I once had the pleasure of a short, impromptu debate with Bob Woodward over whether opening Iraq as a second front in the GWOT was a strategic blunder (I argued yes, seeing as how Afghanistan wasn't finished yet, and still isn't; he argued no, with the dodgeball theory). Although I've yet to win him to my side on that score, at least it appears that we may be in accord on the tactical:
http://www.timesonline.co.uk/article/0,,3-2387604,00.html
In other news, I was watching CNN today (one of my 3 English channels here in Ramallah), and they had a dramatic headline announcement about how talks between Fatah and Hamas have broken down, saying that Fatah was no longer talking to Hamas, and Abbas voiced fears of civil war. Now, I hate to disparage CNN, particularly when it's giving me about 40% of my news lately, but, seriously? First of all, I believe Abbas was quoted as saying that civil war would theoretically be a big problem, and should be avoided at all costs. It's dangerous to equate that statement with the fear that civil war is imminent.
In addition, it's naive to say that the two parties aren't speaking (granted, Abbas is not having an official meeting with Haniyeh, but who are they, a pair of teenage girls?), just fighting.
I'd wager both sides are more clever than that. Look at the last week: Ongoing cycle of closures, lack of money, and rocket attacks leads to unrest in Gaza. Said unrest spreads to the West Bank. Talks break down. Rice comes to visit, with pledges to talk to Israel about easing travel restrictions.
If I were in charge of the Palestinian Territories, and my economy was being strangled, I think I just might turn to the one person with influence (military and economic) over my strangler. But I wouldn't want to give up my position of being powerless, yet. At the moment, I can plead for help with little tit-for-tat. If I shoulder the weight of government, I have much more international responsibility.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment