More on the Bret Stephens piece

I agree with your analysis, Trunk. In fairness to Bret Stephens, the second part of the title of his Chicago Sun-Times piece “Peace plan on course, Bush proving his critics wrong” describes the content of the article much better than the first. Stephens writes:
“[T]he important point here isn’t whether Au Mazen emerges as the hoped-for ‘moderate’ — there’s plenty in his background to suggest that he isn’t. Nor is it that the ‘road map,’ as presently conceived, is the most direct route to genuine Palestinian reforrm. Again, there are good reasons to think it will ultimately yield a still unreformed but internationally sanitized Palestinian state that continues to pose an existential threat to Israel. The point, rather, is that less than a year after Bush put Palestinian reform at the heart of his vision for a peace settlement, he has to no small extent gotten his way.”
Stephens hints at the problem with Bush’s “success.” Token reforms provide the pretext not only for an internationally sanitized Palestinian state, but for one that our own State Department can hold out as a legitimate entity to which Israel must make concessions.

Responses

Books to read from Power Line