Egypt and Jordan Prisoners of Their Own Anti-Israel Rhetoric

1) "Crisis Imperils 2-State Plan, Shifting a Balance," A1, by Michael Slackman
2) "As Troops Enter Gaza City, Israel Sees an Opening," A1, by Steven Erlanger & Ethan Bronner
3) "In Interview, Obama Talks of New Approach to Iran," A8, by Brian Knowlton

The Times continues its inundation of coverage on the Gaza Crisis with two front page articles.

Slackman's article, discussing the damage done to two-state solution amidst the conflict and its repercussions in Jordan and Egypt, is particularly poor. He incredulously writes that "Egypt and Jordan fear that they will be pressed to absorb the Palestinian populations now living beyond their borders. If Israel does not assume responsibility for humanitarian aid in Gaza, for example, pressure could compel Egypt to fill the vacuum; Jordan, in turn, worries that Israel will try to push Palestinians from the West Bank into its territory."

These are some terrible distortions that are far from reality. Israel continues to assume all responsibility for humanitarian aid to Gaza while Egypt has barely done a thing. Furthermore, Israel maintains its commitment to the two-state solution - Jordanian fears (source?) that Israel will push Palestinian into Jordan from the West Bank are completely unfounded.

Significantly, Slackman fails to note that the Jordanian and Egyptian governments themselves continually demonize Israel in state-controlled media. As a result, these two 'moderate' countries have become prisoners of their own anti-Israel rhetoric. Instead of teaching its citizens to coexist with Israel, it has taught them to despise the Jewish State. These governments don't mind when their own population is distracted from 'real' problems (corruption, poverty, governmental repression, lack of opportunities) in its hate for Israel, but once that rage turns against themselves, they feel the heat and cry foul.

*****

In this second article, Bronner & Erlanger provide a synopsis of the ongoing military operations. They positively note that Israel has severely damaged Hamas' capacity to continue fighting and that the organization's domestic leadership may be actively searching for a peace, while its exiled leadership in Syria is attempting to block such a possibility.

Writing that "European diplomats involved in the Egypt negotiations said Sunday that the next 48 hours would be crucial for Israel to decide if a durable cease-fire can be achieved," Times reporters continue to place the entire onus for implementing a ceasefire on Israel. It doesn't seem to matter if Hamas has vociferously rejected such calls. If Israel agrees to a ceasefire but Hamas continues to fire rockets, is it really then a ceasefire? It takes two to tango, but in the world of the Times, only Israel should be held accountable.

*****

The third article, covering Obama's stated views on dealing with foreign policy challenges in the Middle East, positively notes that in "speaking about the Israeli attacks in Gaza, Mr. Obama said he remained convinced that Israel had a clear right of self-defense." The Times should consider following the lead of president-elect.