Neglect of the Counter Statement

"Middle East Negotiators Press Pursuit of a 2-State Solution"
By Isabel Kershner
A8
November 10, 2008

In “Middle East Quartet…,” Kershner fulfills the first obligation of a reporter by accurately presenting what transpired at Sharm El Sheik yesterday, Sunday. She falls short, however, with respect to the second duty –  to provide a counter, when appropriate, to their statements.

With regard to the latter requirement, she reports that Tony Blair, former British prime minister and the quartet’s special envoy, subscribes to the notion that the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict is the primary source of Middle East instability, as indicated by his desire for President-elect Obama to work on its resolution “from Day 1.”

Kershner could have provided a different view by interviewing a number of Israeli MKs, who would insist that Palestinian rejectionism is so deeply engrained that starting on day 1 or day 100 will not make a difference in finding a resolution to the conflict.

According to this reporter, Abbas “has been trying to convince skeptical Palestinians and others that the process has not been in vain.” Kershner should substantiate how Abbas made his case, if indeed he has done so. Most of the evidence suggests that he has used the media to incite against and defame Israel, not make the case for the peace process.

An area that could have been fleshed out more was that of a partial, or incremental, agreement toward a two-state solution.

I was surprised to read that Israel had agreed to pursuing a final, rather than an incremental, agreement with the Palestinian Authority. Kershner may have even misreported here. The Road Map, which is the basis of Annapolis, is an incremental process. This is the process Israel favors because it minimizes the risk of Palestinian non-compliance in the areas of anti-Israel media incitement and the dismantlement of terrorist infrastructure.