It’s just nobody knows how to get there.
“The inevitability of working toward a two-state solution is inescapable,” Clinton said at a news conference after talks with Foreign Minister Tzipi Livni. (source: Bloomberg News)
Netanyahu:
“We found a common language for achieving the common goals,” Netanyahu said after meeting with Clinton at the King David Hotel in Jerusalem. He said the two agreed to meet after a new government is formed and “think together creatively to get out of this maze.”
Clinton’s commitment to achieve a “comprehensive peace” was emphasized by language of pursuing that goal “on all fronts.” Active language.
Now let’s go back to Clinton’s remarks from yesterday in Sharm el-Sheikh. I wholeheartedly agree with Tamara Wittes, of the Saban Center at Brookings, remarks that are supplied by the ever helpful Marc Lynch, even if he (and others) disagree with her (and me). Ms. Wittes scolds Mr. Lynch, then explains her points on Clinton further:
I have to say I think you badly misinterpreted Clinton’s statement at the Gaza reconstruction conference and unnecessarily reinforced the pessimism you say is already taking hold in the region. And you missed entirely a major variable conditioning her statements and emerging US policy: Congressional attitudes.
There is a big difference, and there has to be, between what the United States is willing to do with its money, and what it might do diplomatically. Clinton’s statement carefully reflected this dualism, but you did not notice it. read on
Meanwhile, guess who slipped into town?
Comments are closed.