BUSH WILL STOP MEDIATING - US to lower profile in I/P - Ma'ariv

[tinnypriv]

Note: Yet again, I couldn't find this in any news outlet, so excuse the links. The block caps title is from the front cover of Ma'ariv, the second from the internet version.

Bush will stop mediating

Estimate: U.S. to lower profile in Middle East | Israeli officials: U.S. focusing on Iraq, will reduce involvement in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict | Will not propose new peace solutions

Ma'ariv, 2 October 2003

The United States intends to reduce its involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict until next year, according to Israeli officials.

According to internal documents in Jerusalem, "difficult internal/foreign affairs concerns mean that the Bush administration will concentrate on the Iraq problem to relieve the president from intensive involvement in other issues, including the Israeli-Palestinian conflict".

Israeli officials say that the focus will now shift to the continuing complications in Iraq and the falling popularity ratings of President Bush, instead of Israeli-Palestinian mediation, which will be handled by the state department.

...

To mark a "lower profile" in the conflict, U.S. envoy John Wolf will return to the United States and also reduce his visits to the region.

...

It is believed that the Roadmap plan will now go into a "deep freeze". The American aim is to maintain the current "relative silence" and status quo, until after the presidential elections in Nov 2004.

...

The United States will also remain detatched from Abu Ala, as he attempts to form a new government.

...

http://images.maariv.co.il/channels/1/ART/550/457.html (hebrew)

...

Comment: Alright, what was that fucking bullshit about concentrating on I/P after Iraq? Oh and "deep freeze"? Catchy! :eyes:

[Equinox]

1. Yeah, I'm also wondering who this benefits,

Of course the GOI has all the room in the world now to continue unopposed with their slow, subtle, and methodical transfer (ethnic cleansing) policy to rid the holy land of those pesky stubborn Palestinians.

Maybe someone more balanced will step in? Naw, the US will come rushing back to protect the "only democracy" in the Middle East.

Good luck Palestinians, it was fun while it lasted, but not even the US with it's facade of fairness will hold Sharon and his dobermans back now. I'm sure Sharon whispered into Bush's ear that he needs to stop meddling in his (Sharon's) illegal policies or he'll just have to tell a tale or two about the war on Iraq. Bush of course gazed into Sharon's eyes and saw a "man of peace." They both kissed and lived happily ever after in a world free of Palestinians.

----Curtains-----

[tinnypriv]

2. A section I didn't quote

"The United States will not now publically criticise the security fence"

Tasty. :eyes:

I presume you can now replace "security fence" with "liquidations", "settlements", "killing Arafat", "bombing Iran", etc etc.

[Equinox]

6. Really...

I mean why build a wall? Just expel them and get it over with...shit...........

Much ado about nothing.

[Resistance]

3. whew

for a week or two there I was really worried that Israel would have to abandon the settlement expansion plans which steals land that isn't theirs! What a relief. And the Apartheid Wall can continue without delay from the pesky U.S. patron.

One thing of course missing from all this is the fact that the U.S. will remain quite actively involved, to the tune of the annual $3 billion lottery bonanza which American taxpayers fund --- but of course all this goes to help good causes, y'know, such as the bombs, guns, and missiles needed to murder Palestinian "squatters" who happen to be living on the land which Israel intends on continuing to steal from them; plus the bulldozers which are desperately needed to demolish the homes of all those Palestinians.

So this is really welcome news, eh Democrats? Let the ethnic cleansing continue with impunity and unconditional support!

:thumbsup:

[sushi]

4. I see

Instead of putting his foot down, * is backing off. Actually, that was to be expected, although I read somewhere that he was determined to stay with it.
Well, I suppose he does have to concentrate on Iraq, where he's losing more troops, which is not good for his election campaign.

[Darranar]

5. I didn't know that I could hate Bush any more...

but I just realized that I could.

[loudnclear]

7. So, the US is going to turn a blind eye to genocide and illegal occupation

the longest occupation of a people in a century. We give more aid to Israel every year (one of the wealthiest nations in the ME) than we give to all of sub-Sahra Africa (that's about 15 nations)

[Darranar]

8. Genocide?

What genocide?

[bemildred]

9. This seems to be "analysis".

I don't think its "News" and I don't think it means
much one way or another.

[tinnypriv]

10. It's news

And analysis, written by Ma'ariv political reporters. It isn't an op-ed. Hence, the icon I used.

This is basically the equivalent of the recent Washington Post story on Wilson which quoted a "senior adminstration official".

ON EDIT: It means plenty, since Ma'ariv put their top guns on this story (Caspit, Shahar and Fox. Caspit especially).

[bemildred]

11. Not criticizing.

It's just that from what I read here, which is all I have access
to (being Hebrew challenged), this is spin and opinion, straight
from the GOI. Not a fact in the lot from what I can see. The fact
that it's a "government source" does, of course, make it news,
and I'm not saying they are wrong in their analysis.

It does make a certain amount of sense, they do have their hands
full in Iraq, and with domestic politics as a consequence. And it
makes sense that they would give this back to State where it belonged
in the first place.

Iraq will most likely have a number of consequences, and its only
just beginning. As Mr. Van Creveld points out in another thread
there is likely to be a civil war ramping up there soon, when exactly
depends somewhat on when the US decides to bail out.

Certainly, the present situation does not look good for the prospects
of a negotiated solution, at least in the short run. In the long
run the results are highly unpredictable.

[tinnypriv]

12. Ah, ok!

I agree with pretty much all of that. :thumbsup:

It could be spin, I agree, although I find that highly unlikely.

I do think that you have to take into account the reason for "government" leaks (especially to major newspapers), and I did do that when evaluating this report - I probably am too glib for my own good so that wasn't clear.

FWIW, there was a recent case of this: when Avi Dichter (head of Shabak) made his recent remarks on it being "better to liquidate Arafat", it was leaked to Ma'ariv and international news agencies, and that was taken as the gospel GOI position. Now, it was very close to the GOI position (hence the vote in favor of "expelling"), but not totally. What wasn't leaked was the head of army intelligence advising against it in the same session (revealed by Ze'ev Shiff in Ha'aretz a week or so later).

So, I agree you have to be careful with these reports and "read between the lines", so to speak. I think that was your point.

Er, I'm rambling now. :D

[bemildred]

13. Spin isn't necessarily false, it's just not intended to

to keep you completely informed, and it is intended to shape
your opinions and attitudes. :-)

I will defer to your judgement on the truth of it, I suspect
you are much better informed than I.

[tinnypriv]

14. An english language supporting article (-ish)

"Israel is not worried about American pressure. The U.S. is stepping back from involvement in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, paying lip-service to the road map, insisting it is 'not dead'."

- Aluf Benn, http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/346293.html (last paragraph)

[newyorican]

15. What profile?

:shrug:

[tinnypriv]

16. Reality is starting to intrude:

"With next year's presidential election looming and the U.S.-backed "road map" for peace on hold"

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/360667.html (Reuters)

[Classical_Liberal]

17. Since it wasn't mediating in the first place

Since it was in fact supporting everything Ariel does including the settlement expansion and the wall, this is just as well.

[Aidoneus]

18. good

the charade was grotesque. May the Arabs overthrow their quisling tyrants and put some real pressure on them.

Bush's handlers seems to have noted the heat he got from even Democratic opportunists when he dared to think about perhaps considering tapping Sharon lightly on the wrist (and of course they don't plan on doing anything about this criminal behavior either), perhaps he doesn't wish to risk not being partially re-elected on an insincere facade.

[tinnypriv]

19. I asked Aluf Benn about this today (Ha'aretz diplomatic correspondent):

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/pages/QA.jhtml?qaNo=82

Q: Back in October, Ben Caspit of Ma'ariv reported clearly and starkly that, "Bush will stop mediating" (i.e. the road map will go into a "deep freeze"). You yourself reported something similar. So, my question is, given these facts, why has the pretense that the U.S. cares about the road map persisted in the U.S. press?

A: The U.S. always needs some formula, or platform, to show as its policy basis, even if it's on life support or even in a deep coma. Thus, Washington stuck to the Mitchell plan when it was long overdue, until the new Bush speech-road map paradigm broke forth. The road map will stay in the background, with hollow commitments from the relevant players, at least until the American leadership is re-energized.

...

I'll translate (he is a diplo correspondent after all) ;-)

Answer = Road map is Roadkill until Nov 2004

[vierundzwanzig]

22. You are correct

I concede. I heard James Zogby pretty much state the same thing tonight.

[tinnypriv]

23. Really?

Thanks, didn't know that. I avoid British television, never mind the U.S. version. :D

EDIT: Of course, the reason Zogby said that is probably because Master* gave the order that it was a-okay to say it. Otherwise he'd have kept it shut, like everyone else.

* Colin Powell gave a press conference a day or so ago in which he conceded the Roadmap was "paused".

[vierundzwanzig]

20. So far

I have read nothing of the like in an English zine or paper.

Who made these statements? And if indeed the state department will get involved in the I/P conflict it means rather bad news for the Israelis as the state department in the past has shown less sympathy for Israeli policies. Do not forget that it was the state department in the first place that cooked up the reductions in guarantees.

Dubya worries about re-election no matter the cost. Did anybody believe other wise?

However, there are those that predict that if Bush should 'serve' a second term (which I find doubtful) things will go very badly for the Israelis altogether since he does not have to worry about reelection and support from the pro-Israeli lobby.

If this piece is indeed genuine then it doesn't mean just one thing.

And as a final comment: The 'road map' really isn't on the table anymore but at least four different peace proposals that have not been the work of the Quartet, one of them being realively widely endorsed. Bush screwed it up royally but somehow some people such as Gush Shalom, Nusseibeh and last but not leat our own Jimmy Carter keep the ball rolling much more successfully.

[tinnypriv]

21. Regarding the article

This was written by Caspit, Shahar and Fox (all Ma'ariv reporters/correspondents). Very good reporters incidentially.

I think how "genuine" it is you'll have to judge for yourself. I'm not sure what that means myself.

But, given that the facts were essentially conceded by Aluf Benn of Ha'aretz (see above), when I put them to him, and the supporting elements I've added (to keep this up to date) flesh out the story even more, I don't really see how there can be much of a dispute.

Furthermore, the lack of any article in western journals on this topic simply confirms the thesis of Caspit and co (which I also hold): that the Roadmap is Roadkill.

The reason it confirms it is obvious: the Roadmap is a western creation, hence the death of it cannot be conceded, as that would make certain western politicians look like clusterfucks. It would not be proper for a journalist who values his job to bring that opinion to an editorial meeting, hence it is easier to pretend it doesn't exist.

BTW, since I posted this article (note: back in early October), that is exactly how I've always referred to the Roadmap - i.e. Roadkill.

It was obvious at the time, but I don't really see any excuse for anyone not holding that opinion now (generally speaking).