I believe that the Ken Silverstein’s analysis in Harpers Magazine, that “

The only way to reach a political settlement in the Middle East is for an American president to pressure Israel to make concessions.

” is deeply wrong.

Negotiations are an artifact of power, both current and future, and frequently neither side is completely sure of their power, particularly in the future.

By providing the realistic possibility of a deus ex machina, the intervention of the US, EU, and Russia actually make realistic negotiation less likely, because at their core, negotiations are an artifact of power, and by adding an external pressures, you distort the positions held by the principals.

One need only look at the “mediation” performed by Thabo Mbeki in Zimbabwe to see the downside of this.

Because the Palestinians and Israelis expect an external intervention, any, “last best offer” is likely to demand far more than they would otherwise, because both sides expect that a “road map” will favor the Palestinians, so an Israeli keep concessions in their back pocket, because they expect that they will be pushed beyond their final offer, and the Palestinians keep concessions in their back pocket for the same reason.

Certainly, the US (and EU, and Russia) can in some manner or another take upon themselves to act as guarantors of a final status agreement (a peacekeeping/border force, economic aid for an eventual Palestinian state, etc.), but when you have two negotiating that have an expectation of significant external intervention, it interferes with the basic function of negotiations.

I would also note that Carter’s trip comes exactly the wrong time. With 9 months left in the Bush regime, and the rest of the world considering Bush and His Evil Minions^™ both disastrously incompetent and bellicose, nothing is going to move, because both sides in this dispute cannot see his successor as being any worse.