Two opinion articles in today’s New York Times that suggest a noticable shift in that paper’s stance on Israel/Palestine (or at least providing space for more critical voices).
First up, Roger Cohen writes in yet another piece that Obama cannot allow under any circumstances Israel to bomb Iran:
“Israel would be utterly crazy to attack Iran,” ElBaradei said. “I worry about it. If you bomb, you will turn the region into a ball of fire and put Iran on a crash course for nuclear weapons with the support of the whole Muslim world.”
To avoid that nightmare Obama will have to get tougher with Israel than any U.S. president in recent years. It’s time.
While it is impossible for many in the West to grasp the calculus in the Hamas strategy of war and terror, the movement has demonstrated that it is disciplined in holding its fire, as it did in the summer and fall of 2008. Likewise, it has proved itself capable of negotiating with Israel — albeit through third parties.
Over the long term, Hamas accepts the concept of two states in the Levant, which arguably puts Mr. Mishal’s terrorist movement closer to Washington than Netanyahu is — he now proposes only “economic peace” between Jews and Palestinians.
What we are seeing here is the leading American newspaper putting ever-increasing pressure on Obama to tell the Israelis that business as usual will work no longer.
Maybe. Only time will tell.