I'm not sure where David Brooks came up with most of the analysis in his latest column (does he seriously think this is all just a display of swagger? that no one has actual interests in play?), but this line caught my eye:when Hamas, Hezbollah and Iran became leading players in the Middle East struggle, that land-for-peace game was suspended. A different game with different rules was begun. This new game is not oriented toward a final agreement. The extremist groups believe in the eventual extermination of Israel. They’re not interested in a handshake on the White House lawn.That reference to "a handshake on the White House lawn" is a reference to Yassir Arafat shaking hands with Yitzhak Rabin. But it's worth reminding folks that for most of his life, Yasser Arafat was also judged a hardline extremist with no interest in a handshake on the White House lawn. As leader of Fatah, he planned raids and roadside bombs. Rabin's handshake is remembered as an act of tremendous courage because it was such a leap of faith: It legitimized Arafat in the hopes that he could become more than a violent extremist. And to some degree, it worked. But contra Brooks, no one ever wanted just a handshake on the White House lawn. There were, and are, real interests at stake. The promise of a photo hasn't given way to a deal. Arafat's failure to deliver sufficient improvements in the lives of Palestinians helped legitimize the hardliners in Hamas. The fact that Israel couldn't end the rockets and kidnapping pushed the electorate towards Likud and Netanyahu. The handshake on the lawn only deepened anger over the collapse at Camp David. And now, Fatah has fallen apart, and Israel, with America's help, has ensured that the Palestinian Authority has lost the final shreds of its claim to legitimacy. What comes now is the long wait until Israel recognizes that it must negotiate with Hamas, just as it did with Arafat.
