Sigh. It's 2007 and some things just don't change...
By mbecker908 Posted in Foreign Affairs | Spotlight Blogs — Comments (3) / Email this page » / Leave a comment »
The United Nations has a new Secretary General. Kofi Annan is now gone. The Secretary General is a South Korean, Ban Ki-Moon. He gave an interview to a South Korean newspaper today (Jan 1), excerpts are from The Jerusalem Post.
"If the issues with the conflicts between Israel and Palestine go well, [resolutions of] other issues in the Middle East, including Lebanon, Iran, Iraq and Syria, are likely to follow suit. I will meet with the concerned parties as soon as possible," Ban said in an interview posted on the paper's English Web site Monday.
Read on . . .
So, Ban seems to think - like Annan, all of Europe and James Baker - that if the Israelis will just go away, life in the Middle East will be just hunky-dory. And please don't challenge my contention unless you can provide a reasonable outcome that will accomplish Ban's panoply of peace in some other manner.
He goes on to address the North Korean problem...
Ban has promised to make peace with North Korea a top priority. He said he will travel there when necessary and cautioned that the reclusive communist nation must be talked to - and not just punished with sanctions for conducting a nuclear test.
Time to start serious talk about cutting all funding to the UN. They outlived their usefulness (except to New York restaurateurs and hookers) about 50 years ago.
It is conventional wisdom in educated parts of even the Arab world that Syrian influence in Lebanon, Iranian influence in both Syria and Lebanon, Hezbollah's military rather than political emphasis, etc etc will all go by the wayside if a settlement is reached. It's nice and all, and perhaps a case could be made for it based on logic, but reasoning according to our understanding of the term has never been the strong suit of that part of the world.
And therein we have the conundrum. There are two parties in the region who have to agree to a settlement and then live up to the agreement in peace. Israel and the Palestinians. History, and we only have to go back 10 years, not 1,000, shows us that the Palestinians do not want a settlement that leaves Israel in the Middle East. They also will not abide by any agreement to work toward a settlement. Much like Germany in the '30's, they will sign documents, they just won't abide by them.
The second issue is one of intra-faith strife within Islam. I must have missed the part about Israel's part in the Iran/Iraq war in the '80's. Or the slaughter of the Kurds in Iraq by Saddam. Or the strife between the Kurds and the Turks that's been going on for... ever? Those sneaky Jooooooooos are everywhere, stirring up everybody.
The problem in the Middle East, and a growing problem in the EU, is simply that the practitioners of the Religion of Peace are not a peaceful people. They are stuck in the 7th century, they value the idea that murdering your enemies is a worthwhile way to live from day to day. They think nothing of slaughtering women and children simply for the sake of the slaughter. The West has yet to figure that out.
There are two lessons you can draw from the Middle East. One, Conventional Wisdom is almost always wrong. Two, Islam is the enemy of a peaceful, diverse society. I'm not sure we will figure this out in time.
_______________________________
If "pro" is the opposite of "con", what is the opposite of "progress"...
I agree with Ban's statement on Israel and Palestine, depending on what he means. I agree with you if Ban is another Israel basher, but in the paragraph you provide all I get is that the problem needs to be solved. I'll agree though that it is likely he is another anti-Israeli nut job and we'll just end up rolling our eyes. (Getting ready for bed, so haven't read the link yet).
And you are correct about appeasing and dealing with N Korea.
And correct about booting the UN.
Heck mbeck, you're on a roll!
"Greater is an army of sheep led by a lion, than an army of lions led by a sheep" - Defoe