U.S. Secretary of State
John Kerry is facing a difficult dilemma: whether to back down from his
overzealous promise (a peace deal within nine months), or to stick to
it -- possibly in the company of hopeless Israelis and Palestinians, and
maybe even without the support of President Barack Obama, who doesn't
want to chalk up another international failure and could abandon Kerry
on the battlefield.
If there is no dramatic
development, "John Kerry's Adventures in the Middle East" will be
remembered in history books more for their number (12 visits in recent
months, just to reach an agreement) and less for their quality. It's
hard to put all the blame on the secretary of state; many before him
failed in the same task.
But Kerry's mistake was
the naiveté he brought to the most complicated conflict in the world,
as former U.S. President Bill Clinton called it during his time in
office. Kerry's sin was the high bar he set, and his failure is also one
of obsessive stubbornness.
Kerry also erred when
he involved Washington a little too deeply in the negotiations
themselves. At times he seemed more like a babysitter for Prime Minister
Benjamin Netanyahu and Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas
than a mediator. Experience has taught us that the Israelis and
Palestinians should be left to themselves. This wouldn't guarantee a
deal, but it would promise much more productive talks. This three-way
tango hasn't proven itself, since the way the Palestinians see it, the
Americans automatically side with Israel.
American commentator
Charles Krauthammer has never been particularly charitable toward the
Obama administration. This weekend he raked Kerry over the coals. As far
as Krauthammer is concerned, Kerry failed in the way he tackled the
Syrian issue at the Geneva conferences (Assad stayed in power); Ukraine
(the annexation of Crimea); and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (no
agreement, and it's not sure talks will be extended.) Krauthammer forgot
to mention Kerry's "achievement" on the Iranian nuclear issue last
November in Geneva. Kerry welcomed a deal that Obama himself admitted
had only a 50 percent chance of succeeding.
Obama is backing his
secretary of state, but has every reason in the world to be angry with
him, an American source told The New York Times. The Syrian crisis that
fell on Obama's head is one thing, the annexation of Crimea found the
Americans and its NATO allies without any plan in reserve, and the
Iranian issue found the U.S. in particular and the world in general
without any desire or ability for a military intervention. But the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which every kid in the region knows is an
impossible matter?!
Now it seems that Kerry
has understood that extending the talks by a year (which might happen)
while Abbas remains in power is a great coup. If Kerry didn't have his
own official plane, we might think he was visiting so often to rack up
frequent flier miles.
At any rate, negotiations should
continue -- because it's best for both sides, and because the
alternatives are worse, and especially because the chance of a vacuum is
dangerous. Maybe we should just lower our expectations.
No comments:
Post a Comment