its first term. "The time for diplomacy is now," she said then.

The Israelis can take care of Hamas on its own - as they've been doing since 2000 - eliminating terrorists whenever presented with the opportunity. The PA can't crackdown on Hamas and Hizbullah because it could lead to a Palestinian civil war. Or, at least that's what the diplomats are thinking.

UPDATE:
Captain Ed also notices the US diplomatic maneuverings to get a Gaza crossing deal in place. He's not amused.