As a soccer fan, I was thrilled to see that super-star David Beckham is headed to play in LA.  His contract and endorsements will be around $250 million over the next four years, not to mention press and media opportunities for him and his wife.  The eyes of the soccer nation and world are fixated on the deal.  With all that in mind one would think that the fate of Beckham’s new team rests squarely on his shoulders, and that to beat LA all one has to do is beat Beckham.  But any coach worth his salt will tell you that that’s not true; any successful coach would design a way to focus on Beckham without forgetting about the other 10 players that can hurt you.  But this isn’t a soccer blog, so I digress…  

With so much happening in Iraq, and so much contingent upon the new government’s success, it is difficult to take our eyes off the country to focus on other regional issues.  However, while a stable Iraq is key to a stable Middle East, it is not the only key.  There are other regional issues that could continue adding to instability if left unattended to.  Of course, I haven’t said anything that we don’t know.  But with so many things involved in critical government, this is easier said than done.  Say what you will about the Bush administration, but he has managed to keep his bases covered (this isn’t a baseball blog either), providing a lot of focus on Iraq, but not at the expense of other important regional issues.

One of these issues, as we all know, is the seemingly indefinite conflict between Palestine and Israel.  And most of us will re-call that in “the good ol’ days” before Iraq, THIS was the issue that we were all worried about; THIS was the fulcrum for stability in the Middle East. 

In that context, I was pleased on Monday morning when I read that Secretary Rice had persuaded leaders on both sides to agree in principle to re-convene discussions on the peace process.  Her plan to “just really sit and talk about the issues” causes a bit of concern.  But I am hopeful, nonetheless, that tangible progress will occur.

Were I in a position to do so, I would offer some advice to our top diplomat.  US representatives must avoid thinking about solving the Palestine issue as a means to an end, i.e. merely a way to solve a larger problem.  For purposes of these negotiations the Palestine/Israeli relationship must be the end-game.  By this, I do not mean that we cannot conduct these meetings with US interests in mind.  But I do mean that by working to view the issues through the eyes of Palestine and, conversely, Israel, the US has much to gain.  Aiding these parties through this process will do more for US positioning in the region than we could ever do by attempting to steer the outcome for our benefit at the expense of Palestine or Israel.  

One hopes that as the Iraq issue dissipates, there might be a changing view in the Arab world surrounding the US’ involvement in the peace process.  And when all is said and done, I hope that the outcome will have been encouraged in bipartisan fashion.  Whatever disagreements people have with the Iraq policy, if they come to the belief that there is benefit in this engagement, they need to support the overall context of these discussions.
 

No related posts.