Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


Neno

I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Join the forum, it's quick and easy

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Welcome to the Neno's Place!

Neno's Place Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality


Neno

I can be reached by phone or text 8am-7pm cst 972-768-9772 or, once joining the board I can be reached by a (PM) Private Message.

Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Would you like to react to this message? Create an account in a few clicks or log in to continue.
Established in 2006 as a Community of Reality

Many Topics Including The Oldest Dinar Community. Copyright © 2006-2020


    Jared Kouchner's peace plan could be catastrophic

    Rocky
    Rocky
    Rocky
    Admin Assist
    Admin Assist


    Posts : 281389
    Join date : 2012-12-21
    • Post n°1

    Jared Kouchner's peace plan could be catastrophic Empty Jared Kouchner's peace plan could be catastrophic

    Post by Rocky Sat 25 May 2019, 3:23 am


    [size=32]Jared Kouchner's peace plan could be catastrophic

    - 32 Minutes Ago
    [/size]
    Jared Kouchner's peace plan could be catastrophic %D9%83%D9%88%D8%B4%D9%86%D8%B1-%D9%88%D8%AE%D8%B7%D8%A9-%D8%A7%D9%84%D8%B3%D9%84%D8%A7%D9%85
    [size][size][url][/url][/size]
    [/size]
    On May 2, an interview with White House advisor Jared Kouchner on the Middle East peace process was held at the annual conference of the Washington Institute, an event broadcast live on CNN. Since I recently wrote an article in which he described his next peace plan as "a proposition that would lose everyone anyway" and that President Trump should abandon it to avoid the embarrassing failure, it was fitting for Kouchner to agree to the interview. Thus we "danced" for 45 minutes, - I attacked and he defended - and throughout the discussion, he was studious, attractive, and disciplined. While clarifying the main aspects of his views on Middle East diplomacy, he did not reveal any important announcement.
    However, we learned a lot. Specifically:
    The US plan will provide detailed proposals to answer all key issues on the Israeli-Palestinian agenda, including proposals for Israel's final borders, deciding on the disputed city of Jerusalem, the future of Palestinian refugees, security arrangements that will protect the peace agreement and the final political relationship between Israelis and Palestinians. It would not be a plan on how to create a new negotiating process; instead, he boldly declared that its goal was to provide "solutions".
    The US plan will highlight the equation of providing security for Israelis and improving the quality of life for Palestinians, with less emphasis on the "political aspirations" of the Palestinians. When he had the opportunity to express his support for the idea of ​​a demilitarized State - an "incomplete state" - which Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu himself once proposed, Kouchner said he avoided the term "state" altogether. "If I say 'two states' , And something else for the Palestinians, let us not use that term. "It remained unclear why he proposed answers to all issues of the peace process, but he did not offer an American definition of" statehood. " Indeed, it was very difficult to draw Kouchner's sympathy for Palestinian political aspirations, whatever their definition. (At some point, the word "countries" was used to refer to Israel and the future Palestinian entity, but it seemed closer to a slip of the tongue than a politically overloaded sign.)
    The US plan will focus on making the Palestinian region a magnet for investment as a way to improve the lives of Palestinians. But the sequence here is critical: Kouchner pointed out that achieving this goal will require demarcation of borders, followed by fundamental political reforms within the Palestinian Authority, comprehensive anti-corruption efforts and effective rule of law, including property rights. In other words, in addition to the money - "the money of others" - which means only a modest US contribution - it will take a lot of time before Palestinians can see improvements in living conditions.
    If these three points were the words of the "Kouchner Plan," the tune was in line with his father's father's bragging and threatening language, although he was more charming and easy to handle than the usual family representative. When he spoke to a room full of experts on the Middle East, Kouchner boldly rejected the concept of experience. When asked about his definition of success and the possible effects of failure, he described the question as a "Washington question" pattern - although he went on to admit that failure was the most likely option, describing it as "betting on easy [smart] money" It has different definitions of diplomatic success, saying: "Success can take many different forms. It may sound like a debate, and it could lead to closer cooperation and perhaps resolve some issues. "
    Instead, he drew the case in his own favor as a cross-cutting between facts and practical problems by referring to his unexpected accomplishments - trade deals with Mexico and Canada - a legislative achievement on criminal justice reform - and then hailed the originality of the triangular business of lawyers for real estate and bankruptcy Who are responsible for the "peace process" portfolio in Trump's administration: himself, his senior aide Jason Greenblatt, and US Ambassador to Israel David Friedman. Kouchner admitted that the President himself had not yet read the draft peace plan, which he said was still under revision. "When you work for the president, you try hard not to disappoint, but you can disappoint," he said. "When you work for your wife's father, you can not disappoint."
    When we gather all these data, we see that Kouchner has presented a new approach to peacemaking in the Middle East, though not entirely unprecedented. The Kouchner Plan, if ratified and proposed by Trump, may be the first since the 1982 Reagan Plan, in which the United States presented its own ideas for a permanent resolution of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict away from the ongoing peace talks. By doing so, it may conflict with the long-standing US policy of favoring direct negotiations between the parties as the best way to reach an agreement that satisfies the parties. In addition, excluding the idea of ​​a US-style statehood would in itself be a major step away from the bipartisan consensus that emerged after President George W. Bush endorsed the goal of establishing a Palestinian state in 2002.
    Ironically, Kouchner's focus on determining a final outcome and then working with the parties on the best way to achieve them formally reflects the traditional Arab approach to peacemaking. This is best illustrated by the Arab Peace Initiative, an idea put forward by Saudi Arabia in 2002 that called for Israel's full withdrawal from all the territories it occupied in 1967 in return for full recognition by all Arab states. But Israel criticized the Arab peace initiative - and rightly so - because it offered no room for negotiation, but was merely a discussion of implementation. However, it seems that Kouchner's proposal, in essence, aims to avoid the political minefields that could complicate Netanyahu's life, such as the legitimacy of Israeli settlements deep inside the West Bank, to avoid long-term Palestinian demands such as statehood, Security arrangements.
    But any attempt to look at the "Kouchner Plan" through the perspective of the previous diplomacy will stifle its real innovation. In my view, it is more enlightening to see Kouchner and his colleagues as developers who are taking lessons in the Middle East than the real estate market in New York than diplomats trying to solve a long-standing, intractable international conflict. Reading between the lines, it seems as if they view the peace process as the functional equivalent of converting a condominium apartment building in central Manhattan into luxury apartments. For the Kouchner team, one of the key elements of the strategy is to reduce the Palestinians' expectations of what they will get in the US plan, especially after the rejection of many previous proposals by Israel.
    Anyone with knowledge of the Middle East realizes that the similarity between the peace process and real estate deals in New York is rapidly collapsing. If the past is a prelude to what will happen, most Palestinians - and certainly their leaders - would rather wait until the developers finish their business rather than accept the low-value proposition; they eventually reject more tempting offers, which Abba Eban meant by " They miss an opportunity to miss a chance. " In the end, the Palestinians know that they have a very valuable asset to Israel - political and psychological acceptance - and are confident that the Israelis will eventually come up with more than the "Kouchner Plan" to find a final solution to their century-old conflict.
    Moreover, unlike the real estate deal in which one party obtains the property and the other pays the money, the Middle East Peace Agreement begins and ends with the two neighbors as neighbors, stuck with each other and sharing one double house forever. While New York offers limitless possibilities, where there is always another piece of land to be developed, another building to be bought, and another residential complex that turns into luxury apartments, there is only one piece of land at stake in the Israeli-Palestinian arena, No other place to go. This does not mean that Israel has to accept Palestinian demands 100 per cent. It means that the conflict will never end unless each party believes that the other party has made a good faith effort to reconcile its needs with that of the other party - a situation that is not being done under the current circumstances .
    The basic fact missing from the Kouchner formula seems to be that Israelis and Palestinians do not start from scratch. Twenty-five years have passed since their special contractual relationship with the Oslo Accords. Despite periods of conflict and tension, neither side has opposed the status quo until it has decided to change it. Indeed, despite all its mistakes, the Palestinian Authority has evolved during this period into what resembles a normal Arab state - less corrupt, more dysfunctional, violent, and authoritarian than some countries; more corrupt, more dysfunctional, violent, and authoritarian than others. Since Israel's suppression of the second intifada 15 years ago, and the loss of Gaza to Hamas extremists three years later, the Palestinian Authority has maintained, in some way or another, Arafat, under the leadership of Mahmoud Abbas, peace with Israel, and has maintained security cooperation with And ensured that the West Bank does not fall into the hands of Islamic extremists.
    Any US peace proposal must begin with how to build on the foundations, with a hard effort to ensure that nothing is done to risk the current fragile situation. Kouchner's remarks lacked any appreciation for this bleak reality. At one stage of the debate, he used a metaphor from the medical field to boldly assert that his plan would "cure the disease" that fuels the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, but the real challenge would be to ensure that his proposal was not violated. Do not hurt.
    This indifference to the potential consequences of failure is the reason I believe his plan is a threat to American interests and it is reckless for the US administration to try even to try it. While the United States must be prepared to offer its own ideas to help the parties bridge the final gap in the negotiations - just as Jimmy Carter did at Camp David in 1979 after Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat spent 17 months of intensive bargaining - Today, the gap between Israelis and Palestinians is wider than any formula imaginable or adopted to fill. From this point of view, little attention is paid to the details that Kouchner and his partners are preparing to put on the table because of the lack of possible overlap between what Israel can offer and what Palestine is least prepared to accept (and vice versa). Making every effort to solve [this problem] - and this is the foundation of Trump Kouchner - remains unpopular, irresponsible.
    Even if the failure is a "bet on smart profit," there is still another reason why friends of Israel - including friends of the current Israeli government - should think twice before urging President Trump to pursue his son-in-law's peace plan formally: Failure to delegitimize Kouchner's best ideas. Indeed, Kouchner may believe that his plan will remain a new point of reference for future negotiations even if it fails to achieve peace in a major breakthrough, but Trump's successors are likely to throw those ideas into the diplomatic quagmire, even if they are strong, worthy and valuable ideas. Given the deep tribal political polarization in the United States, it is not difficult to imagine a future administration - particularly democracy - refusing to reconsider proposals on issues such as security arrangements, refugee resettlement, Palestinian political reform and regional economic development if they carry a Trump seal . Since the Kouchner team deals with these issues with deep sympathy with Israel, it is likely to hurt ideas that appear to be particularly friendly to the Jewish state. That is why I hope that Netanyahu will return to his senses and do his best to thwart the "deal of the century" before it becomes a US official policy.
    Of all the characters in this emerging tragic comedy, Kouchner - who seems serious in his desire to craft a plan that meets his father's desire to be a peacemaker in the Middle East - is not the most perplexing. This is the case for Mahmoud Abbas, who seems to be playing his role without turning away from the line, preferring to follow the tiresome road of seeking meaningless UN resolutions and applause in European capitals - (Had Abbas Sadat's imagination and determination only been realized, The best way to blow up the US plan that threatens its interests is to boldly propose direct talks with Israel. " In contrast, Netanyahu is the most puzzled figure.
    The long term of Netanyahu, who will soon be the longest serving prime minister, is due to a combination of tough political skill and his inherent aversion to risk. No democratic leader of our time can be compared to Netanyahu in terms of his talent and natural wisdom in knowing how to win elections, even if victory involves dangerously close passage alongside the political, legal and moral edge. No leader on the world stage today recorded Netanyahu's success in combining daring and creative diplomacy with the restricted use of military force to improve his country's strategic position.
    Under normal circumstances, the last thing Netanyahu wants is for the US president to propose a detailed plan for a permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He who is fluent in gradualism and gradual diplomacy, who tests both the real intentions of the other side and the political flexibility of his main supporters, was right to stay away from the great "American ideas" about what is best for Israel.
    So why does Netanyahu seem optimistic about the next peace plan? Why does he seem willing to legitimize a dangerous series of solutions proposed by the United States, which claims to know everything, why does it also seem welcome, and even Trump encourages a proposal that Netanyahu himself has long opposed?
    There are many possible explanations. After Trump's decisions to move the US embassy to Jerusalem, to thwart Iran's abysmal nuclear deal, and to recognize Israeli sovereignty over the Golan Heights, Netanyahu may view Trump's presidency as a chance to transform the pro-Israel administration into a formal policy of the US government. Netanyahu may be confident Abbas will fail as a leader, and Palestinian mistakes will allow Israel to annex key parts of the West Bank without provoking anger in Washington or large opposition in the Arab world. Netanyahu may be too burdened with his own legal problems, so that the "deal of the century" is seen as the lifeline of politics.
    Whatever the rationale, I hope that Benjamin the Strategic Thinker will win Benjamin the Tactical Political Thinker and use whatever tools are at his disposal to thwart the Kouchner Plan in the few weeks before Trump announces his name. It may require a direct appeal to the US president, or even rally support from a person the president respects - such as the prominent Republican donor Sheldon Adelson or [Republican Senator] Lindsey Graham whispering with Trump's permission - to appeal on his behalf. For Israel and its friends, the key point remains: the only way to protect the long-term viability of the best aspects of the Kouchner Plan is to thwart the plan.
    [size]
    Washington Institute


    http://rawabetcenter.com/archives/89583
    [/size]
    • Back to top
      Current date/time is Wed 27 Nov 2024, 6:35 am