J. E. Dyer has posted the first of a multi-part series on the realignment developing in the Middle East, including “an incipient hegemonic axis of Iran, Russia, Syria, and potentially even Turkey,” which she sees as “The Next Phase of World War IV” (the reference is to Norman Podhoretz’s construct of the next worldwide conflict following the Cold War, which was World War III).
It is worth reading in its entirety, but here is part of her discussion of the significance of the “deafening silence” of the State Department regarding the U.S. commitments to Israel in the April 14, 2004 Bush letter to Ariel Sharon, which formally assured Israel of defensible borders, noted that there would not be a return to the 1967 borders, and stated that the major settlements would realistically be retained by Israel:
In Western opinion journalism, the settlements are usually discussed in terms of Palestinian political objection, anger, “fairness,” and a list of other perspectives ranging from the moral to the emotional. But the significance of the West Bank settlements to
If Obama does not understand the importance of the summits east of Jerusalem to Israel’s national security, then he is alone among the actors in this Middle Eastern drama in that lack of understanding. The other players know full well that in making the settlements the point of contention between the
The State Department has now refused 21 times to answer whether the Obama administration stands behind the Bush letter. Dyer’s post makes it clear this “persistent refusal” is perhaps “one of the most important developments” in the next phase of a conflict that extends far beyond
Comments