If a Martian landed on earth and ignored all that has been said but, instead, paid attention only to what has been done, she would come to the obvious conclusion:

o Israel is America's enemy.
o Iran is its best friend.

For 5 years now, the US has been constantly weakening Israel and strengthening Iran.

Even a Martian can see that.

You're failing to mention what the commenter above points out: Rice's attempts have been repeatedly sabotaged from within the administration, primarily by Cheney. I'm sure Olmert recognizes this weakness, and is deliberately exploiting it. There's no way to address a problem as intractable as this one when the emissary (Rice) doesn't have the full backing of the administration.

http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/843867.html

Israel's position with regard to the peace process with the Palestinians is founded upon fundamental principles, the most central of which is the existence of two nation-states, with each state addressing the national aspirations of its own people - Israel for the Jewish people and Palestine for the Palestinian people - and with both states coexisting in peace, free from the threat of terrorism and violence. For this purpose, a direct dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians is necessary." The statement added: "Israel also believes that moderate Arab states can fill a positive role by encouraging regional cooperation, and supporting the Israel-Palestinian track. A dialogue between these states and Israel can contribute to this end."

Deputy Premier Shimon Peres called on the Arab states "to sit together with Israel and achieve an agreement, as we did with Egypt and Jordan. Unilateral declarations, in which each side presents its positions, will not achieve anything," Peres said.

I’ll trust Peres wisdom over MJ wisdom every time.

Sez Davai:
"Deputy Premier Shimon Peres called on the Arab states "to sit together with Israel and achieve an agreement, as we did with Egypt and Jordan. Unilateral declarations, in which each side presents its positions, will not achieve anything," Peres said.
I’ll trust Peres wisdom over MJ wisdom every time."

Ofcourse you do. Peres is Israeli. MJ is American whose prime concern is the interests of the country he lives in. What's your prime concern, Davai?

"If now is not the time to insist on a "just solution to the refugee problem", even if it leads to a binational state, then when?"
Never, just forget about this.
There no conflict in a world was ever resolved on basis of words such as just, fair, entitlement.

These words can’t help resolve any conflict, only to start or prolong conflict.

MJ is American whose prime concern is the interests of the country he lives in”
Sure, but he claims to be “true friends of Israel” and he wrote his comments in his capacity of a true friend of Israel.
I trust Peres’ judgment what’s is best interest of Israel over MJ judgment what is in the best interest of Israel any time.

“What's your prime concern, Davai?”

The same as yours, our families. :-)

Use blockquote. as in,

LEFT blockquote RIGHT
text here ...
LEFT /blockquote RIGHT

where LEFT is
and RIGHT is >

Wordie,

I can't imagine a better oportunity for Israel, but it doesn't sound as if there is any serious consideration of the plan by Israeli leaders.

"Israel is sincerely interested in pursuing a dialogue with those Arab states that desire peace with Israel, this in order to promote a process of normalization and cooperation. Israel hopes that the Riyadh Summit will contribute to this effort.

"Israel's position with regard to the peace process with the Palestinians is founded upon fundamental principles, the most central of which is the existence of two nation-states, with each state addressing the national aspirations of its own people - Israel for the Jewish people and Palestine for the Palestinian people - and with both states coexisting in peace, free from the threat of terrorism and violence. For this purpose, a direct dialogue between Israel and the Palestinians is necessary." The statement added: "Israel also believes that moderate Arab states can fill a positive role by encouraging regional cooperation, and supporting the Israel-Palestinian track. A dialogue between these states and Israel can contribute to this end."

MJ,

Olmert said, “There are interesting ideas there, and we are ready to hold discussions and hear from the Saudis about their approach and to tell them about ours.” That is a start. But why not simply accept the initiative with the stated understanding that its specific terms have to be amended?

How?  In the final communique from the Arab League summit, the delegations agreed, among other things to,

Create working groups to carry out contacts with the United Nations, United States, Europe and Russia to mobilize support for this initiative and start serious negotiation.

We recognize these contacts targeted by the Arab League's proposed working groups as the Quartet for Middle East Peace.  But what about Israel?  We are supposed to condemn Israel for apparently finessing the initiative, while the Arab League delegations leave Riyadh with a plan to enter into dialogue with... the Quartet?

This is being sold as an Arab League initiative.  The Arab establishment needs to initiate negotiations with Israel.  Russia, not so much.

PS: If one wants to downrate this comment, fine.  But can we at least deal with the overarching concern expressed herein?

David Ben-Gurion would think he was dreaming. After 60 years, the Arab states (every one of them) and the PLO, are offering Israel full normalization of relations in exchange for territorial withdrawal and a solution to the refugee problem.

So Isreal runs a test case and pulls out of Gaza. How did that workout? More rockets packed with ball bearings fired at civilians. Hamas apparently isn't on the same page with those other Arab states.

This is the same old game where those that are not actively killing Jews at the moment provide political cover for those that are.

The sons of the prophet are noble and bold,
and quite unaccustomed to fear.
But the bravest by far in the ranks of the Shah
was Abdul Abulbul Amir

If Rosenberg felt that the existence of only the Palestinians...

Ho-kay, let me put it this way: If the Zionist position, that the Jews must have a land of their own, run as a "Jewish State", is true, then Hitler was quite correct in wanting to rid Germany of them.

I am a Jew. The idea of living in a "Jewish state" is the most disgusting excuse for pseudo religious tyranny I have ever heard.
If Judaism supplied the foundation for an armed and sovereign state we would have had one all along.
Judaism is just a religion, a perfectly good religion (I sure like it). To pretend it provides either the need or the equip[ment to run a state is pure fantasy, it would be hysterical if it did not have such tragic consequences for so many people.
One of its worst consequences is the fact that Judaism, due to Zionism, is now no more than the handmaiden, or rather the eunuch, of US policy.

Davai sez: re the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
"There is NOTHING you can do about this. So, stop whinning, get a life."
Too bad the thousands of Israelis and Palestinians killed since Oslo ended cannot get a life. Each of them had one. But the conflict Davai loves so much cost them their lives.
He, ofcourse, came here. He has a life. How nice for him!

Mark Weinberg,

Davai sez: re the Israeli-Palestinian conflict
"There is NOTHING you can do about this. So, stop whinning, get a life."

davai was obviously referring to the reestablishment of Jewish national self-determination in the state of Israel (and something tells me you already knew that).

My impression is that attention is now being shifted to an Israeli "red line" about the right of return with Olmert insisting that not a single refugee will return.

Not so long ago that would have been taken for granted and the "red lines" being highlighted would be about Jerusalem and major settlements.

The message I got was that the Israeli government is (silently) letting people know to prepare themselves for accepting that the 1967 borders will be the basis for negotiations.

Presumably at least a few weeks have to elapse between such a significant silence and officially starting to say it aloud. It wasn't all that long ago since Olmert first announced that some major settlements might have to be discussed at all.

During that period people can get themselves used to going on and on about the absolute unreasonableness of the Palestinian right of return.

At the same time they can chat to each other about how the silence about 1967 borders is a clever tactical move so as to block negotiations on grounds that look more reasonable to world opinion but not being unnecessarily insulting to world opinion by repeating rudely that Israel has red lines about Jerusalem and major settlements. All that matters is that progress is blocked.

Then there has to be at least a few weeks of starting to officially say it aloud, but obscurely, as a possibility that might conceivably be necessary to get peace with the Arabs in order to unite against Iran. This will require louder and more hysterical shouting about Iran.

This process enables all but the most completely delusional to at least be resigned about it when it turns out that Israel does have to accept a return to its 1967 borders as the basis for negotiations - as has been obvious to anyone not slightly delusional for decades now.

Given the significant numbers of Israelis who are at least slightly delusional it is highly desirable that they be delusional about Iran rather than about their immediate neighbors and at least resigned to the prospect when the Israeli government does announce that it really is going to have to withdraw from the Palestinian occupied territories and accepts the 1967 borders as the basis for negotiations.

That is when negotiations about such more difficult matters as the right of return can commence.

Otherwise the overall process would take longer as delusional people do have the capacity to disrupt it - as has been repeatedly made obvious .

Needless to say similar processes are going on among Palestinians.

I see no reason for "disappointment" about the very significant silences this week.

On March 30, 2007 - 2:05pm seth edenbaum said:

Everyone is scared of Iran, the only regime in the Middle East at risk of being toppled by moderates rather than reactionaries.

You seem to be right.

Thanks Daniel,

But I hesitate to throw around the "antisemite" thing too easily.  While there are antisemitic implications to some, if not many, characterizations of Israel and Zionism that are much too casually tossed about, I remain unconvinced that there has ever been any more than a small handful of genuine antisemites that visit here.

Mark Weinberg,

But you band together with Greenbaum and Brad. All you guys. So cute, the clannishness in this day and age.

Check your ratings.  lockean doesn't like either of us, Mark.  Go figure!  Sometimes clannishness is thrust upon you.

"I am not clear what you actually object to"

I'm object to MJ style and tone of absolute certainness of what Israel should do in response to Arab initiative. There is a game of precondition traps is going on and Israel should be very careful in playing this game.
I don’t have a personal opinion of what’s the best response. I just want people to have more humidity and not pretend that they know the TRUTH.
Being born in a totalitarian state, from my childhood I have very strong allergy to people who know the TRUTH. MJ is one of the people who knows the TRUTH.

A zissen pesach to you, Reb Zionista. (You can translate in case that am haaretz Bradthe Dad makes an appearance.