The effort by the USA, and in particular by secretary of state John Kerry, to broker a deal between the Palestinians and Israel has crashed and burned. Both sides in the negotiations understand that they are going nowhere. The Palestinians have made abundantly clear that they will not accept the most fundamental of Israel's requirements for peace, namely that Israel continue to exist. This outcome has been obvious for months, but Kerry has continued to push forward. First he tried for a framework for a peace deal, then a framework for an interim deal, and finally just for a continuation of talks. Kerry was so oblivious to reality that he seemed like the passenger on the Titanic who, while freezing in the water after the ship went down, spent time wondering what to wear to dinner on the following day.
None of this is news; anyone who followed these so called negotiations understood months ago that failure of the effort was inevitable. What interests me today, however, is not the fact of Kerry's inability to grasp the facts in front of him. No, I am fascinated by the way that the mainstream media is covering the story. This morning, the Bible of the liberal press, the New York Times, has a front page article reporting that Kerry may be recognizing that the approach to Middle East peace will have to change. According to the Times, Kerry's "endless optimism and energy" may not have been sufficient to get the parties together yet. The Times give Kerry kudos for his effort towards peace but laments the fact that it seems to have not been enough. Now, I know that the Times supports the Obama administration and that the debacle in these negotiations is not good for the president politically. Nevertheless, a supposedly serious media outlet like the Times should try to report something at least remotely related to reality.
Think about it. America's top diplomat pushes a plan for negotiations that clearly cannot succeed. Indeed, Kerry could have had a five minute conversation with Abbas of the PA before the whole effort began and understood that there was no chance for success. Instead, Kerry (and Obama) had America ignore the actual facts and make a major effort to achieve the unachievable. In the process, Kerry and Obama undermined the links between Israel and America, raised false hopes among various peoples in the Middle East, wasted the time and money of the USA on a fantasy, and -- worst of all -- revealed the weakness in leadership of the USA to our opponents all across the globe. But the Times calls this a display of endless optimism and energy and commends Kerry for it.
The truth is that the Times is putting lipstick on a pig. As usual, the pig is still a pig.
None of this is news; anyone who followed these so called negotiations understood months ago that failure of the effort was inevitable. What interests me today, however, is not the fact of Kerry's inability to grasp the facts in front of him. No, I am fascinated by the way that the mainstream media is covering the story. This morning, the Bible of the liberal press, the New York Times, has a front page article reporting that Kerry may be recognizing that the approach to Middle East peace will have to change. According to the Times, Kerry's "endless optimism and energy" may not have been sufficient to get the parties together yet. The Times give Kerry kudos for his effort towards peace but laments the fact that it seems to have not been enough. Now, I know that the Times supports the Obama administration and that the debacle in these negotiations is not good for the president politically. Nevertheless, a supposedly serious media outlet like the Times should try to report something at least remotely related to reality.
Think about it. America's top diplomat pushes a plan for negotiations that clearly cannot succeed. Indeed, Kerry could have had a five minute conversation with Abbas of the PA before the whole effort began and understood that there was no chance for success. Instead, Kerry (and Obama) had America ignore the actual facts and make a major effort to achieve the unachievable. In the process, Kerry and Obama undermined the links between Israel and America, raised false hopes among various peoples in the Middle East, wasted the time and money of the USA on a fantasy, and -- worst of all -- revealed the weakness in leadership of the USA to our opponents all across the globe. But the Times calls this a display of endless optimism and energy and commends Kerry for it.
The truth is that the Times is putting lipstick on a pig. As usual, the pig is still a pig.
No comments:
Post a Comment