where's the nader...,
2006-12-08 09:40:08
| Main |
The Way Forward...,
2006-12-10 15:15:30
"The only basis on which peace can be achieved is that set forth in UN Security Council Resolutions 242 and 338":
in comments Diane Warth suggests: "If Baker were serious about talking to Syria he'd have a bargaining chip in hand, say the Golan Heights." She hasn't had a chance to read it, but I should have noted that the ISG's report on the way bogward does include the Golan Heights and the Palestinian-Israel conflict. Pretty much the correct position, depending on how you "parse" it, though they exclude Hamas (only those "who acknowledge Israel's right to exist"), which, that's just head in the clouds stuff, of course they have to be included to get anywhere.
It's also pretty much the one principle the delighted, gasping segments of the press has been almost universally repulsed by, by my slim accounting.
On the other hand I'm not sure what Syria is supposed to "do" about Iraq that they aren't doing already, to the extent that they can afford it. In fact, the ISG's one demand on this front is for "Greater Syrian efforts to seal its border with Iraq." The real problem is Iraqis who can't get into Syria, not the other way around.
I don't see why this is a make or break point regarding any remote possibility of success their plan might have in Iraq, they don't explain it any further - presumably Syria is nefariously at work behind the scenes, guarding Saddam's WMD stockpiles and handing out keys to IAEA explosives dumps - but it wouldn't hurt either.
