> . . . Still, despite Max's hypothetical, the reality has been that peace
has
> done
> better under Carter and then Clinton than under Reagan, when the first
> intifada spiralled up out of the complete oppression of the Palestians.
> Bush Senior deserves credit for moving away from Reagan's absolute
> disregard for Palestinian concerns. But it was under Clinton that the PA
> expanded and the worst repression by Israel ended, until negotiations spun
> out of control late last year leading to the most recent rounds of
> violence.
Nathan, this reads like a foreign-policy version of Robert Bartley's "seven fat years." Clinton's era of Oslo "peace" was exactly what Bush was working towards when he convened the Madrid meeting in 1991. It was a totally bipartisan policy. That's why Bush Sr. was invited to the Rose Garden signing ceremony. The main reason Clinton failed is that he refused to follow in Bush's footsteps of threatening Israel over settlements. (Not that Bush's threats were that sincere.)
Seth