This article is from the source 'guardian' and was first published or seen on . It last changed over 40 days ago and won't be checked again for changes.

You can find the current article at its original source at http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2013/jul/18/editorial-middle-east-wall-difficulties

The article has changed 2 times. There is an RSS feed of changes available.

Version 0 Version 1
Middle East: a wall of difficulties Middle East: a wall of difficulties
(2 months later)
The Middle East is grim terrain for intervention, diplomacy or mediation of any kind. The US secretary of state, John Kerry, has taken on the task of raising Lazarus from the grave in his efforts to create the conditions for a resumption of peace talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The European Union and the United States are gingerly reaching out to see if their offices can be of any use to a rancourously divided Egypt, while the turn in the fortunes of war in Syria seems likely to make international efforts at a resolution of the conflict even more insubstantial than they already were, which is saying something.The Middle East is grim terrain for intervention, diplomacy or mediation of any kind. The US secretary of state, John Kerry, has taken on the task of raising Lazarus from the grave in his efforts to create the conditions for a resumption of peace talks between the Israelis and the Palestinians. The European Union and the United States are gingerly reaching out to see if their offices can be of any use to a rancourously divided Egypt, while the turn in the fortunes of war in Syria seems likely to make international efforts at a resolution of the conflict even more insubstantial than they already were, which is saying something.
Military solutions, whether they involve arming the rebels in Syria or deterring the Iranians would, it is now more widely agreed, be madness. The flurry of apparent interest in taking some form of military action in Syria was never quite real, and has died down, thank goodness, on both sides of the Atlantic. Meanwhile the success of the Libyan intervention looks more problematic than it did immediately after the fall of the regime, and the task of French forces in west Africa more open-ended than François Hollande may have hoped. Sir David Richards, the British general most identified with previous interventions, is signing off this week after his stint as chief of defence staff with a stout warning against adventurism in Syria.Military solutions, whether they involve arming the rebels in Syria or deterring the Iranians would, it is now more widely agreed, be madness. The flurry of apparent interest in taking some form of military action in Syria was never quite real, and has died down, thank goodness, on both sides of the Atlantic. Meanwhile the success of the Libyan intervention looks more problematic than it did immediately after the fall of the regime, and the task of French forces in west Africa more open-ended than François Hollande may have hoped. Sir David Richards, the British general most identified with previous interventions, is signing off this week after his stint as chief of defence staff with a stout warning against adventurism in Syria.
There is a sea change in the relations between western and Middle Eastern countries in progress which is both welcome and unwelcome. It is welcome because it is the beginning of the end for the residual colonialism which still marks western attitudes toward the region. The governments and the peoples of the region are making their own decisions, good or bad, with less and less reference to what outsiders, including the United States, desire. It is unwelcome because the resulting conflicts and crises seem to precisely demand that outsiders offer help. Yet the record of the outsiders, not just the long historical record, but the more immediate one, has plainly been littered with dismal mistakes.There is a sea change in the relations between western and Middle Eastern countries in progress which is both welcome and unwelcome. It is welcome because it is the beginning of the end for the residual colonialism which still marks western attitudes toward the region. The governments and the peoples of the region are making their own decisions, good or bad, with less and less reference to what outsiders, including the United States, desire. It is unwelcome because the resulting conflicts and crises seem to precisely demand that outsiders offer help. Yet the record of the outsiders, not just the long historical record, but the more immediate one, has plainly been littered with dismal mistakes.
Syria might today be in a very different place had the United States not come out so plainly and unequivocally for regime change, a decision which has undermined every subsequent effort to mediate, and which has probably irretrievably alienated Russia. Similarly, if the United States and the European Union had used their leverage in Israel more wisely, we might now not be at the last ditch for the two-state solution to that now antique conflict. As for Iran, it is mainly thanks to the shrewdness of the Iranian electorate, not to the threats and sanctions of the west, that we are now in a better position to tackle the nuclear issue. They have delivered a sensible president, one with whom it should be possible for Washington to do business.Syria might today be in a very different place had the United States not come out so plainly and unequivocally for regime change, a decision which has undermined every subsequent effort to mediate, and which has probably irretrievably alienated Russia. Similarly, if the United States and the European Union had used their leverage in Israel more wisely, we might now not be at the last ditch for the two-state solution to that now antique conflict. As for Iran, it is mainly thanks to the shrewdness of the Iranian electorate, not to the threats and sanctions of the west, that we are now in a better position to tackle the nuclear issue. They have delivered a sensible president, one with whom it should be possible for Washington to do business.
What we need and what they, the peoples of the region, need is one chink in this wall of difficulties which, if breached, could have wider beneficial effects. It could come in Egypt, but only if the Muslim Brotherhood is brought back into political life, and that must surely involve the resurrection in some form of Mohamed Morsi. It could come with resumed negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians, but that would have to be a real and not just a pro forma new start. It could come in Iran. It is tragically unlikely to come in Syria.What we need and what they, the peoples of the region, need is one chink in this wall of difficulties which, if breached, could have wider beneficial effects. It could come in Egypt, but only if the Muslim Brotherhood is brought back into political life, and that must surely involve the resurrection in some form of Mohamed Morsi. It could come with resumed negotiations between Israelis and Palestinians, but that would have to be a real and not just a pro forma new start. It could come in Iran. It is tragically unlikely to come in Syria.
Western countries had better forget about soldiers and no-fly zones, never mind taking out nuclear installations, but they do have some resources left. These are largely economic. The Israeli military and the Egyptian military are highly dependent on American aid. Trade is important, as has been demonstrated this week by Israel's fury over the EU's decision to bar financial assistance to Israeli organisations operating in the occupied territories.Western countries had better forget about soldiers and no-fly zones, never mind taking out nuclear installations, but they do have some resources left. These are largely economic. The Israeli military and the Egyptian military are highly dependent on American aid. Trade is important, as has been demonstrated this week by Israel's fury over the EU's decision to bar financial assistance to Israeli organisations operating in the occupied territories.
We are of course not the only moneybags in the region. But there is leverage and it should be used. More leverage by western countries, and more humility on their part. It seems contradictory, but only in some such combination is there hope that we can help more than hinder our embattled neighbours.We are of course not the only moneybags in the region. But there is leverage and it should be used. More leverage by western countries, and more humility on their part. It seems contradictory, but only in some such combination is there hope that we can help more than hinder our embattled neighbours.
Our editors' picks for the day's top news and commentary delivered to your inbox each morning.