Comments on: Dispatch From Israel: Obama’s Hail Mary Pass?

By: marine2026

marine2026 — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 14:17:05 +0000

Benjamin, with this you have scored a bullseye. Thank you for not using an attacking tone. The attacks to come are enough.

By: Iris2Cotton

Iris2Cotton — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 06:00:04 +0000

Mr. Kerstein: Really interesting analysis. However, I take exception to this:

"While it is certainly possible that the first outcome of statehood would be a Palestinian civil war; it is equally possible that, buoyed by its triumph, Fatah could well turn to the sponsorship of mass terrorism and even a full-scale war against Israel, both in hopes of consolidating its hold on power against its theocratic rivals and out of an ideologically driven desire to destroy the Jewish state it still despises."

Fatah cannot unilaterally declare statehood under the pretense of unifying with Hamas under a banner of armed resistance. How is Fatah going to garner any credible support for a declaration of statehood that includes a promise to take East Jerusalem by force? And ultimately, would the promise of East Jerusalem will be enough to placate Hamas? I find that extremely doubtful. Fatah is clearly not interested in provoking Hamas into any more battles, so maybe this is just a baseless rumor, or political posturing. Still, I wonder how hard Obama would push for something like this.

By: arrond

arrond — Tue, 10 Nov 2009 04:04:09 +0000

GregDC – ” I think its hard to credibly still claim that Fatah is a terrorist organization. They have made tremendous strides in reducing the number of terrorist attacks from the West Bank. “
Only because they are fighting for their lives with Hamas. They don't have time to waste on Israel.
So work on your analysis too, please. There is no two state solution, until the Palestinian people reject terror. All of it. Until Israel has high confidence in their new neighbour, there will be no new neighbours.

I am just in awe reading this.

By: gregDC

gregDC — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 19:54:25 +0000

I think its hard to credibly still claim that Fatah is a terrorist organization. They have made tremendous strides in reducing the number of terrorist attacks from the West Bank. Under your analysis, there is no possibility of a two-state solution even through Israeli agreement, since Fatah will always be a terrorist organization. A more balanced discussion of the destablizing effects of a unilateral recognition would have been appreciated.

By: Barry_Meislin

Barry_Meislin — Mon, 09 Nov 2009 15:09:47 +0000

...because if it proves real, Obama’s gambit would be, at the very least, an extraordinarily reckless and destabilizing move.

No doubt. But for Obama, this may merely add to the idea's attractiveness. Breaking eggs, and all that....leading to a revoluationary new era of equality, brotherhood and peace, justice for the Palestinians finally having been granted.

On the other hand, he may regard it as not reckless at all, but with characteristic fecklessness as an bold, audacious attempt to bring hope and peace to a hopeless region....

Nor should one ignore that built in to the scheme is the value-added bonus whereby Israel (not that this is anything new) will be roundly and uniformly blamed for whatever hostilities that (must) break out as a result, and for any and all of the resulting carnage (which can only be tremendous), with special thanks to Richard Goldstone.

And so, for the latest Nobel Peace Prize laureate, this Armageddon-unleashing-Gordion-knot moment would, I think be most tantalizing. (And, who knows? It may even win him the long sought after admiration of the Arab/Islamic world along with---irony of ironies---all those thirsting millenarinists who may have not, generally, been know to show much enthusiasm for the President's agenda....)

As they say, a win-win situation. And for Israel....well, who really cares about Israel, now?....