Khaleej Times, from Dubai, carries this AFP story. The US government would very much like to have Saudi Arabia take part in the Annapolis conference scheduled for later this month. Some say that a Saudi absence would doom the peace conference. It looks as though we won’t know if the Saudis will attend until tomorrow sometime.
Bush phones Saudi king ahead of Mideast meet
RIYADH, Nov 20, 2007 (AFP) – US President George W. Bush telephoned Saudi King Abdullah to discuss the Middle East on Tuesday, the state SPA news agency reported, as Washington began issuing invitations for a key peace conference.
The two leaders discussed relations between the close allies, as well as “regional and international developments, chiefly events in the Middle East,†SPA said without elaborating.
The conversation came as both Israel and the Palestinians announced that they had received invitations to next week’s conference in Annapolis, outside Washington, aimed at jumpstarting peace talks after a seven-year freeze.
Despite its close ties with Washington, oil-rich Saudi Arabia has declined to confirm its attendance at the meeting unless the core issues of the Middle East conflict are addressed.
Arab foreign ministers are due to meet in Cairo on Thursday to decide on their participation at the US-sponsored conference.
RSS feed for comments on this post.
Sorry, the comment form is closed at this time.
November:21:2007 - 12:57
It is clear that the meeting at Annapolis will be of no use to advance anything in the area, since the US maintains its full support to the Israeli position on all issues that will be discussed.
Therefore, I personally don’t see why any Arab official should attend the meeting, except the Palestinians and the Israelis.
But, in fact, the negociations shouldn’t really take place between the Palestinians and the Israelis, but between the Palestinians and the US Government. It is only thanks to the US support that the Israelis have been to do what they have been doing for the past several decades, and even more to the point during the past seven years of the Bush administration.
I am sure lots of people may not agree with this view, particularly the Americans, but that’s the way I see the situation.
November:21:2007 - 16:50
And as always, your opinions are welcome!
November:21:2007 - 17:42
So the route to peace is de-recognition of Israel as a negotiating partner by the Palestinians? Not likely, I’d guess.
Try turning it around, al-waleed. If you really think that the Jews are out to get the Arabs, then doesn’t the U.S. serve as a restraint on Israeli conduct rather than an enabler? Was any progress made on creating an independent Palestinian state between the years 1949 and 1978, when the U.S. brokered Sadat’s Camp David deal promoting the principle of self-determination?
November:22:2007 - 07:50
Solomon2:
After writing my comment above, I read totally by chance an interesting article which dealt with the subject of the Annapolis conference. It is called “How to get out of the annapolis conference”, and if we believe its author, Uri Avnery, “The Annapolis conference is a joke. Though not in the least funny.”
The article is highly informative, and unfortunately destroys any illusion any inveterate optimist may still have about the Annapolis meeting. A must reading at arabnews:
http://arabnews.com/?page=7§ion=0&article=103858&d=22&m=11&y=2007&pix=opinion.jpg&category=Opinion
November:22:2007 - 08:06
Al-Waleed: I think that piece’s author has so many issues going on about Israel–and he is, of course Israeli–that you need both mountains of salt and a Psych degree to figure out what he really means.
November:22:2007 - 09:51
al-Waleed, spot on as usual. A complete waste of time. This is all about the “Bush legacy” and Israel looking like they are trying to do something, when the truth is there is ZERO incentive for them to do anything, and they well know it.