Stardate 20020209.2241

(On Screen via long range scanners): There is a classic cartoon showing two scientists. One of them has just filled a chalkboard (remember those?) with equations and another is looking it over. In the middle is the phrase "...and then a miracle occurs..." and the second scientist says, "I think you need to go into a bit more detail here."

French Foreign Minister Vedrine has a great idea for peace in the middle east: everyone should stop fighting. (Works for me!)

Of course, he doesn't bother dealing with any of those pesky problems like the right of return, or the long term status of Jerusalem, or access by Jews to holy sites in the proposed Palestinian territories, or what to do about the settlements, or the fact that there are a large number of Palestinians who won't settle for just the West Bank and Gaza, or the fact that there's little hope that a Palestinian election would actually unite them, or that several of the Palestinian activist groups are puppets for other nations like Syria and Iran.

Step one is:

Palestinian elections "to support the Palestinian Authority's popular legitimacy in its efforts to crack down" on extremists. These could be general elections or a vote for a legislative council.

But that assumes that the majority of Palestinians actually want a crackdown on the extremists. What if they don't? What if a candidate campaigns on a platform of annihilating Israel, and wins?

Step 2 says:

For the elections, Israeli troops in the West Bank and Gaza Strip would withdraw to the positions they held before September 2000, when the violence erupted, and lift travel restrictions.

Which only leaves two problems: who keeps the Palestinians from slaughtering the Israelis living in the West Bank and Gaza? What if as a result of lifting travel restrictions the number of suicide attacks in Israel proper goes way up (which it would)?

But Step 3 is where the miracle occurs:

The newly declared Palestinian state and Israel would sign "a declaration of non-belligerency," open negotiations and sign a peace accord.

It's that "sign a peace accord" part that I have a bit of a problem with. A little more detail on that would be helpful. Like what, maybe, would the terms of that accord be?

Isn't this the guy who a couple of days ago accused the US of taking a simplistic view of things?