Replies

First of all, I was not responding to you initially. nse. I responded to Zionist Conspirator's post #60, which suggested that Indyk and Ross were not pro-Israel.

And what evidence is there that their personal opinions were not in accord with those of the administrations they served?

Ross has written a book, The Missing Peace : The Inside Story of the Fight for Middle East Peace , which provides his own insights. From a WaPo review:

"Ross saves some of his toughest criticism for the second Bush administration's failure to engage in the peace process. From the beginning, Ross argues, President Bush and his advisers mistakenly believed that because nothing could be done to improve the situation, it was better to do nothing. But Ross says Bush denied to Israelis and Palestinians America's most important gifts: its energy and its sense of optimism. When things are going badly, American involvement becomes even more crucial, he argues, because it can help prevent a bad situation from becoming worse. And he coolly picks apart the fallacies and lackluster execution of Bush's subsequent diplomatic initiative, the so-called Roadmap for Peace, that have made this effort a source of derision in Washington, Jerusalem and capitals throughout Europe and the Middle East."

A Squandered Opportunity By Martin Indyk

There is not an ambassador, political appointee or career, who has not had some differences of opinion with the existing administration over a foreign policy issue. It goes with the territory. There is always a tension between the folks in the field and the Washington establishment. In the end, Washington always wins.

What possible relevance to this discussion does the service of his daughter on a kibbutz have?

It was meant to show Ross' personal involvement with Israel. As he said, he is a "proud Jew," not that there is anything wrong with that.

Negotiating with Arafat was a mistake to begin with. It was doomed from the start.