Reintroducing the language of diplomacy into the West

By Arshin Adib-Moghaddam (for Safe Democracy)

Arshin Adib-Moghaddam writes on the recent crisis of the captured British soldiers in Iran and its meaning in the Western world. From ignoring the parallel cases of kidnapped Iranians, to emotionally and nationalistically portraying the families of the kidnapped soldiers, the Western media irresponsibly neglected reporting the facts to take advantage of irrational fears. In Adib-Moghaddam‘s opinion, it should come as no surprise that the anarchy and rhetoric of force of the first world engenders anarchy and rhetoric of force in the third. The West must relearn its much-neglected language of diplomacy to avoid the escalation and manipulation of this small crisis into a second catastrophe in the Persian Gulf.

Dialogue with Syria could “save” Ehud Olmert

Mario Sznajder analyzes the options open to Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert to avoid the consequences of the scandals and ongoing instability that are threatening his administration. In Sznajder‘s opinion, despite Olmert‘s comfortable parliamentary support, the current crisis could escalate and force his resignation. There is, however, one step that Olmert could take, which he has ignored until now, to allow him to survive his current political nightmare: the opening of negotiations with Syria.

Stability or Civil War in 2007?

George E. Irani explains why Lebanon finds itself at a crossroads between stability and civil war. Despite these clear and distinct choices, the world is left wondering which path the Land of the Cedars will take. Irani writes that the actual tensions in Lebanon are provoked by the clash of visions between the government and opposition parties, submerged in a region full of international actors such as Israel, Syria, Iran, Saudi Arabia, Egypt, the United States and France. To deconstruct the present and future of Lebanon, George E. Irani analyzes each of the major plotlines in the Middle East and predicts their paths in coming years.

The Fight against Terrorism

Ricardo Angoso explains that, according to NATO‘s own objectives to defeat terrorism, establish security and support democracy, Afghanistan is a failed war. In Angoso‘s opinion, no foreign occupying force has ever been able to control Afghanistan, and none ever will. It is time that the Atlantic Alliance learns from the past, because the War in Afghanistan is only going to get worse.

How to change track and move forward

Dan Bavly writes on the multiple missed opportunities for peace in the Middle East due to a general trend of indifference in the Israeli government for long-term negotiated solutions. Still stuck in the 1948 War of Independence mentality, the Israeli government, military, and population as a whole have been unable to adapt to the changing reality of the Middle East conflict. From the current Saudi Initiative, to the dozens of proposals and openings over the last forty years, Israel has failed to seize countless opportunities for peace, insisting instead on the use of military might to end wars. But in Bavly‘s opinion, modern wars cannot end without negotiation. It is time to change track and move forward.

Proposal for peace in the Middle East

Walid Salem presents the Bring Peace Together Project, whose summit was held in Riyadh, Saudi Arabia on March 28th in order to discuss a comprehensive solution to create peace in the Middle East. The following is a formal letter and call to action of the Bring Peace Together Project, presenting its plan for the recognition, normalization, and security of Israel by 22 Arab countries in exchange for a just solution to the Palestinian refugee problem in accordance with UN General Assembly Resolution 194. Read on to find out how you can become involved in this unique opportunity to create peace in the Middle East.

Contradictions in the Middle East peace process

Walid Salem writes about the growing contradiction within European, American, and Israeli decision-making since the West dropped its sanctions-regime against Hamas. In Salem‘s opinion, while some States favor gradual diplomacy to legitimate Hamas and establish a five-year ceasefire, others are seeking the negotiation of an immediate permanent status solution with Abu-Mazen. And as the complexity of the contradiction grows, one thing has become clear: Abu-Mazen‘s hope lies in a permanent peace agreement. Continuing partial agreements will only damage Abu-Mazen‘s Presidency, increase tension between Hamas and Fatah, and weaken the possibility for an eventual reconciliation between Israelis and Palestinians.