What the appointment of Martin Indyk as U.S. Middle East special envoy tells us

Richard Falk writes: It was to be expected. It was signalled in advance. And yet it is revealing.

The only other candidates considered for the job were equally known as Israeli partisans: Daniel Kurtzer, former ambassador to Israel before becoming Commissioner of Israel’s Baseball League and Dennis Ross, co-founder in the 1980s (with Indyk) of the AIPAC-backed Washington Institute for Near Eastern Policy who handled the 2000 Camp David negotiations on behalf of Clinton.

The winner among these three was Martin Indyk, former ambassador to Israel (1995-97; 2000-01), onetime AIPAC employee, British born, Australian educated American diplomat.

Does it not seem strange for the United States, the convening party and the unconditional supporter of Israel, to rely exclusively for diplomatic guidance in this concerted effort to revive the peace talks on persons with such strong and unmistakable pro-Israeli credentials?

What is stranger, still, is that the media never bothers to observe this peculiarity of a negotiating framework in which the side with massive advantages in hard and soft power, as well as great diplomatic leverage, needs to be further strengthened by having the mediating third-party so clearly in its corner. Is this numbness or bias? Are we so used to a biased framework that it is taken for granted, or is it overlooked because it might spoil the PR effect if mentioned out loud?

John Kerry, the Secretary of State, whose show this is, dutifully indicated when announcing the Indyk appointment that success in the negotiations will depend on the willingness of the two sides to make “reasonable compromises”. But who will decide on what is reasonable? Can one trust such a determination to a third-party that is unabashedly the political ally of Israel? [Continue reading…]

Print Friendly, PDF & Email
Facebooktwittermail

2 thoughts on “What the appointment of Martin Indyk as U.S. Middle East special envoy tells us”

  1. delia ruhe

    Samantha Power, now Martin Indyk . . . Why doesn’t Obama just turn over US foreign policy on Israel to Sheldon Adelson.

  2. Norman

    To answer the above comment, isn’t that what’s already happened? Perhaps not out front, but the Administration/Congress is unmistakeably in bed with the Jewish providers of cash in this country. Perhaps the Abbas or others are to get one of those pallets of new $100.00 bills that were given out in Iraq, Afghanistan, Libya, Egypt, and other places too. Corruption knows no borders, especially today.

Comments are closed.