THE BEADLE ON KRISTOL METH :

On a Big Issue, Bush Goes Wobbly : Why is the president endorsing a provisional Palestinian state? (Fred Barnes, 07/01/2002, Weekly Standard)

Though Bush's embrace of an interim state is highly conditional, his plan will be harmful to him nonetheless--morally, strategically, and politically. The moral angle is quite simple: He's rewarding Palestinian terrorism. Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat has failed to deliver a promised speech denouncing suicide bombings, and he hasn't arrested any Palestinian terrorists either. Yet his regime would suddenly be moved a large step closer to full statehood. And Bush would also weaken his brave and lonely support of Israel as it suffers relentless terrorist attacks.

The normally reliable Fred Barnes appears to have sniffed whatever Bill Kristol is cooking up. There are only two questions that really matter as regards Palestine :

(1) Will it be a state five to ten years from now?

The answer is unequivocally, yes. In fact, it will likely become a recognized state by the end of 2003.

(2) Is Israel (and thereby the U.S.) better served by a Palestinian state that can be held accountable for violence and treated as harshly as any other sovereign state or by a Palestine that is occupied territory, with its people under the nominal control of Israel and, therefore, able to claim the status of civilians?

The answer to this one seems obvious too.

Posted by Orrin Judd at June 24, 2002 8:56 PM