Sent: Monday, June 8, 2009 2:13:59 PM GMT -05:00 US/Canada Eastern
Subject: Abbas's Waiting Game - observation and question
Dear Mr. Diehl,
In your editorial, "Abbas's Waiting Game (May 29, 2009), you state that you and Post Editorial Page Editor Fred Hiatt sat down and met with Palestinian president Mahmoud Abbas during his recent visit to Washington DC. During the interview, Abbas astounded, coming clean, and in your words "acknowledged that Olmert had shown him a map proposing a Palestinian state on 97% of the West Bank - though he complained that the Israeli leader refused to give him a copy of the plan. He confirmed that Olmert 'accepted the principle' of the 'right of return' of Palestinian refugees - something no previous Israeli prime minister had done - and offered to resettle thousands in Israel." You continued "Abbas turned it down. 'The gaps were wide', he said."
Mr. Diehl, I am curious to know, did you happen to ask him what was wide about the so-called gaps between Olmert's deal and what Abbas had in mind? What could possibly be in the wide gap in which Abbas refers? Aside from the gap of the tiny 3%, the only other gap in that area is the one between the West Bank and the Mediterranean. And of course we know that that gap is called Israel. How much clearer does he have to make it?
As for the Jewish settlements, they make up less than 2% of the West Bank. How is that such a huge problem? The new Palestinian state would be 98% Arab land, 2% Jewish. Big deal! The road system that the Palestinians squawk about can be administered any way they like, it would be their country after all. The Jewish areas in the West Bank are not an impediment to the peace process despite what the endless articles about them in your newspaper dictate. They do serve to give the Palestinians a convenient excuse for not making peace.
No one gets 100% of what they want in a negotiation. But Abbas practically did, and yet he called the gaps wide. Clearly, the Palestinians don't want peace. We all just need to stop making believe that they do.
Michael Berenhaus
