The BBC World Affairs correspondent Paul Reynolds has posted an analysis of why the
letter to President Bush by former American diplomats complaining about US policy towards Israel and the Palestinians is unlikely to have much of an effect on the White House.
In summary, the reasons he gives are:
- The State Department doesn't have much influence on the present Administration.
- Some of the diplomats are involved in pro-Palestinian lobby groups and may not be seen as impartial.
- Few of them are well known.
- The letter barely mentions Iraq, which is of more interest to the US Government and would also be more effective because of ‘we told you so’ arguments.
Not one word about the fact that the Administration considers the current policy towards Israel to be right. Nor about whether there was anything in the letter that could make them think that the current policy is wrong.
Isn't it astonishing that someone whose job is to keep abreast of world affairs is completely unaware of one of the major determinants of international events today? Or perhaps ‘unaware’ isn't the right term. He is aware of it. It's just that he is pathologically committed to denying its existence.