Michael Oren sees good coming from Annapolis if you’re not looking for peace in Middle East peace through Anxiety

After arguing that the conditions for peace don’t exist (or aren’t that strong) Oren writes

The inability of the international community either to entice or deter the Iranians from producing nuclear weapons adds urgency to the need to unite those countries threatened by those bombs. That, and not American fiat, brought 49 states and organizations to Annapolis; that, and not the yearning for an Israeli-Arab accord, impelled a Saudi prince to sit alongside an Israeli prime minister.Not unexpectedly, the Iranians reacted ferociously to Annapolis. President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad pronounced it a “failure” and the government-controlled press promised to “bring down Islamic wrath” on its participants. But such rage merely betrays the anxiety induced by Annapolis in Tehran. For the first time a coalition of Western and modern Arab leaders has coalesced and declared its commitment to resist “extremism” in the Middle East — a well-known euphemism for Iran.

What’s more, new efforts have begun to confront Iran outside of the United Nations and woo Syria from Iran’s orbit. An international conference may not be the ideal formula for attaining Israeli-Palestinian peace, but it can provide a powerful forum for expressing solidarity in the face of war.

I don’t buy that wooing Syria from Iran’s orbit will be useful. I also can’t believe that with all the lip service given to “peace” that this conference was simply to deter Iran. Maybe Oren’s right, but I’m skeptical.

David Ignatius sees Iran as a focus too in the Road from Annapolis. (or here)

Annapolis was a setback for Iran. That country’s firebrand president, Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, tried hard to dissuade Syria from attending; his efforts, I am told, included calling his ally, President Bashar al-Assad. He failed, but if the Annapolis process should languish, Iran and its proxies could quickly regain the upper hand. That’s the danger of what Rice has set in motion. Now she has to make it work.

So whereas Oren sees Annapolis strictly as a response to Iran, Ignatius sees the “peace process” as a means of isolating Iran even further.

What needs to be done?

After dragging its feet on security assistance for the Palestinians the past two years, the United States has finally recognized that this is a crucial variable. To beef up the American effort, Rice on Wednesday named retired Marine Gen. James Jones as her “special envoy for Middle East security.” Jones is an adept mediator and has many friends in Congress and in Europe, where he was a popular NATO commander.

America did provide plenty of assistance to the Palestinians in the past, only to see it used against Israel. And if the United States is asking Israel to “absorb terrorism” how is that going to help? Declaring peace when there is none is not very effective.

A happy Annapolis surprise was the positive speech by Syria’s deputy foreign minister, Fayssal Mekdad, which American officials viewed as a break in the ice of U.S.-Syrian relations. Before publicly embracing a Syrian-Israeli track, Rice wants to see Syrian cooperation in electing a new president in Lebanon. But U.S. officials credit Syria for reducing the flow of foreign fighters into Iraq, and they are planning regular security meetings with the Syrians.

But at what cost? The Golan? That will only strengthen Syria, which has shown no reason to be trusted.

Lebanon is one example of how the Middle East logjam is beginning to break. After several months of deadlocked negotiations over a new president, the pro-American parties holding a slender majority in the Lebanese parliament announced last week that they will back the Lebanese army commander, Gen. Michel Suleiman. America’s key Lebanese allies, Sunni leader Saad al-Hariri and Druze leader Walid Jumblatt, are both said to be comfortable with Suleiman as a compromise candidate. The Lebanese general has managed the trick of being friendly with Damascus, which originally backed his appointment, and also friendly with Washington. This compromise is not a perfect solution, and it leaves unresolved the future of Lebanon’s volatile Shiite militia Hezbollah. But it’s certainly preferable to a return to civil war.

Realistically, how much room does Suleiman have to maneuver? I can’t believe that he can act independently of Syria or Hezbollah without risk.

The big strategic challenge in the Middle East remains Iran. Rice believes that in dealing with such an adversary, it’s important to have some leverage. The Annapolis conference and recent American successes in Iraq have given the United States and its “realignment” allies a bit more of that strategic heft. The key now is deciding how to use the new leverage in a timely way, before it’s lost. Tehran isn’t yet on Rice’s travel itinerary. But someday soon it should be.

The leverage, such as it is, is diplomatic. There’s nothing for Iran to fear. Iran has shown no inclination to change its behavior. And nothing Ignatius has written suggests that it has any reason to do so in the future. So Ahamdinejad is a bit peeved with Assad, there’s really nothing more significant that than that happened at Annapolis.

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

Jackson Diehl writes in today’s Fuses in Gaza

The Islamic Hamas movement, which won the 2006 legislative elections and took sole control of Gaza in June, spent the week of Annapolis quietly doing what it has been doing every week for the past six months: smuggling tons of explosives, rifles, rocket-propelled grenades, anti-aircraft missiles and Katyusha rockets through tunnels from the Sinai peninsula in Egypt. The explosives are used to make the crude Qassam rockets that are aimed mostly at the southern Israeli towns of Sderot and Ashkelon. The Katyushas, new to Gaza, are being saved for the all-out war for which both Hamas and the Israeli army are vigorously preparing.Already, Israel is staging near-daily raids and airstrikes that have killed more than 200 Gazans this year. The power, fuel and water supplies it controls are being dialed back, with the aim of creating suffering just short of a humanitarian crisis. Defense Minister Ehud Barak has pronounced the same warning repeatedly in recent weeks: “Every day brings us closer to a broad operation in Gaza.”

First of all the Qassams have been fired at Israel for a lot longer than six months. Elder of Ziyon started his Qassam calendar in February when it became clear that the media wasn’t going to report on the regular attacks on Israel. So the regular Qassam attacks have been going on for at least a year.

Diehl may play up the Hamas election and downplay its attacks on Israel (as if Hamas wasn’t responsible for many of the suicide bombers we’ve seen since 1994) but doesn’t it tell you something about the legitimacy of Hamas if one of its primary qualities is that it is waging war against Israel where no occupation exists?

Israel, by the way, is not attempting to create “suffering” but to disrupt the ability of the rocket makers and shooters to attack civilian targets. Its humanitarian concern is why it keeps the level of suffering “short of a humanitarian crisis.”

The Bush administration, characteristically, favors a policy of continued “isolation” — it would keep Gaza on ice and turn the rival West Bank administration of Abbas into a showcase. In a few months — maybe even before a peace deal is reached — Gaza’s population could be asked in an election to choose between continued misery and Abbas’s promise of statehood. That might work as long as the Qassams keep missing and Hamas doesn’t try something larger. And if it does? Senior administration officials have told Olmert that he should prepare his public to absorb some terrorism without giving up on the talks.

How much of this is coming from the administration and how much from the Olmert government, is uncertain. But this is very disturbing. And if the terror is coming from Fatah no doubt the administration would also advocate Israel’s absorbing terrorism instead of stopping talks. To the degree that this is true this is unconscionable meddling in Israeli security. (And it doesn’t bode well for the tenure of Gen. Jones.)

However Diehl also writes

Egypt and Saudi Arabia have a different strategy — one that directly undercuts Bush’s. Both Israelis and Americans believe that the Egyptian government has chosen to tolerate the smuggling from Sinai into Gaza. President Hosni Mubarak, they say, is hedging his bet on Abbas and avoiding a complete break with Hamas. Both Egyptian and Saudi officials are quietly pushing for renewed negotiations between the two Palestinian factions, in parallel with the peace talks. The problem is that Abbas, so far, hasn’t been interested in striking a bargain with Hamas.

Egypt and Saudi Arabia’s action is only described as undermining the administration’s not as inimical to peace efforts. (”[C]hosen to tolerate?!?” How much more delicate could Diehl have been?)

The one option that doesn’t seem to be getting serious consideration is perhaps the only one that Hamas itself might accept: a cease-fire with Israel that would end attacks by both sides, open Gaza to normal commerce and allow the peace negotiations to go forward without interference. Such a deal, which is favored by the out-of-power Israeli left, doesn’t fit with the Bush administration’s vision of a polarized Middle East in which Iran and its allies are irreconcilable. Hamas might indeed be unyielding in its opposition to peace. But if there is no cease-fire, prepare for war.

Perhaps dealing with Hamas is off the table, perhaps not. But Diehl, in his sloppiness, before ignored the length of time that Hamas has been encouraging the Qassams. Elder of Ziyon started keeping the calendar because the Qassams persisted despite a Hamas ceasefire.

So the question is why in the world is Diehl advocating a policy of continuing to tolerate the intolerable? Is his vision of peace so warped that peace can only be achieved by Israel absorbing terror?

Crossposted on Soccer Dad.

It’s past time that Ehud Barak made good on his promise to clean up Gaza.

Four soldiers were lightly injured Sunday evening from a mortar hit on an infirmary in an IDF base adjoining Kibbutz Nahal Oz, next to the Gaza Strip.

The injured soldiers, three men and one woman, were evacuated to Barzilai Medical Center in Ashkelon and Soroka Hospital in Beersheba to receive treatment for their wounds. Around 15 mortars have been fired thus far Sunday from the Gaza Strip toward Israel.

There were between 5-8 mortars in the barrage that hit the base, one of which hit the base infirmary in which four soldiers had sought shelter. One paramedic broke her hand, two other soldiers were hit by flying shrapnel and a fourth went into shock. The injured soldiers received immediate first aid from on-base medical personnel.

The IDF took out a few terrorists.

Between Sunday night and early Monday morning, five palestinians were killed in two separate IDF actions in the northern Gaza Strip. An IDF force killed two gunmen who were trying to launch a mortar shell into Israel, and later a Golani Brigade force in the Saja’eeyah area killed three armed men attempting to reach the border fence.

Not good enough.

Earlier, a barrage of more than 10 mortars were fired toward the Sha’ar Hanegev Regional Council. Three mortars landed in a kibbutz, while the rest landed in open fields near the Gaza border fence. No injuries or damage were reported.

[...] Also on Sunday, a Qassam rocket landed in an open field near Sderot.

In the past week, dozens of mortars were fired from the Gaza Strip. Last Friday five mortars landed near the border fence. Two days earlier, seven mortars were fired from the Strip and landed in open field.

Funny how we don’t hear the world talk about the need to stop rockets from raining down on Israel as part of the peace deal. But then, they do—they just insist it can’t be done, or isn’t part of the deal.

Haveil Havalim #143 is UP!

Haveil Havalim is the Israel/Jewish blogging carnival.

Among the great posts:
The history of the UNRWA
Asser Levy
When Hebron is as distant as Lebanon
How should you light?

The categories are:

Annapolis
History
Israel
Politics
Humor
Judaism
Torah
Culture
Antisemitism

And that first one is rather large.

Please check it out and enjoy.