by Mark Silva
A year before the election that seated his successor, then-President George W. Bush summoned the leaders of the Middle East to a summit in Annapolis, where the Israeli and Palestinian leaders voiced a bold prediction that they might see a framework for peace by the end of Bush's term.
Talks collapsed amid renewed violence in the region.
Months after his own election, President Barack Obama is inviting the leaders of Israel and the Palestinian Authority to Washington to talk about reopening the path to the same goal that Bush sought: "A two-state solution,'' one for the Israelis, one for the Palestinians, living side by side.
"The president, even in reviewing how we move forward and are best able to help the two sides create a lasting peace, has spoken in favor of and continues to support a two-state solution,'' Robert Gibbs, the White House press secretary, said in announcing Obama's intention to have the Israeli and Palestinian leaders - as well as the president of Egypt - in for separate talks, presumably by the end of May. Obama played host to King Abdullah II of Jordan in the Oval Office yesterday.
.
"Following on a successful meeting with King Abdullah of Jordan, the president has invited other key partners in the effort to achieve a comprehensive peace in the Middle East to the White House in the coming weeks,'' Gibbs said.
"With each of them, the president will discuss ways the United States can strengthen and deepen our partnerships with them, as well as the steps all parties must take to help achieve peace between Israelis and Palestinians and between Israel and the Arab states.''
Unlike the Annapolis summit, Obama is planning separate meetings with the key players in the decades-old conflict among the Israelis, Palestinians and neighbors.
Obama's envoy to the Middle East, retired Sen. George Mitchell, has been renewing talk in the region of the "two-state solution'' which also was the cornerstone of Bush's solution for peace in the Middle East.
However, Bush had not personally committed himself to negotiations that had consumed some of his predecessors.
Obama is signaling an intention to get more involved.
"The president spoke throughout the campaign about the simple notion that it is in the interest of this country to seek that lasting peace, and that this country should be engaged in a constructive role to move that process forward and to be engaged in it early and often, as he's done,'' Gibbs said yesterday.
"I think the president has always believed that it is and that it can be primarily because the United States can play a role, an active role, an engaged role, in helping to move that peace forward.''
Comments
Obama's Foreign Policy Challenge: Arabs, Israel& Iran
The following is a practical approach to a workable foreign policy for the administration President Obama.
Palestinian Independent State
The problems of Palestinian subjugation to Israel occupation are the seeds for an unstable world including the Middle East. Many expect, as previously stated by Iran and many Arab counties, that they would not reject a reasonable break through between Washington and Israel over the Palestinians home state. However; many political analysts have suggested that any resolution about Palestinian state would be a non-starter with Israel. The success or failure of the administration of President Obama with Israel would determine the nature of future stability for the Middle East.
There is no dispute that Iran is already a nuclear state. The states with this capacity are many; among them are Japan and Germany. But, there is a great difference between being a nuclear state, i.e., nuclear fuel cycle capacity, and a state with nuclear bomb, such as India, USA, Russia, England, France, China, Israel and Pakistan.
The steps required to allay our fear that Iran in the future may develop Nuclear Bomb are:
1. Nuclear Fuel Cycle Iranian Consortium:
USA should join the consortium among others Japan, Germany, France and England to actively monitor the Iranian fuel cycle activity too. IAEA has consistently asserted that the agency could not find any indications that Iran is diverting the fuel cycle for nuclear bomb development. Iran has asserted that their activities are limited to development of fuel for nuclear reactor.
2. Nuclear Shield
An international nuclear shield for all nations in the Middle East, including Iran;
3. A nuclear- bomb-free Middle East.
This action will remove any pressure from Iran to develop nuclear bomb in the future for deterrence against nuclear bomb Israeli state.
Unfortunately the attentions of the past two US Presidents (Clinton and Bush) were on nuclear fuel cycle of Iran. They both ignored that Israel had nuclear bombs. The Middle East should be the starting point toward President Obama’s dream of a world free of all nuclear bombs.
Posted by: SaintM Traveler | April 22, 2009 6:09 PM