We need to learn from what we got right

[Quantum Windbag]

I generally don't have a lot of confidence in the US when it comes to brokering peace deals, but we have done it, all it takes is a little work.

In the recent flurry of attention to U.S. sponsored peace talks in the Middle East and Syria the critics have been plentiful. Much ink has been split on the preponderance of lost opportunities, missteps, and miscalculations. In the midst of the criticism, what the United States has broadly got right in its commitments to other ongoing peace processes barely makes the front pages of any western newspaper. This comment reflects on sustained U.S. foreign policy engagement and support in Northern Ireland, through the 1998 Belfast Peace Agreement brokered by Senator George Mitchell to the most recent round of talks led by Richard Haass. While the Haass-sponsored talks have yet to produce a definitive break to the political stalemate that emerged in the past year following protests over flags in the jurisdiction, there are some important take away messages for those skeptical of U.S. engagement in peacemaking abroad. The lessons are directly relevant on ongoing U.S. engagement in Syria and Israel-Palestine. The draft agreement published by Haass can be accessed here.

1. Staying the course.
2. Talking to all sides.
3. Generally avoiding preconditions.
4. Taking real risks.
5. Constructive ambiguity.
6. Inclusivity.
7. Being tough.
8. Making and keeping friends and allies as you build peace from the bottom up.
9. Investing Resources.
10. Retaining a core commitment to human rights and democratic values.

10 Things the United States has done right in Supporting a Peace Process: Lesson for the Middle East : Just Security

 

[Mojo2]

I generally don't have a lot of confidence in the US when it comes to brokering peace deals, but we have done it, all it takes is a little work.

In the recent flurry of attention to U.S. sponsored peace talks in the Middle East and Syria the critics have been plentiful. Much ink has been split on the preponderance of lost opportunities, missteps, and miscalculations. In the midst of the criticism, what the United States has broadly got right in its commitments to other ongoing peace processes barely makes the front pages of any western newspaper. This comment reflects on sustained U.S. foreign policy engagement and support in Northern Ireland, through the 1998 Belfast Peace Agreement brokered by Senator George Mitchell to the most recent round of talks led by Richard Haass. While the Haass-sponsored talks have yet to produce a definitive break to the political stalemate that emerged in the past year following protests over flags in the jurisdiction, there are some important take away messages for those skeptical of U.S. engagement in peacemaking abroad. The lessons are directly relevant on ongoing U.S. engagement in Syria and Israel-Palestine. The draft agreement published by Haass can be accessed here.

1. Staying the course.
2. Talking to all sides.
3. Generally avoiding preconditions.
4. Taking real risks.
5. Constructive ambiguity.
6. Inclusivity.
7. Being tough.
8. Making and keeping friends and allies as you build peace from the bottom up.
9. Investing Resources.
10. Retaining a core commitment to human rights and democratic values.

10 Things the United States has done right in Supporting a Peace Process: Lesson for the Middle East : Just Security

I find it curious and frustrating that a thread devoted to the Middle East peace process fails to specify which part of the Middle East is being referred to.

Palestine vs Israel?

Syria govt vs rebels?

Iraq Sunni vs Shia?

Egypt Military vs Muslim Brotherhood?

 

[Quantum Windbag]

I generally don't have a lot of confidence in the US when it comes to brokering peace deals, but we have done it, all it takes is a little work.

In the recent flurry of attention to U.S. sponsored peace talks in the Middle East and Syria the critics have been plentiful. Much ink has been split on the preponderance of lost opportunities, missteps, and miscalculations. In the midst of the criticism, what the United States has broadly got right in its commitments to other ongoing peace processes barely makes the front pages of any western newspaper. This comment reflects on sustained U.S. foreign policy engagement and support in Northern Ireland, through the 1998 Belfast Peace Agreement brokered by Senator George Mitchell to the most recent round of talks led by Richard Haass. While the Haass-sponsored talks have yet to produce a definitive break to the political stalemate that emerged in the past year following protests over flags in the jurisdiction, there are some important take away messages for those skeptical of U.S. engagement in peacemaking abroad. The lessons are directly relevant on ongoing U.S. engagement in Syria and Israel-Palestine. The draft agreement published by Haass can be accessed here.

1. Staying the course.
2. Talking to all sides.
3. Generally avoiding preconditions.
4. Taking real risks.
5. Constructive ambiguity.
6. Inclusivity.
7. Being tough.
8. Making and keeping friends and allies as you build peace from the bottom up.
9. Investing Resources.
10. Retaining a core commitment to human rights and democratic values.

10 Things the United States has done right in Supporting a Peace Process: Lesson for the Middle East : Just Security

I find it curious and frustrating that a thread devoted to the Middle East peace process fails to specify which part of the Middle East is being referred to.

Palestine vs Israel?

Syria govt vs rebels?

Iraq Sunni vs Shia?

Egypt Military vs Muslim Brotherhood?

I find it insulting that anyone would think I would post a thread about the Middle East in General Global Topics.

 

[TheOldSchool]

I wonder what threads about middle east peace talks will look like in the future. In 20 years when it's all virtual reality it'll be awesome!