What a Mideast Envoy Needs
Steve Clemons suggests Dennis Ross would make a good ambassador to Israel, in part to ensure that if a Middle East peace envoy is appointed it’s someone prepared to take a more balanced approach. He suggests “Colin Powell, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar, or even Richard Armitage” as “smart and interesting choices” for those roles. I agree on all those scores, but I will say that with a sensitive subject like this it’s important to not just pick people who are good, but people who have the confidence of the president. The Bush administration’s approach to the peace process has been terrible, but Bush’s Middle East envoys have been pretty good. There’s nothing wrong with Tony Zinni or Jim Jones. But they didn’t have the right kind of authority or mandate.
What a Middle East envoy needs is to be someone who’s taken seriously by the leaders in the region and by the principles back in Washington. That’s not primarily an issue who gets appointed — though appointing someone of stature helps — but of what the president says and does. Not just publicly, but privately in the White House’s and State Department’s communications with the governments in the region. Israel’s Prime Minister will be able to tell whether or not she has better access to decision-makers in DC than the envoy does.
42 Responses to “What a Mideast Envoy Needs”
Register
RSSLogin
Topic Cloud
ArchivesBlog RollAbout Matt YglesiasContact Me
Donate
November 25th, 2008 at 10:37 am
Dennis Ross advocates bombing Iran? Isn’t that disqualifying in its own right? Not to mention he pushed that Clinton deal on the Palestinians at the end of the term which, sorry to say, was a bad deal for the Palestinians. He has no credibility with them.
November 25th, 2008 at 10:38 am
they didn’t have the right kind of authority or mandate.
http://www.makkale.blogcu.com
November 25th, 2008 at 10:42 am
Israel’s Prime Minister will be able to tell whether or not she has better access to decision-makers in DC than the envoy does
Is that a prediction?
November 25th, 2008 at 11:41 am
On NPR yesterday, I heard the guest news analyst suggesting that Bill Clinton would make a near-ideal Middle East envoy. I have to admit, the idea seems to me to have merit.
November 25th, 2008 at 12:04 pm
Re Yglesias
He suggests “Colin Powell, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar, or even Richard Armitage” as “smart and interesting choices” for those roles.
Chuck Hagel and Richard Lugar are two of the biggest Israel bashers in the Senate. Appointing either of them as ambassador to Israel would be the equivalent of appointing the head of AIPAC ambassador to Saudi Arabia.
Re raoul
Not to mention he pushed that Clinton deal on the Palestinians at the end of the term which, sorry to say, was a bad deal for the Palestinians. He has no credibility with them.
Mr. raoul evidently considers any deal which does not involve the Government of Israel going out of business to be a bad deal for the Palestinians. I have a flash for Mr. raoul. that’s the best deal the Palestinians are going to get. Their demand that the Government of Israel go out of business will be accepted when Mr. raoul sees the back of his own ear.
November 25th, 2008 at 12:14 pm
SLC and Raoul,
I think you are misreading the quote a bit. The suggestion from Clemons is precisely that Ross should get the Ambassadorship to Israel because it is the more ceremonial position and doesn’t require any faith on the part of the Palestinians.
The suggestion above is not that hagel or Lugar be appointed ambassador to Israel, but rather that they be put in charge of the actual middle east peace negotiations.
Of course these points say nothing about whether Clemons is saying something reasonable. It is just a question of making clear what he is advocating.
On a separate point, if the deal offered to the Palestinians at the end of the Clinton administration is the best deal they will ever get, then Israel will go out of business at some point. But I suspect you are wrong. Eventually Israel and the palestinians will make a deal that makes possible a lasting peace.
November 25th, 2008 at 12:36 pm
Re Lon
The Government of israel will go out of business when the shrimps learn to whistle (old Russian saying via Nikita Khrushchev). Further, the Palestinians are asking for it and, when somebody like Uzi Landau becomes prime minister, they’re going to get it (i.e. Hama Rules).
November 25th, 2008 at 12:58 pm
“Colin Powell, Chuck Hagel, Richard Lugar, or even Richard Armitage”
The “decent” Republicans are really feeling empowered, aren’t they.
November 25th, 2008 at 1:00 pm
SLC:
We certainly do not want the government to go out of business, but the current policies are leading to a disfunctinal pariah state where a significant portion of the ecomomy is run by mobsters and a lot of the rest by the military-industrial complex. Israel will sucumb on its own, it probably would have already but for U.S aid. If we want Israel to survive, we better hope it starts recognizing that it is in a precacious position. But mind me not, keep whistling past the graveyard.
November 25th, 2008 at 2:04 pm
“Biggest Israel-bashers in the Senate”
Is that like “world’s tallest midget?” Or “best pizza in DC?”
November 25th, 2008 at 2:32 pm
Considering the source, and the current condition of the USSR, you might want to reconsider the usefulness of the quote.
Your snuff film collection not doing it for you any more?
November 25th, 2008 at 3:07 pm
Mr Ross should permanantly move to Israel and revoke his US citizenship.
He’s verifiably a traitor.
November 25th, 2008 at 4:17 pm
the current policies are leading to a disfunctinal pariah state – raoul
But what is the evidence that even if Israel changes its policies it would be anything other than a pariah state? Given the way Israel gets bashed around and treated like a scapegoat, it would seem that, so long as Israel exists as a homeland for us Jews, it will be treated as a pariah state. The only way to please some people would be to create a situation in which Israel no longer served as a Jewish homeland.
November 25th, 2008 at 4:27 pm
so long as Israel exists as a homeland for us Jews, it will be treated as a pariah state
The theory being that the western European countries – all of which have substantial Jewish populations who are fully integrated, with full civil, legal, and human rights – the criticize Israel’s treatment of the Palestinians in the territories are just really, really anti-semitic, but only towards Jews who are far away?
I think you’re looking for an excuse.
November 25th, 2008 at 4:30 pm
DAS:
First sorry for the typo- dysfunctional. In fact I will one-up your statement- there are a lot of people who simply do not want Jews in the area, much less a Jewish state; hopefully that will change in the distant future. A majority Jewish homeland will only be preserved if conquered territories are secceded. And not this pussyfooting around that this corner is yours and that corner is mine. Then Israel can look inwards and fix its broken society, but the current situation is preventing Israel from moving forward. Frankly, apart from playing the victimhood card, there really do not exist any other options.
November 25th, 2008 at 4:41 pm
If Obama is smart, he’ll appoint two envoys (cue that Warren Zevon song in re. envoys, however): one envoy will be Jewish — active in the Jewish community and with at least some Zionist bona fides … but who will tell the Israelis to put a sock in it; the other envoy will be a Palestinian Muslim — active with his community … but who will tell the Palestinians to put a sock in it.
November 25th, 2008 at 4:43 pm
joe from lowell …
… because, as far as Jews are concerned, Europe has such a good track record? Next please …
Of course, the question for raoul is “which conquered territories?”. And would the resulting clipped state be functional? Would it even have defensible boundaries?
November 25th, 2008 at 5:25 pm
I’ve always thought that sending Bill Clinton to Israel/Palestine would be a good idea, for a whole raft of reasons–to add to his legacy, to finish the work that began in his administration, and because he is an excellent negotiator. Yes, there is always drama with the Clintons, but he has clout and skills that would come in useful there.
November 25th, 2008 at 5:49 pm
DAS: All of them (1967)- and it behooves Israel to make it viable.
November 25th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
I’m not sure how much the settlements contribute to the Israel economy, but give the costs of supporting them I don’t think giving them up would destroy the economy. Whether or not the country is functional is more up to the Israelis themselves, not the borders- which reminds me of a good Israeli joke.
And I’m pretty sure the borders would be defensible. A hundred plus warhead nuclear stockpile and the baddest army in the region going up against Lebanon, Syria, Egypt and Jordan? Even assuming that all the countries would attack? I’m not sure what the point spread on that matchup would be, but I’d bet a pile of cash that Israel would beat it.
November 25th, 2008 at 5:52 pm
what is the evidence that even if Israel changes its policies it would be anything other than a pariah state?
Can we separate ‘Israel’ the country from ‘Schmisrael’ the American polical abstraction? The perpetuation of Schmisrael politics is a bad thing.
November 25th, 2008 at 6:11 pm
Re Farid
Fucktard Mr. Farid is cordially invited to take his comment and shove it up his ass. And after he accomplishes that feat, he can go fuck himself.
Re Dave in NY, Raoul, and DAS
The fact is that an Israeli withdrawal to the 1967 Green line would not lead to a solution. The only deal the Palestinians will accept, at this time, is resettlement of inhabitants of refugee camps in Israel. There is no Israeli government that would agree to any such thing nor any prospect that any American government would attempt to impose such a solution.
Until such time as the Palestinian leadership gives up this unobtainable demand, negotiations and peace proposals are a waste of time. President Elect Osama has far more important issues on his agenda, in particular, repairing the damage done over the last 8 years by the assholes currently in charge of our government. It’s the economy stupid.
November 26th, 2008 at 9:19 am
All of them (1967)- and it behooves Israel to make it viable. – raoul
Some would say that all of them includes some of the lands Israel has had since 1948. Meanwhile others would say that, since Israel doesn’t even have all the lands promised to the Jewish state, Israel ought to be allowed to take the rest of the West Bank, for example.
BTW … why is Israel being asked to return lands it conquered in a war of self-defense? Pace the “it’s international law that you don’t get to keep lands you occupied after a war” crowd, that’s actually rather unprecedented. Should Poland, for example, be required to return some of its western parts to Germany since it won them in a war (of self-defense)?
January 19th, 2009 at 11:36 pm
laptop battery
laptop batteries
March 1st, 2009 at 7:40 pm
cialis
It is the coolest site,keep so!
March 2nd, 2009 at 5:58 am
levitraExcellent site. It was pleasant to me.
March 11th, 2009 at 5:12 am
Great site. Good info
March 13th, 2009 at 12:09 am
It is the coolest site,keep so!
March 14th, 2009 at 5:53 am
Incredible site!
xanax
March 17th, 2009 at 2:35 am
Excellent site. It was pleasant to me.
tramadol
March 22nd, 2009 at 6:33 am
tramadol
I want to say – thank you for this!
March 27th, 2009 at 12:57 am
Hi, I read your blog from time to time and I own a similar one and I was just wondering if you get a shit load of spam? If so how do you control it, any plugin or something you can suggest? I get so much it’s driving me insane so any help is much appreciated.
March 27th, 2009 at 4:13 pm
Hi, I read your blog from time to time and I own a similar one and I was just wondering if you get a ton of spam? If so how do you control it, any plugin or something you can suggest? I get so much it’s driving me insane so any help is much appreciated.
April 9th, 2009 at 8:21 am
I want to say – thank you for this! viagra
April 14th, 2009 at 9:38 am
If you have to do it, you might as well do it right
viagra