Middle East Peace: Will the Bush Administration Get it Done?

Circumstances Suggest Odds Are Against It

Back in 1979, President Jimmy Carter eschewed campaigning against Ronald Reagan with any great intensity, instead choosing to work diligently on the existing Iran Hostage Crisis. In 2008, it appears that President Bush is trying to accomplish organizing an end to strife in the Middle East as his presidential life winds down.

Ron Dzwonkowski reports in his article, "Peace is not at hand-will it ever be?" that Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, may have been a tad too optimistic when she suggested that there may be a peace treaty in place by the end of the year 2008.

The article, on Freep.com, says that probably about the best that the Bush administration can do is to "set the table" for the incoming administration.

That was essentially what happened when the Iran Hostages were released upon Carter's departure from. It may very well have been because they knew they were getting a "super-hawk" in Ronald Reagan.

Rice's position is that efforts should just continue to be made keeping the possibility of change out in front of us. Her comments were, "I just think it is extremely important to keep making forward progress, rather than prematurely trying to come to some set of conclusions. We continue to have the same goal, which is to reach agreement by the end of the year."

That is honorable of the Bush Administration and a noble cause. Sadly, as with Carter and, Clinton for that matter, when a president leaves office it often has more to do with self-promotion such as a legacy of being a humanitarian and the possibility of being a Nobel Peace Prize recipient.

There are several reasons to be pessimistic about this situation in the Middle East.

As the article relays, the Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Olmert will step down next month. Additionally, the Palestinians that are participating are only the moderates.