"...they never explain why Israelis should risk the future of their country to cut a peace deal with Palestinians when the Palestinians cannot even honor a ceasefire amongst themselves."
Well, without necessarily making an endorsement of it here's what I surmise the explanation to be:
(1) The Palestinian problem is not just an Israeli problem, and directly impacts American interests abroad; (2) An official peace deal will provide the US the legitimacy required to enforce such a deal with proper military threat; (3) "forcing" Palestinians into statehood will put the ball into their court, raising the consequence bar for acts of war; and (4) peace and sovereignty will beef up the mettle of our "friends in the Gulf" with regard to Iran, and isolate Syria as well.
Any takers?
ADVERTISEMENT
SPONSORED LINKS
The speech our President should make.
A noted economist fires back.
How political can you get?
You might have missed it, but it was boomed in January.
Farcical feminism is a decades-old phenomenon, as George Will's essay from 1970 reminds us.