US Presidents seem to love the challenge of Middle East peace, especially Democratic Presidents. Carter, Clinton and Obama spent a great deal of effort in trying to arrive at a peace agreement between Israel and its neighbors. And while Carter was the most successful (in getting a peace agreement with Egypt), he couldn't go beyond this, while Clinton was a general failure and Obama so far seems to be on the same road. The big problem is that the US Congress is under the influence of AIPAC, and the President cannot pressure Israel too much, so he is ineffective. The damage the US' deep involvement causes is that while the US is involved, it pushes the Europeans aside and does not let them weigh in. It will be best to reverse the roles of these powers. Let the EU be in the driver's seat on peace, let them develop their own peace plan, send their own ME mediator and apply their own pressure, which is considerable in the economic field, and let the US just go along. The Europeans are more neutral about the conflict, and therefore may be more effective, to say nothing about the fact that they don't suffer from an Aipac-paralysis syndrome.
Hello user Logout | profile
You have watched of 10 articles
Erdogan: Turkey spent $10 billion on Syrian refugee crisis compared to UN's $455 million (Reuters)