Cinnamon Stillwell

I’m the West Coast representative for Campus Watch, a project of the Middle East Forum. I was a political columnist for (San Francisco Chronicle online) from 2004-2008. I've written for the Algemeiner, Daily Caller, Washington Examiner, Independent Journal Review, American Thinker, FrontPage Magazine, Jihad Watch, Family Security Matters, Accuracy In Media, Newsbusters, Israel National News, Jewish Press, J-The Jewish News Weekly of Northern California, and many others.

Sunday, November 25, 2007

The Mideast "Peace Process" Charade Continues

The next round of Middle East "peace talks" are coming up on Tuesday. But for those of us who insist on engaging with reality, the Annapolis Peace Conference is just the latest episode in a neverending series of pointless, diplomatic posturing.

It is an international charade that pretends that a society mired in civil war, hatred, and violence, and led by the likes of Hamas and Fatah (not to mention their cohorts across the Arab world) will suddenly dispense with their goal of annihilating Israel and make nice. But it's based more on wishful thinking than anything else.

As Daniel Pipes (for whom I work) has pointed out on many occasions, peace cannot be achieved until one side defeats the other, either militarily or ideologically. In this case, the latter would entail the Palestinians being forced to accept the existence of Israel as a Jewish state. And let's just say, it's highly doubtful that will be the outcome of next week's talks, no matter the company line being spouted by Bush, Condi, Abbas, Olmert, and the ever-delusional mainstream American Jewish community (with the notable exception of the Zionist Organization of America). Instead, it's more than likely that the entire process, replete as it's sure to be with further concessions on Israel's part, will simply embolden those bent on her destruction.

R. E. Smith, Jr., writing for the American Thinker, sums up this sad state of affairs in " No More Middle East Peace Charades, Please." As he puts it:

After sixty years of hope where are we? We’ve had resolutions, summits, opportunities, windows, roadmaps and paths to peace. Yet an Arab and a Jewish state cannot harmoniously exist side by side.

...Please, spare the world more of these charades. An Arab negotiator made it painfully plain: "Palestinians will never acknowledge Israel’s Jewish identity." What don’t Jews and our politicians understand about the meaning of "never"—at no time, under no circumstances, not ever, not on your life, no way, when pigs fly.

...Pathetically, many Americans and other westerners continue to stare, transfixed, at that vision. They step back to the future on a treadmill-like path with endless, in vain hope that talks, negotiations, and compromise will bring peace. The self-deluded cannot bring themselves to face reality. Arabs or Jews must dominate and control the region, not both.
I've written much the same thing myself a number of times, particularly when it comes to the follies of pushing for a Palestinian state as it's now comprised. But I finally got tired of repeating the obvious.

So, for now, I'll simply sit back, watch, and wait for the farce to commence, yet again.


Anonymous Anonymous said...

And what do you think of Obadiah Shoher's arguments against the peace process ( )?

Thursday, December 06, 2007 6:14:00 AM  
Anonymous Anonymous said...


"Separate but equal" did not work
When it was old Jim Crow
Propounded it--as by no quirk
The US South did show.

"Separate but equal" never truly
Was equal but in name;
So, though transition came unruly,
Still yet transition came.

So why that terminology
Exact will men opine,
Dividing, sans apology
"Israel, Palestine"?

"Separate but equal" sounds okay
But when examined closer
The segregation moves one way
And so does the bulldozer.

Thursday, December 06, 2007 7:50:00 AM  

Post a Comment

<< Home