The "Boston Study Group on Middle East Peace" has issued a group of papers calling for the two-state solution in a hurry. One of the authors is blogger/professor Steve Walt. I’ll be reading them later as I struggle with my partition over partition. But there is already this attack on the document from Roger Scher, an economist writing at the Foreign Policy Association site:
The major problem I had with this document was the inclusion among the authors of Stephen Walt, whose bias against Israel and the US-Israel alliance is well-known. His inclusion undermines the seriousness of the document.
What’s the problem with Walt? Well, the "vehemence" of his argument against the Israel lobby revealed his "clear distaste for Israel." I’ve never detected Walt’s "clear distaste for Israel"– he’s a cool realist, who neither loves states nor dislikes them, and he has stated his admiration for Israel’s achievements. But wait, since when is "distaste" for some foreign country a bar to speaking in the United States? A lot of people showed distaste for France recently, are they barred from commentary? And some people have "distaste" for Jim Crow conditions on the West Bank and dropping white phosphorus on children.
This is a crazy litmus test. Of course it is what we have come to expect from the foreign policy establishment. And who is Scher? Well he says that dismantling settlements amounts to “ethnic cleansing," that granting Israel sovereignty over all of Jerusalem would "be fair," and that "Israel’s enemies are finding effective non-conventional means to seek Israel’s destruction, including… calls for one-person-one-vote."
Imagine that: calling for one-person-one-vote in a segregated land is revolutionary and anti-American.