Well, it's a start. According to the Times (see here), "Israel and the Palestinians have agreed to cooperate on the demolition of the 1,600 Gaza houses to be vacated by Israeli settlers in less than two months... The agreement represented the first concrete Israeli-Palestinian cooperation in Gaza after many months of disputes."
I've wrestled with my own positions on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict for many years -- I think it's important to support Israel, for a number of reasons, but I also think that the only viable solution with respect to long-term peace is the withdrawal of Israel from disputed lands and the creation of a sovereign Palestinian state. Call me a moderate, but the whole region could use some moderation if there is ever to be anything approaching peace. (And let's not forget that the violence continues.)
Anyway, this will be an interesting story to follow through the summer (and beyond, of course). For now, there is hope that Sharon and Abbas are moving in the right direction. And, yes, it's time to give Condoleezza Rice some credit. After years of avoidance and irresponsible neglect, the Bush Administration is finally dealing with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict in a serious and productive manner, and Rice is clearly the way. Better late than never, I suppose, but there's still much to be done, and American involvement will continue to be crucial going forward.
Sunday, June 19, 2005
And the next chief justice is...
According to the Post (see here), the three likeliest nominees are appellate judges John Roberts and Michael Luttig, and Attorney General Alberto Gonzales. Other possibilities are appellate judges Michael McConnell, Harvie Wilkinson, and Emilio Garza, and former solicitor general Ted Olson. With Rehnquist's retirement coming soon, likely as soon as the Supreme Court's current term ends next week, we could be in for a significant summer battle over his successor.
Or perhaps not. After all, the Democrats likely won't challenge Rehnquist's replacement as strenuously they will the replacement of one of the more liberal justices. They may back off here, where the Court's balance isn't at stake, and instead save their ammunition for more important battles yet to come. In the meantime, Bush has a big decision to make, one that could cause a rift within the Republican Party if he doesn't go with a hardcore conservative to appease the right. Looking at the list of possible nominees, however, you know you're already in trouble when Gonzales (whom I opposed when his nomination came up for attorney general) seems like the best of the bunch.
Or perhaps not. After all, the Democrats likely won't challenge Rehnquist's replacement as strenuously they will the replacement of one of the more liberal justices. They may back off here, where the Court's balance isn't at stake, and instead save their ammunition for more important battles yet to come. In the meantime, Bush has a big decision to make, one that could cause a rift within the Republican Party if he doesn't go with a hardcore conservative to appease the right. Looking at the list of possible nominees, however, you know you're already in trouble when Gonzales (whom I opposed when his nomination came up for attorney general) seems like the best of the bunch.
What the Iraqi insurgency is all about
Whatever we may think of the Iraq war, and of the American occupation, and however much we may criticize, rightly, the atrocious treatment of some detainees at American detention facilities like Gitmo, it's important to keep in mind just what the other side is doing. We know how brutally Saddam treated Iraqis, but we're finally getting a glimpse of just what the insurgents are like -- see here (it's a tough read, but an important one).
Let us debate the conduct of the war/occupation, but let us also keep in mind that we're all on the same side -- or, at least, we should be. I know it's hard to see that, especially for those of us on the left or in the center who disagree with the Bush Administration and who find much of the zealously pro-war right so repellent, but some perspective is required if we are to deal with Iraq without resorting to blind partisanship.
There will always be those on the extremes who refuse to see things as they are and who approach every issue with a mind to scoring political points, but let us at least try to do the right thing irrespective of the usual left-right divisions that plague American politics. And, for now, in that regard, let no one think that America and Americans are in any way on the same level of inhumanity as those who wage war on their own people and who don't give a damn about human life, whether Saddam or, now, the fascist jihadists who lead the Iraqi insurgency.
Let us debate the conduct of the war/occupation, but let us also keep in mind that we're all on the same side -- or, at least, we should be. I know it's hard to see that, especially for those of us on the left or in the center who disagree with the Bush Administration and who find much of the zealously pro-war right so repellent, but some perspective is required if we are to deal with Iraq without resorting to blind partisanship.
There will always be those on the extremes who refuse to see things as they are and who approach every issue with a mind to scoring political points, but let us at least try to do the right thing irrespective of the usual left-right divisions that plague American politics. And, for now, in that regard, let no one think that America and Americans are in any way on the same level of inhumanity as those who wage war on their own people and who don't give a damn about human life, whether Saddam or, now, the fascist jihadists who lead the Iraqi insurgency.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
