Lost in the latest Middle Eastern controversy is the fact that the prospects for Israeli-Arab peace are steadily improving, and that the apparently impending defection of Turkey from the Western camp is a great opportunity. The predictable consequence of Europe s treating Turkey like a shabby, swarthy mendicant knocking at its back door for 30 years embracing it when an ally in the region was needed, but rebuffing it at other times is the defeat of the Kemalist Western emulators by the Muslim Turkish nativists.
The Anti-Defamation League has taken issue with comments from President Barack Obama that the ADL says reflect a "significant shift" in U.S. policy toward Israel and the peace process.
Aaron David Miller was a devout believer in and diplomatic practitioner of the so-called Israel-Palestinian "peace process" promoted by the United States for lo, these many years. In a timely personal essay, Miller now renounces "The false religion of Mideast peace." Miller gets rolling in these three paragraphs: Like all religions, the peace process has developed a dogmatic creed, with immutable first principles. Over the last two decades, I wrote them hundreds of times to my bosses in the upper echelons of the State Department and the White House; they were a catechism we all could recite by heart. First, pursuit of a comprehensive peace was a core, if not the core, U.S. interest in the region, and achieving it offered the only sure way to protect U.S. interests; second, peace could be achieved, but only through a serious negotiating process based on trading land for peace; and third, only America could help the Arabs and Israelis bring that peace to fruition. As befitting a religious doctrine, there was little nuance. And while not everyone became a convert (Ronald Reagan and George W. Bush willfully pursued other Middle East priorities, though each would succumb at one point, if only with initiatives that reflected, to their critics, varying degrees of too little, too late), the exceptions have mostly proved the rule. The iron triangle that drove Richard Nixon, Gerald Ford, Jimmy Carter, George H.W. Bush, Bill Clinton, and now Barack Obama to accord the Arab-Israeli issue such high priority has turned out to be both durable and bipartisan. Embraced by the high priests of the national security temple, including State Department veterans like myself, intelligence analysts, and most U.S. foreign-policy mandarins outside government, these tenets endured and prospered even while the realities on which they were based had begun to change. If this wasn't the