Who should know better than Carter's former adviser that the most perfect peace plans burst like bubbles without solid substance? Yet the duo opened their article with this quarter-truth:
"More than three decades ago, Israel statesman Moshe Dayan… declared he would rather have Sharm el-Sheikh without peace than peace without Sharm el-Sheikh. Had his views prevailed Israel and Egypt would still be in a state of war. Today," the writers go on to infer, "Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu… is conveying an updated version of Dayan's credo - that he would rather have all of Jerusalem without peace than peace without all of Jerusalem." The two writers naturally omitted the very facts which undermined their argument:The remark Dayan tossed off in a different period did not prevent him from joining the government of Likud leader Menahem Begin in 1977 in order to undertake a secret mission in women's disguise to an Arab country to meet Egyptian president Anwar Sadat's secret envoy. He then delivered Begin's offer to return all the Egyptian land Israel captured after it was attacked by Egypt - in return for peace.
Sharm el-Sheikh in Sinai was naturally part of the offer - of which, incidentally, the Carter administration in which Brzezinksi starred knew nothing. The Likud leader's peace initiative laid the foundation for Anwar Sadat's extraordinarily brave pilgrimage to Jerusalem, his speech to the Israeli Knesset, his private prayer for peace from the mosques of Israel-held Temple Mount and the first Arab peace accord with Israel.
Can Carter's former adviser Brzezinski or former congressman Solarz produce a single Arab ruler prepared to accept the current Likud prime minister's peace messengers and hear what they have to offer - much less meet him in Jerusalem or anywhere else in the world as he has proposed?"
No, he cannot and he knows it. This is a plan built on sand. It will be washed completely away during the first rising tide. Obama is a butt kissing Islamist and nothing will ever be able to hide this fact.
Debkafile, Ex-President Jimmy Carter's National Security advisers Zbigniew Brzezinski and former Democratic congressman Stephen Solarz have come up with yet another Middle East peace plan - this one, as published in the Washington Post, relies heavily on a dramatic Barack Obama peace odyssey to the region with a party of Arab leaders and Quartet (US, Russia, EU and UN) members climaxing in a dramatic speech "to all the peoples of the region" from the Old City of Jerusalem. This would be "the culminating event in the journey for peace."
If the US offer is rejected by either side or both, the two writers advise the United States "to seek the UN Security Council's endorsement of its framework for peace, thus generating worldwide pressure on the recalcitrant party."
debkafile's analysts agree that the Brzezinski-Solarz extravaganza deserves Hollywood's finest director. The only trouble is that it pretends to be a serious peace plan when, even as a script, it is full of holes which fly in the face of the facts. Perhaps President Obama's failure to visit Israel despite his trips to Arab capitals, including his outreach to the Muslim world from Cairo - which was not matched by any gesture toward the Jewish world - can be glossed over for now. But just the airy proposal to send Arab rulers to Jerusalem is enough to discredit the plan in advance.
Not only is it inconceivable that the Saudi king, the Syrian president, the Iraqi prime minister - or any other Arab rulers - would consent to set foot in the Jewish state, but even Egyptian president Hosni Mubarak and Jordan's King Abdullah, both of whom enjoy the fruits of peace accords with Israel, have never accepted invitations to visit Israel. The Saudis even rejected out of hand any suggestion of allowing Israel civilian over-flights when President Obama asked for a token gesture to smooth the road to peace diplomacy.
A bubble without substance
Who should know better than Carter's former adviser that the most perfect peace plans burst like bubbles without solid substance? Yet the duo opened their article with this quarter-truth:
"More than three decades ago, Israel statesman Moshe Dayan… declared he would rather have Sharm el-Sheikh without peace than peace without Sharm el-Sheikh. Had his views prevailed Israel and Egypt would still be in a state of war. Today," the writers go on to infer, "Prime Minister Binyamin Netanyahu… is conveying an updated version of Dayan's credo - that he would rather have all of Jerusalem without peace than peace without all of Jerusalem." The two writers naturally omitted the very facts which undermined their argument: The remark Dayan tossed off in a different period did not prevent him from joining the government of Likud leader Menahem Begin in 1977 in order to undertake a secret mission in women's disguise to an Arab country to meet Egyptian president Anwar Sadat's secret envoy. He then delivered Begin's offer to return all the Egyptian land Israel captured after it was attacked by Egypt - in return for peace.
Sharm el-Sheikh in Sinai was naturally part of the offer - of which, incidentally, the Carter administration in which Brzezinksi starred knew nothing.
The Likud leader's peace initiative laid the foundation for Anwar Sadat's extraordinarily brave pilgrimage to Jerusalem, his speech to the Israeli Knesset, his private prayer for peace from the mosques of Israel-held Temple Mount and the first Arab peace accord with Israel.
Can Carter's former adviser Brzezinski or former congressman Solarz produce a single Arab ruler prepared to accept the current Likud prime minister's peace messengers and hear what they have to offer - much less meet him in Jerusalem or anywhere else in the world as he has proposed? Yet both writers adopt wholesale the position advanced most vocally of late by Jordan's King Abdullah (whose reign depends heavily on Israeli protection) that Israel is the foremost enemy of peace in the region and must be squeezed harder for more concessions.
Palestinians turned down four previous Israeli offers of a state
Their projected peace plan has the effect of good advice to the Palestinians and their Arab patrons to sit tight and wait for President Obama to table his "framework for peace" at the UN Security Council as a mandatory resolution. This would force Israel's hand and then all their wishes wouldl drop in their laps without the need to face Israel in negotiations. This proposition is gainsaid by another fact of life which both Brzezinski and Solarz choose to ignore and which every objective, informed Middle East observer knows:
The Palestinians - today as always before - are secretly opposed to the independent state on offer.
In the 33 years since the Begin-Dayan peace initiative, four Israeli leaders have offered the Palestinians the lion's share of the areas Israel captured from Jordan and Egypt in the 1967 war.
Continue reading
Tags: Arab-Israeli History, Obama failed Middle East plan To share or post to your site, click on "Post Link". Please mention / link to the Patriot's Corner. Thanks!
0 Comments - Share Yours!:
Post a Comment