The administration was winding down. It wanted to make its mark on history. A legacy. What better legacy could there be than peace in the Middle East? And so the adminstration worked to make it happen.

Shultz Expects Some Progress From Mideast Shuttle

By returning so soon to the Mideast, while the bloody uprisings in the West Bank and Gaza Strip continue, Mr. Shultz hopes to find some opening among leaders whom he believes increasingly want regional stability. In the long term, he hopes that by keeping the momentum going, he will deflect criticism that he has not taken an active enough role in promoting peace in the region during his long tenure. Even if he can make little progress before the Reagan Administration leaves office, he is eager to leave behind the legacy of having tried. Mr. Shultz said that after discussions with Arab and Israeli leaders during his last shuttle in February, he came away convinced that they recognized the need for more stability, which can only be achieved with a peaceful resolution of conflicts. ”The problem is there,” he said. ”Everybody recognizes it. And the problem isn’t going to go away.” He conceded that President Hafez al- Assad of Syria, as well as the Soviet Union, are likely to oppose any American initiative. Yet he said: ”I can feel it in my bones that there’s an answer out there if you can only find it. And you can only find it if you can get the right people together to talk about it and negotiate it, so that’s what we’re trying to do.”

At this point the PLO was a terrorist organization, not having officially (and mendaciously) accepted Israel’s right to exist.

The PLO was still in exile in Tunis. Israel controlled Gaza, Judea and Samaria.

The administration was winding down. It wanted to make its mark on history. A legacy. What better legacy could there be than peace in the Middle East? And so the adminstration worked to make it happen.

WHOSE HOLY LAND? NEWS ANALYSIS; Falling Short of Peace

And Mr. Clinton, who had devoted more time to Middle East peacemaking than any other American president, saw little risk and possibly big gains, his aides said. If he failed, he would be given points for trying; if he succeeded, his legacy as the Middle East peacemaker would be unchallenged. Now, with three months’ hindsight and having witnessed the startling speed with which an elaborately woven peace effort can unravel, officials and diplomats are considering whether those risks were greater than the Clinton administration had anticipated. Diplomats from moderate Arab nations have said that they were startled by the alacrity with which the summit meeting was called, and they said afterward that the White House had neglected to prepare the ground with them, something that proved crucial particularly as proposals were put forth over the fate of Jerusalem, which is a priority not just for Mr. Arafat and the Palestinians but for the entire Muslim world. If the Americans had consulted them fully beforehand on the scope of their ambition, those diplomats said, they might have been able to give greater support to Mr. Arafat during and immediately after the meeting.

At this point:

Arafat and the PA had jurisdiction over Gaza and a number of cities in Judea and Samaria, including Tulkarem, Jenin, Bethlehem, Nablus, Kalkilye and Ramallah.

The PLO was no longer considered a terrorist organization by most of the world.

There was an official Palestinian police force.

Hamas was flourishing though it was still second to Fatah.

The administration was winding down. It wanted to make its mark on history. A legacy. What better legacy could there be than peace in the Middle East? And so the adminstration worked to make it happen.

Rice Drops Hints on Time, Place and Tone of Middle East Talks

With time running out on his tenure, President Bush has called for an international conference to be held in the United States this fall as part of a renewed push to settle the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, trying to leave a legacy that has enticed and eluded his predecessors. In Ramallah, Ms. Rice, on her seventh trip to the region this year, described Mr. Bush’s initiative as ”the most serious effort to end this conflict in many, many years.” In some of her strongest language yet, she said, ”Frankly, it’s time for the establishment of a Palestinian state.”

At this point:

Hamas controls Gaza where there are no more Jews living there.

Sderot is under regular rocket attack.

Arafat is dead, replaced by Mahmoud Abbas and Salam Fayyad (and Hamas.)

Does it sound like Groundhog Day yet?

Inarguably the Palestinians should be in better shape than they are now. The idea of forcing Israeli Jews from their homes to allow for Palestinian self-government was a pipe dream of the extreme left in Israel when Secretary Shultz was seeking his legacy. But that very action was carried out by Israel’s Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, who, never had been known as a leftist.

The political landscape in Israel has shifted tremendously in the past 20 years. And yet it’s debatable that the Palestinians have moderated their views at all in the same time.

The Palestinians refuse to define Israel as the Jewish homeland — a major point of contention in recent talks — and identify east Jerusalem, annexed by Israel after its capture in the 1967 Mideast war, as the capital of the future Palestinian state. Palestinians think that offering recognition of Israel as a Jewish state would imply they are dropping one of their key demands in any peace deal — the right for Palestinian refugees and their millions of descendants to return to former properties in Israel. Israel opposes a return

No it’s not debatable. The Palestinian position has not changed at all. And it’s been quite a bit longer than 20 years.

Article 20:

The Balfour Declaration, the Mandate for Palestine, and everything that has been based upon them, are deemed null and void. Claims of historical or religious ties of Jews with Palestine are incompatible with the facts of history and the true conception of what constitutes statehood. Judaism, being a religion, is not an independent nationality. Nor do Jews constitute a single nation with an identity of its own; they are citizens of the states to which they belong.

Denying that Israel is a Jewish State, isn’t a matter of negotiation. If the PA doesn’t accept it, it doesn’t accept Israel’s right to exist. The PA insists on this because it isn’t strictly or even mostly a movement national liberation, rather it is a movement of national destruction.

Even now the Quartet’s envoy Tony Blair has announced a series of initiatives for the Palestinians including

Another is the repair of a sewage system in Beit Lahiya, in the northern Gaza Strip. Though Hamas’s takeover of Gaza has meant that most of the projects are earmarked for the West Bank, the sewage system was put on the list because it is on the brink of collapse and represents a serious health hazard to Gaza residents.

And why is that sewer system in such a state of disrepair? Could it be because the pipes were scavenged to make Qassams?

Once again, the evidence shows that the Palestinians are more devoted to destroying Israel than to building their own society. And Israel is expected to concede more and more. (The problem isn’t only with the Palestinians either.)

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

The Annapolis farce will continue, now with the Golan Heights on the agenda. Let us remember that Israel just bombed a nascent Syrian nuclear plant in the desert, and yet, Syria is the nation that gets to set the demands on the return of the Golan Heights—territory Syria lost in the Six-Day War, and territory from which Syria regularly bombed Israeli civilian targets during supposedly “peaceful” times.

The United States has agreed to put the occupied Golan Heights on the agenda of the Annapolis peace conference, but Syria will decide whether to attend when it receives the schedule, Foreign Minister Walid Moualem said on Friday.

“The United States has sent confirmation that it will include the Syrian-Israeli track… The Golan… On the Annapolis schedule,” the Syrian news agency quoted Moualem as saying.

There was no immediate comment from Washington.

The Damascus government has repeatedly said it would only attend the US-hosted conference, which aims to restart talks on Palestinian statehood, if the Golan Heights, occupied by Israel since 1967, are on the agenda.

And by the way, the Saudis really don’t want to be there, and the Arabs don’t want to touch the Israelis.

Al-Faisal told a press conference that an Arab League meeting Friday had decided that Arab countries will attend Annapolis at the level of foreign minister. “I’m not hiding any secret about the Saudi position.

We were reluctant until today. And if not for the Arab consensus we felt today, we would not have decided to go,” al-Faisal said. “But the kingdom would never stand against an Arab consensus, as long as the Arab position has agreed on attending, the kingdom will walk along with its brothers in one line.”

But he cautioned, “We are not prepared to take part in a theatrical show, in handshakes and meeting that don’t express political positions. We are going with seriousness and we work on the same seriousness and credibility.”

Let me translate you “seriousness and credibility” via my Arab-and-or-Muslim dictator/English dictionary: “Unless Israel capitulates to all of our demands, we agree to nothing.”

And now that Ehud Olmert has agreed to give the terrorists 25 APCs, we can expect a major attack, soon, and probably from both the West Bank and Gaza. With help from Hizballah. My hope in this case is that Olmert never actually gave a date for the “gift” of 25 APCs, so perhaps he’s doing the smoke-and-mirrors thing. At least, I hope he is.

I still can’t believe the Israelis haven’t forced this incompetent out of office yet. What has he got on the opposition that’s stopping them from getting rid of him?

In an innocuously title article, Israel Allows Some Gaza Exports, Isabel Kershner of the NY Times reported:

Israel has approved the transfer of 25 armored personnel carriers from Russia to the Palestinian Authority and will allow the export of some agricultural produce from Gaza for the first time since Hamas took over the area, Israeli government officials said Wednesday.The moves come as part of a general effort to create a positive atmosphere leading up to the American-sponsored peace gathering scheduled for Tuesday in Annapolis, Md.

Also according to other reports Israel will be transferring some 1000 rifles and 2 million rounds of ammunition to the Palestinian Authority. (And yes, Israel will allow some exports from Gaza too.)

Kershner at least shows that she might be attention with this:

Israeli government officials said Israel had agreed to the transfer of the armored vehicles to bolster the Palestinian Authority security forces and “their actions to prevent terror.”

Given the tenor of the rest of the article, I suppose that she’s just quoting an Israeli press release. Still the scare quotes are appropriate, because given recent events, it’s pretty clear that the PA security forces haven’t been so effective in preventing terror.

Guess who approves of this transfer.

Hamas took over Gaza in June after routing Fatah forces loyal to Mr. Abbas in a brief factional war. Its military wing called the authorization of the delivery “a Zionist gift.” A Hamas spokesman, Sami Abu Zuhri, said it showed that Mr. Abbas worked “hand in hand with the occupation” against the Palestinian “resistance.”

And who disapproves

Israeli legislators from the right-wing opposition also criticized the move, raising fears that the Palestinian Authority’s weapons could be turned against Israel or fall into the hands of Hamas. Benjamin Netanyahu, the head of the Likud Party, told Army Radio, “According to all the security services, Olmert is endangering the lives of Israeli civilians.”

Actually it was the IDF that objected to the transfer. Netanyahu wasn’t simply being part of the “right wing opposition,” he was supported organizations whose professional responsibility is to evaluate such risks. Unfortunately, Kershner did the weaselly thing and attribute it to politics.

As Elder of Ziyon, Daled Amos and Israel Matzav have pointed out, these confidence building measure are, by themselves, risky, so why does Israel resort to them when they demonstratively achieve nothing.

Nothing?
Yes, nothing.
Today Kershner reports Pact Unlikely Before Talks in U.S., Palestinian Insists

A senior Palestinian official said here on Thursday that it would be a “miracle” if the Palestinian and Israeli negotiating teams agreed on a joint document, as they had hoped, to present at the American-sponsored Middle East peace gathering set to start Tuesday in Annapolis, Md.

Why would that be? Didn’t Israel do enough to build Palestinian confidence? Apparently not.

But the brinkmanship could also be seen as reflecting a longer term Palestinian goal: Mr. Hamad suggested that the difficulties in agreeing on a text underscored the need for more international involvement in Israeli-Palestinian peace efforts.

More international involvement = more pressure on Israel.

Apparently, the Israelis are cognizant of this:

Israel has always rejected the idea of outside mediation. “Israel is very clear that this is a bilateral process,” said an Israeli government official who asked not to be identified by name because of the delicacy of the negotiations. “There is no need for outsiders telling us what to do.”

Israel, as usual, made concessions to build confidence. The Palestinian are all too happy to receive the concessions and all too happy to continue pretending that they never happened.

At what point will the Israeli government say “enough” and wait for some sort of reciprocal action? This isn’t a matter of politics, it’s Negotiations 101 and Israel is failing it miserably.

UPDATE: A similar point is made at This ongoing War’s Lethal Gestures.

Crossposted at Soccer Dad.