ANOTHER DAY, ANOTHER ROUND OF TALKS – AT 6:43 P.M. ET:  After months of Obaman blundering in the Middle East, indirect talks between Israelis and Palestinians finally got started, as The Politico notes:

At long last, indirect peace talks between the Israelis and Palestinians have gotten underway.

U.S. Middle East peace envoy George Mitchell wrapped up the first round of proximity talks with Israelis and Palestinian leaders, and is expected to return to the region next week for the next round. The State Department described the talks as "serious and wide ranging."

The fact is, it's a step back.  The two sides used to negotiate directly.  These "negotiations" could have started much sooner, but Obama wrecked the store by making demands of the Israelis that not even the Palestinians were making, reflecting his leftist background.

"Both parties are taking some steps to help create an atmosphere that is conducive to successful talks, including President Abbas’ statement that he will work against incitement of any sort and Prime Minister Netanyahu’s statement that there will be no construction at the Ramat Shlomo project for two years," State Department spokesman PJ Crowley said in a statement. "They are both trying to move forward in difficult circumstances and we commend them for that."

Crowley said the U.S. had "received commitments from both sides, and we have made assurances to both sides, that are enabling us to move forward," adding that "the full scope of these discussions will remain private."

What does "move forward" mean?  And on whose behalf are the Palestinians "negotiating"?  Half their proposed country, Gaza, doesn't even recognize the authority of the people talking with the Israelis.

"As both parties know, if either takes significant actions during the proximity talks that we judge would seriously undermine trust, we will respond to hold them accountable and ensure that negotiations continue," Crowley said.

In English:  You Israelis better not commit housing. 

The U.S. seeks to move to direct negotiations "that will result in a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict," Crowley said. "Our overall goal remains a comprehensive peace in the Middle East."

COMMENT:  That's nice.  But what do you do about Hamas-controlled Gaza, which is under the thumb of Iran?  Guess that page fell out of the briefing book.

We all want peace, etc., etc.  But the anti-peace forces on the Arab side are looking at a weakened United States, with its appeasement-minded president, and are undoubtedly asking, "Why now?"  Some Israelis, of course, are asking the same thing. 

Michael Ledeen made the point in a briefing a few days ago that, historically, peace is achieved when one side wins.  It must be made clear to the Arabs that they must, now and forever, give up their dream of destroying Israel.  When they're convinced of that, we may have a shot.

May 9, 2010