Collected perspectives on Annapolis
First, the hope expressed by the Economist in the leader of its latest issue (22. nov):
In this speech Mr Bush needs to set out forthrightly America’s own plan for dividing Palestine. That would mark an historic change. In the past—in Madrid in 1991, for example, and at Camp David in 2000—the Americans asked the Israelis and Palestinians to thrash out their differences on their own. But they can’t. The gap is too wide, and even when their respective leaders want to narrow it neither dares move towards the other for fear of the uproar from the ideological bitter-enders at home. The existence of an American blueprint that commanded international support would, however, immediately transform the political dynamic of both societies, fortifying the moderates and pushing the hardliners to the margins.
Perspectives from the day after the event (28. nov):
Steven Erlanger, NY Times: “Dan Gillerman, Israel’s ambassador to the United Nations, put it this way: ‘This is the summit of our hope and their fear. It’s our hope that at long last the Arab world will understand that the Israeli-Palestinian problem is not the core and can be solved, and their fear of Islamic extremism and Iran, which they call the Persian threat. This is what brought them here.’ “
Al Jazeera: “[Bush] did not mention the most intractable issues of borders, the final status of Jerusalem and the right of return for Palestinian refugees. Neither the Palestinians nor the Israelis have indicated they will move from their positions on those points.”
BBC offers a menu of quotes from the Middle East, among them this one, from “Editorial in hard-liner; pro-Khamenei Kayhan“: “The conference is nothing more than a dinner party for America’s friends … We can later compare the Annapolis conference with a Tehran conference to be hold soon with the real representatives of Palestinians and the leaders of Islamic Jihad groups.”
AP on Ahmadinejads reaction: “Iran has repeatedly condemned the conference, saying it would fail to bring any peace for the Palestinians and warning that it will discredit Arab countries who participated. Iran on Tuesday expressed surprise that Damascus participated in the gathering, although it has stopped short of directly criticizing its ally.”
From a Haaretz correspondent’s analysis: “Until a few months ago, Saudi Arabia was considered the Islamist Palestinian organizations’ best friend, but now it is finding itself serving as their punching bag - on Iranian orders.”