Reply #50: Very Uneven Positions By Dean

[DrFunkenstein]

First of all, I don't see much of anything in Dean's position that could not be claimed by the Bush administration. Both support a two-state system, the return of SOME occupied lands, the removal of SOME settlements (neither talk specifics), normalized relations, etc.

More disturbingly, Dean's language is very biased towards Israel.

"To get there, the Palestinian Authority will have to fight terrorism and violence on a consistent basis to create the conditions necessary for a viable peace process. The Israeli government will have to work to improve the living conditions of the Palestinian people and ultimately will have to remove a number of existing settlements."

Dean asks the Palestinians to curb their violence, but asks Israel only to improve Palestinians conditions. Not only does this ignore the the violence perpetrated routinely by the Israeli army, but couches the systematic destruction of Palestinian infrastructure in language that makes Israel seem the paternal care-giver.

"Through it all, the United States will maintain its historic special relationship with the state of Israel, providing a guarantee of its long-term defense and security. And the United States will have to take responsibility with its international partners for helping the Palestinians establish a middle-class democratic society in which women fully participate in economic and political decision-making."

Again, Dean endorses the security of Israel, but seems to parallel that - not with the security of Palestinian state - with female enfranchisement. Which is odd, because in his other speech he says:

"Palestinian women play a more significant role in government than in almost any other Arab society."

I would rather see more specifics, mention of Palestinian security, and - most importantly - a demand for parallel concessions by both sides. In short, Kerry's foreign policy speech.