|
slims--the problem seems to me to be the logical and political circle that resulted in the siege in the first place.
the speculative aspect of my take on this is something i wrote earlier--that power would have moderated hamas. in the present context, however, they've no reason to drop the refusal to recognize israel---but at the point the policy decision was made not to deal with hamas, an opportunity went away to negociate this point.
my impression--but in this case it's no more than that---is that the decision not to dreal with hamas was unilateral and was not preceded by any negociations which did not work out.
the issue of shalit et al seems to me to be tied up with the lifting of the siege.
that israel did not lift it is a problem. and i think that the only way to have "shown willingness" to lift it would have been to lift it.
again, had they not boxed themselves in up front, maybe things would be otherwise now.
what is sure is that the bush administration fucked up policy wise when they decided that this was a good way to go.
i continue to connect that decision to all of this chaos. a bad move.
__________________
a gramophone its corrugated trumpet silver handle
spinning dog. such faithfulness it hear
it make you sick.
-kamau brathwaite
|