Christopher Jon Bjerknes
Based upon the following stories it appears that Bush and Blair are playing good cop and bad cop:
We could have university people and institutions write up possibilities papers, as opposed to positions papers, which could then be discussed. The idea is to create a framework without commitments, that focuses on, and defines, the problems from various perspectives, and then which attempts to find common bonds back to the problems so that viable solutions can be proposed that do not contravene the major and legitimate interests of the parties involved. A system of arbitration is needed. We need someone, or some group, to sponsor a forum. Perhaps the Scandinavians, or the Indians, or the Japanese, I'll have to consider the problem further from all points of the compass. However, if the nations involved in the Middle East were to avoid the opening vollies from the West over how to begin negotiations, and simply engage one another, I suspect America, England, France and Russia would demand access to the negotiating table.
Should Turkey, Iran, Iraq and Syria open a forum for discussing the future of the region and a plan to develop the interests of Sunnis, Shias and Kurds, as opposed to Israel and its client states, they would then start to identify their own interests in a progressive climate as opposed to a hostile one. They would then cease to allow Israel to control the agenda, which is an open attack on Islam carried out by dividing and destroying. The Moslems would then be able to make the agenda one of mutual benefits and the construction of infrastructure, trade programs and the building of education and industry. These Middle Eastern nations could have their intellectuals identify the common problems, the source of those problems, and potential resolutions to those problems. These nations would be unwise to allow their enemies to control the agenda, or to wait for their enemies to solve the problems their enemies have worked so hard to create.