What is driving Israel and Syria to the negotiating table?

May 24, 2008 Published under Israel, Mideast Negotiations

The Economist wrote an interesting piece on what they think are the motivations of Olmert and Assad to negotiate.

Mr Olmert’s critics in Israel suspect that he is pursuing the Syria track merely to divert attention from how badly talks on a peace deal with the Palestinian president, Fatah’s Mahmoud Abbas, have been going, and from some recent corruption scandals. For his part, Mr Assad may hope the talks will dampen anger at home caused by rising food prices and foreign pressure over Syria’s meddling in Lebanese politics. This confluence of interests could lead to something real; the question is whether either leader has the determination or the clout to make it so.

Read the full article.

Digg This
Reddit This
Stumble Now!
Buzz This
Vote on DZone
Share on Facebook
Bookmark this on Delicious
Kick It on DotNetKicks.com
Shout it
Share on LinkedIn
Bookmark this on Technorati
Post on Twitter
Google Buzz (aka. Google Reader)

related posts


  1. Lucas said:

    It just seems an irresponsible folly to cutoinne to suppose, as a basis for evaluation and analysis, that the US High Command wants stability in the Middle East. How on earth are they going to keep the Middle East and Eurasia garrisoned, if peace breaks out? Perhaps they would like maybe a little bit lower simmer but not necessarily too much lower I mean, come on, we talk about what’s needed for peace as if it were some deeply mysterious topic. But the solutions are mainly just obvious. Obama’s Brain Trust is every bit as much aware as we are that if they really want peace, they need to negotiate in good faith with everyone involved, including, obviously, Hamas and Hezbollah and Iran. Everyone has security interests that need to be addressed. Even the settlers have real concerns that need to be addressed, for all that they are land-stealing squatters. It’s not, as we used to say, rocket science. Now, perhaps, we should say it’s not nanotechnology’, or, maybe it’s not bioengineering’. Are we seeing even the slightest sincere steps towards that? No.

post a new comment