Syriana
... IBD Editoirals: Mrs. Chamberlain.
We've seen how well Iran plays with others, capturing 15 British sailors in what in earlier times would have been considered an act of war. It is killing U.S. troops with advanced armor-piercing IEDs it supplies Iraqi jihadists. It plays host to Muqtada al-Sadr, whose Mahdi army has tried to destabilize Iraq's infant democracy.
Still, Pelosi insists we follow the ISG's advice. ...
Ground Pounding
Jules Crittenden
A picture’s worth a thousand words: Pelosi hits the ground crawling. She’s also freelancing as a go-between for Israel. And it’s peace in our time! But how can Pelosi sort out the ancient woes of the Middle East and tell a peace partner from a terrorist when she hasn’t even read her own job description yet?
Free Syria has more on who Pelosi is talking to. ثقافة الأجهزة القمعية. Read the whole thing. Here’s another view on Syria, from across the border.
Big question. A liberal Dem asks: What happens on the ground in Iraq if Pelosi gets her way? ...
Did Pelosi give Assad the wrong message from Israel?
Allahpundit
I was skeptical when I first saw Gateway Pundit’s post, but if he’s wrong then why is the Israeli Prime Minister’s Office issuing formal clarifications of what Olmert said to her a few days ago? Quote:
The Prime Minister emphasized that although Israel is interested in peace with Syria, that country continues to be part of the axis of evil and a force that encourages terror in the entire Middle East.
In order to conduct serious and genuine peace negotiations, Syria must cease its support of terror, cease its sponsoring of the Hamas and Islamic Jihad organizations, refrain from providing weapons to Hizbוullah and bringing about the destabilizing of Lebanon, cease its support of terror in Iraq, and relinquish the strategic ties it is building with the extremist regime in Iran…
What was communicated to the U.S. House Speaker does not contain any change in the policies of Israel, as was communicated to other foreign leaders.
It’s that middle paragraph that’s key. No peace talks until the terror stops. Absolute precondition. Now here’s how Pelosi described what she said to Assad today, via Gateway Pundit:
“[Our] meeting with the president enabled us to communicate a message from Prime Minister [Ehud] Olmert that Israel was ready to engage in peace talks,” Pelosi told reporters in Damascus after talks with Assad.
Pelosi said Assad in turn assured her of his willingness to engage in peace talks with Israel.
“We were very pleased with the assurances we received from the president that he was ready to resume the peace process,” Pelosi said. “He’s ready to engage in negotiations for peace with Israel.”
An Israeli government official said that was not the message Olmert had asked Pelosi earlier this week to convey to Assad, who seeks the return of the Golan Heights, a strategic plateau Israel captured in the 1967 Six-Day War.
“The prime minister said Israel is interested in peace with Syria, but Syria would first have to abandon the path of terror and providing support for terrorist groups,” the official said, in reference to Palestinian group Hamas and Lebanon’s Hezbollah.
The left aren’t exactly hard bargainers when it comes to terrorism, but I can’t believe she’d purposely omit a prerequisite as crucial as that in conveying the offer to Assad. Particularly given that it’s an offer from Israel, to whom the Democrats are anxious to prove they’re every bit as strong an ally as Republicans. Which means either she bungled the offer unintentionally, out of sheer, royal stupidity, or she didn’t bungle it at all and there’s simply been a miscommunication somewhere. I’ve got to believe it’s the latter. For all her faults, Pelosi isn’t stupid.
The AP adds a bit that mitigates it somewhat: ...
Why Foreign Policy Belongs In The Executive Branch
Ed Morrissey
The Jerusalem Post notes that the Israeli Prime Minister's office had to issue a "clarification" after Nancy Pelosi attempted to deliver a message from Ehud Olmert to Syria's Bashar Assad. The PMO's statement contradicts Pelosi and points up the problems when amateurs attempt to involve themselves in sensitive diplomacy:
The Prime Minister's Office issued a rare "clarification" Wednesday that, in gentle diplomatic terms, contradicted US Speaker of the House Nancy Pelosi's statement in Damascus that she had brought a message from Israel about a willingness to engage in peace talks.
According to the statement, Prime Minister Ehud Olmert emphasized in his meeting with Pelosi on Sunday that "although Israel is interested in peace with Syria, that country continues to be part of the Axis of Evil and a force that encourages terror in the entire Middle East."
Olmert, the statement clarified, told Pelosi that Syria's sincerity about a genuine peace with Israel would be judged by its willingness to "cease its support of terror, cease its sponsoring of the Hamas and Islamic Jihad organizations, refrain from providing weapons to Hizbullah and bringing about the destabilizing of Lebanon, cease its support of terror in Iraq, and relinquish the strategic ties it is building with the extremist regime in Iran."
Pelosi somehow forgot the part about ending support for terrorism when she met with Assad. She told the Syrian dictator that Israel was ready to meet with Assad on a peace proposal, which only told part of the story. In delivering only part of the message, Pelosi not only arrogated to herself the role of American foreign policy director -- which Condoleezza Rice has as Secretary of State -- she did the same with Israel's foreign policy as well.
Not a bad night's work for an incompetent.
When diplomats meet with enemies, they make sure to get their positions coordinated with their allies and execute strict message discipline. They do not "wing it" -- they check with their elected governments when any questions arise about the directions of talks. Only someone with an ego in inverse proportion to her talent would start making stuff up as she goes when dealing with the Syrian-Israeli relationship, one of the most explosive in the world. ...
Video: Carter defends Pelosi’s meeting with Assad, says it’s “long overdue”
Ian Schwartz
CNN asked Jimmy Carter who is the better “peacemaker,” the actual Secretary of State, Condi Rice, or the woman who thinks she’s the Secretary of State, Nancy Pelosi. Carter said what you’d expect him to say:
Well I wouldn’t want to compare the two women, no. But, I was very pleased when I learned the Speaker would go to Syria. It’s long overdue.
Because really, you just can’t meet with terrorists and dictators quickly enough.
