Posted here Wednesday, April 14, 2004 at 4:08:53 PM 
On US/Israel/Palestine from the NYT
http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/articles/A11483-2004Apr14.html
In response to a question, Bush said Sharon's policy, which also includes a unilateral departure from parts of the West Bank, means Sharon "is beginning to implement a vision that allows for contiguous territory so that a Palestinian state can emerge." That action, he said "accelerates the process" toward peace.
Asked about former president Jimmy Carter's recent charge that U.S. policy is tilted toward Israel, Bush replied that he is the first president to explicitly advocate a Palestinian state. "U.S.-Middle East policy is tilted toward peace, and the best way to achieve peace is to fight terror," he said. He said Sharon, with his new plan, "stepped up" to his responsibilities. "The Arab world has got responsibilities to help not only fight terror, but to provide hope for a peaceful Palestinian people," he said.
Bush argued that "the United States will not prejudice the outcome of final status negotiations," but explained why certain requirements must be imposed. "The realities on the ground and in the region have changed greatly over the last several decades, and any final settlement must take into account those realities and be agreeable to the parties," he said.
This can be seen as
1. A realistic approach to realities and the need for a solid peace, which requires that the Arab world find a way to play its part., or
2. An indication that the Bush presidency will take "terrorism" as its defining moment and take us down the path, with other pieces having to fall in place, such as Positioning the key Israel issue as "fighing terrorism", that support such a strategy. Such a strategy probably includes
a. the Fukuyama/ Freidman "end of history" view that the market democracy model wins.
b. this model, with a rhetoric of democracy and freedom, is very much an agenda of American/big business domination of the agenda.
********
|
