by Tony Badran
During last week's stormy hearing on
Although the basic components of
If this sounds like a familiar tune from the 1990s, that's because in the end it's nothing but a reprise of the view that holds the conflict with Israel as the engine driving all regional dynamics and regime behavior. It's the politics of grievance.
This line of thinking plays right into the Syrians' hands, affording them a pass for their actions and duplicity pending the conclusion of a peace deal that may not materialize for years, if ever.
Witness, for example, this statement by Feltman: "
This toxic viewpoint was echoed by National Security Advisor Jim Jones at a recent event at the Washington Institute for Near East Policy: "One of the ways that
Such an outlook, distilled in Feltman's testimony, poses as a grand strategic concept that purports to help mitigate the challenge posed by
It's the new domino theory. Only there's nothing new about it. As some of us reasoned, Bashar al-Assad made his gamble with the Scuds calculating that this peace processing impulse would be the administration's default position. If the
Thus, Obama becomes trapped by his own "big game". If
The sought-after model for
The administration is trying to camouflage this muddle by arguing that this situation necessitates sending an ambassador to
The Obama administration might lean on the Israelis to resume peace talks with
The "big game" is nothing but a sideshow.
Tony Badran is a research fellow at the Foundation for Defense of Democracies.
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.