Myths about Middle East Peace

The Washington Post has a new entry up in its "Five Myths" series, this one about Middle East peace. I fully expected to see things categorized as myth that were not, but the characterization of myths is surprisingly accurate. The problems come with the analysis and recommended U.S. courses of action.

1. Direct negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians are the key to reaching an accord. The author, Aaron David Miller,  points out that direct negotiations have achieved little, whereas advances -- such as they are -- have come from the U.S. But the recommendation for action is horrible, and conflicts with one of the author's later points.

Sooner rather than later, the United States will need to invest itself more heavily in the negotiations in order to bridge gaps on core issues such as borders and the status of Jerusalem; will need to marshal the billions of dollars required to support an agreement; and probably will need to deploy U.S. forces to the Jordan Valley to monitor security arrangements.

How about no, no and no? None of that would be in the U.S. interest.

2. The United States is an honest broker in the peace process. I've made this point many times. The U.S. is an ally of Israel. It is not and should not pretend to be an honest broker. We are deceiving no one. Naturally Miller thinks we need to be more even-handed. We don't. We should do exactly the opposite of what he argues, recognize that Israel is our ally, the Palestinians are hostile, and act accordingly. It is not in the U.S. interest to try to benefit the Palestinians at the expense of Israel.

3. Settlements are the main obstacle to peacemaking. Again, right on target. Settlements are only one of many issues. Their impact is greatly exaggerated. Israel could declare a total halt to all settlements tomorrow and the Palestinians would simply switch to some other grievance.  

4. Pressuring the Israelis is the only way to reach an agreement. No argument there. Any agreement obtained by pressuring Israel to accede to Palestinian demands isn't going to be in the U.S. interest.

5. Arab-Israeli peace is critical to securing U.S. interests in the Middle East.If it isn't, and I agree that it isn't, then this point undermines pretty much all the author's other recommended policy moves. There's only one good reason for the U.S. to damage relations with its ally, and assist those hostile to it (and that's what trying to adopt a neutral position means), and that's if there's no other choice in order to secure U.S. interests in the region. As the author rightly notes,

Arab-Israeli peace will not stabilize Afghanistan or facilitate an extrication of U.S. forces from there. It will not create a viable political contract among Iraq's Sunnis, Shiites and Kurds. It will not stop Iran from acquiring enough fissile material to make a nuclear weapon. It will not force Arab states to respect human rights. Nor will it end anti-American sentiment fueled by our support for authoritarian Arab regimes, our deployment of forces in Afghanistan and Iraq, our war against terror and our close relationship with Israel.

The U.S. interest in Arab-Israeli peace is primarily to keep a lid on the situation while maintaining ties with our allies in the region. It would be nice if the so-called peace process was viewed primarily through that lens. But I know it's too much to ask that American leaders actually put American interests first.

 

Icelanders Agnostic on Elves

According to one set of statistics, the population of Iceland is 16-23% atheist, (compared to 3-9% in the U.S.).  But when it comes to elves Icelanders are agnostics.

A 2007 University of Iceland poll found that, while few people will go on the record to say they believe in elves, 54 percent of the Icelandic population will not deny that they exist.

What about gnomes? Every one always forgets about gnomes. They are just not as glamorous as elves. It would be interesting to poll different countries and find out which mythical creatures have the most people who believe in them.

Destroying the "Deregulation" Myth

Blaming the Bush administration's "deregulation" for all or part of the current economic crisis is highly popular on the left -- except that it never happened.  Veronique de Rugy, writing at Reason Online, details the massive expansion of regulation that took place under Bush.  As she points out: 

The Bush team has spent more taxpayer money on issuing and enforcing regulations than any previous administration in U.S. history. Between fiscal year 2001 and fiscal year 2009, outlays on regulatory activities, adjusted for inflation, increased from $26.4 billion to an estimated $42.7 billion, or 62 percent.

A legitimate argument can be made that the right type of regulations were not in place, or that enforcement was lacking in crucial areas, but the idea that Bush was some sort of deregulator is a complete myth.

"Myths" about Progressives.

Campaign for America's Future, a liberal blog, has an interesting article up that outlines what the author holds to be ten myths that conservatives believe about progressives.  Are they really myths?  

1.  Liberals hate America.  Yes, this is mostly a myth. There is a segment of the left that is virulently anti-American, but it is a minority. Calling all liberals anti-American is just a smear.

2.  Liberals want to leave us defenseless.  This is a myth because of the emphasis on what liberals want.  It is true that liberals often advocate policies that conservatives think would weaken the U.S.  But like conservatives, most liberals believe their policy positions are best for the nation.

3.  Liberals hate the free market.  Whether or not this is a myth depends on your definition of the free market.  If you think government regulation of every facet of the economy, public & private partnerships, massive government spending on stimulus & bailouts, blind support for unions, higher taxes on investors & the most productive elements of the economy, and support for every socialistic program short of outright socialism is love for the free market, then liberals love the free market. Otherwise, not so much.  This is not a myth, at worst it's an oversimplification.

4.  Liberals hate our troops.  Like point #1, this is definitely a myth except for a small minority of the left that really does hate America & the troops.

5.  Liberals are a bunch of elitists who hate decent working- and middle-class Americans.  Many liberals are indeed elitists -- as are many conservatives.  But whether elitist or not, I do not believe they hate working and middle-class Americans.

6.  Liberals are against "family values." As with the free market, this depends on your definition of family values.  I'm ok with calling it a myth.

7.  Liberals want to raise our taxes.  I'm sorry,  but this is most definitely not a myth. Liberals certainly do want to raise taxes, and most do not appear to understand simple economics, such as the fact that higher taxes on businesses result in higher cost to consumers -- in effect raising taxes on the consumers. 

8.  Liberals are Godless—and therefore, amoral.  Obviously a myth. Belief in gods is not a requirement for morality, and many liberals are believers anyway. 

9.  Liberals don't believe in personal responsibility. This is a myth only if asserted that starkly.  I don't think it's a myth that many liberals tend believe less in personal responsibility than conservatives.

10. Liberals are wimps.  This is myth as a blanket statement.  Whether or not it is true depends entirely on the context in which it is used.  When applied to liberal positions on foreign policy and some other issues, it can contain an element of truth.