Posts
since Wed, 26 Dec 2007 20:04:17.
According to A correction and a query, Neocon historian and Bill-Kristol-collaborator Robert Kagan criticized one of Harvard Professor Stephen Walt's blog entries for making a false accusation:
The claim that I worked against a two-state solution in the Middle East is a complete fabrication. I have literally never written or spoken on the subject.Robert Kagan is more or less yanking Professor Walt's chain.
Kagan seems to take the Oslo Process seriously, but only if the US supports Israel in everything it wants [1], and in reality neither Arafat [2] nor Abbas/Fatah[3] nor Hamas[4] is an acceptable negotiating partner.
In the Israeli political spectrum, I would put Kagan with Netanyahu -- fake negotiations and effective permanent Apartheid with periodic slaughter of Palestinians.
Here are the articles and interview on which I base my conclusion.
1. Green Light for Israel -- Sep 3, 2001, Even pro-US Arabs are bad, and only when Palestinians completely submit to the USA and Israel will negotiations be possible.2. A Realigning Election -- Feb 14, 2005, Arafat had to die for the Oslo negotiation to go forward to a two state solution.
3. Democracy and the Middle East -- Jan 27, 2006, Hamas is good because Fatah is corrupt.
4. Surrender as 'Realism' -- Dec. 4, 2006, Hamas is bad because it won't concede as much as Arafat.
Robert Kagan has demonstrated yet another of the innumberable ways in which Neocon Zionists lie to Americans.
Thanks to Russian Jewish immigration of the early 1990s, Zionist Neocons simply have felt no pressure for a two-state solution even if they have occasionally faked commitment to the Oslo process. Kagan seems to plug right into this mentality. See Stephen Walt: Talking to Hamas?
