Israel Matzav: Effect of 'peace' between Israel and 'Palestinians' exaggerated

Effect of 'peace' between Israel and 'Palestinians' exaggerated

What's important about this article is not so much what is said (which is really nothing new), but who is saying it. This op-ed from the Wall Street Journal, which is accessible to all for a change, is by Richard Haass. Mr. Haass is the Chairman of the Council on Foreign Relations, probably the most important foreign policy think tank in the United States.

The danger of exaggerating the benefits of solving the Palestinian conflict is that doing so runs the risk of distorting American foreign policy. It accords the issue more prominence than it deserves, produces impatience, and tempts the U.S. government to adopt policies that are overly ambitious.

This is not an argument for ignoring the Palestinian issue. As is so often the case, neglect will likely prove malign. But those urging President Obama to announce a peace plan are doing him and the cause of peace no favor. Announcing a comprehensive plan now—one that is all but certain to fail—risks discrediting good ideas, breeding frustration in the Arab world, and diluting America's reputation for getting things done.

As Edgar noted in "King Lear," "Ripeness is all." And the situation in the Middle East is anything but ripe for ambitious diplomacy. What is missing are not ideas—the outlines of peace are well-known—but the will and ability to compromise.

Haass' argument is an argument for the status quo - at least for the foreseeable future. And it's one that will be very difficult for Obama's brain trust to ignore (although he may try to have them do that anyway).

Read the whole thing.

Israel Matzav: Effect of 'peace' between Israel and 'Palestinians' exaggerated