American Thinker
23 November '10
About a week and a half ago Secretary Clinton, undoubtedly on President Obama's instructions, pushed Israel's Netanyahu into agreeing to present to his cabinet administration's incentives for resuming the West bank settlement freeze -- incentives that were worked out during a non-stop, 7-hour negotiation session.
The US-Israeli agreement clinched, all that now remains for the parties to do is to agree on what it is that they agreed to.
Why do they need to do that? Netanyahu's cabinet, agreeing that President Obama agrees with the Palestinians a whole lot more than he agrees with the Israelis, agreed to consider agreeing with Obama/Clinton/Netanyahu agreement only if the agreement is clearly spelled out on paper, and is agreeable to the ministers. Which necessitated for the Obama administration the task of spelling out the details of that agreement -- and the above-mentioned situation resulted.
Because putting such agreement on paper is tricky. To be successful, an in-between needs to speak out of both corners of his mouth, depending on who he speaks to, so each party hears what it wants to hear. A written document makes that extremely hard, for what is aimed at one party gets read by the other one, too.
(Read full article)
If you enjoy "Love of the Land", please be a subscriber. Just put your email address in the "Subscribe" box on the upper right-hand corner of the page.
.
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment