The Sydney Morning Herald's latest editorial (Palestine: back to square one, 26/9/11)) on the Palestinian Authority's bid for UN recognition of a Palestinian state waffles its way to the following non sequitur:
"[Reopened Israeli-Palestinian peace negotiations] are worth a try. Otherwise everybody stands to lose":-
"Barack Obama... risks alienating the forces of democratic change in the Middle East..."
"Israel... risks becoming even more isolated within its region."
"Abbas... endangers crucial US financial support."
"If the Palestinian issue does come to a vote in the UN General Assembly, we should abstain."
So, if US politics is so dysfunctional that the Israel lobby has Obama by the balls and your forces of democratic change in the Middle East are only too aware of this; and Israel is a serial abuser of the Palestinians and others in the region, such that no self-respecting Arab would want anything to do with it; and US Congresspersons would happily club baby seals to death, let alone cut off PA funding, if the Israel lobby demanded it of them, then we - who never tire of mouthing two-state rhetoric - should abstain.
Classic Herald cluelessness!
The relevant letters in the same issue, apart from those written by the usual suspects, are a different matter entirely. I particularly liked this one from John Little of Cronulla:
"I was born in 1950 and have lived through massive change in world power balance, war, conflict, conflict resolution, reconciliation, economic development and huge improvement in the lives of billions of ordinary people.
"Crises have come and gone. Natural disasters happen, then things get better. Disputes that once looked intractable fade into nothing... just grainy old newsreels as the cities and people they once blighted now thrive and prosper. Steady, steady progress.
"The world moves on and fresh flowers bloom. New chapters are written and wonderful, exciting challenges summon the genius of the young generation to respond.
"Then there is Palestine."