John Kerry’s loose lips may sink peace ship
on February 06, 2014
12 Comments
John Kerry has done a great disservice to the peace process by pumping up the anti-Israel boycott movement far beyond its reality, and doing so in a way that was widely and accurately perceived as a bullying threat to Israel. Such overhyping only serves to entrench those who think Israel can be pressured into giving up key security considerations.
At the Munich Security Conference last week, Kerry said :
I believe that – and you see for Israel there’s an increasing de-legitimization campaign that has been building up. People are very sensitive to it. There are talk of boycotts and other kinds of things. Are we all going to be better with all of that? ... ... not to mention that today’s status quo absolutely, to a certainty, I promise you 100 percent, cannot be maintained. It’s not sustainable. It’s illusionary. There’s a momentary prosperity, there’s a momentary peace. Last year, not one Israeli was killed by a Palestinian from the West Bank. This year, unfortunately, there’s been an uptick in some violence. But the fact is the status quo will change if there is failure. So everybody has a stake in trying to find the pathway to success.The reaction was furious, and in some cases hyperventilated, because this is not the first time Kerry has held a Palestinian protest sword over Israel's head. In November, Kerry warned Israel it faced a Third Intifada:
"The alternative to getting back to the talks is the potential of chaos," Kerry said. "Does Israel want a third intifada?"This all is diplomatic foolishness. Expressing "concerns" in public has a way of creating its own reality that such expressions in private do not. Abe Foxman of the ADL was correct in this assessment:
In speaking about the price Israel will pay if the peace talks break down and Israel is blamed, you may have thought you were merely describing reality. But as the key player in the process, the impact of your comments was to create a reality of its own. Describing the potential for expanded boycotts of Israel makes it more, not less, likely that the talks will not succeed; makes it more, not less, likely that Israel will be blamed if the talks fail; and more, not less, likely that boycotts will ensue. Your comments, irrespective of your intentions, will inevitably be seen by Palestinians and anti-Israel activists as an incentive not to reach an agreement; as an indicator that if things fall apart, Israel will be blamed; and as legitimizing boycott activity.David Horovitz, founder of The Times of Israel and someone I've always viewed as a voice of moderation, calls him The petulant Secretary Kerry:
