Rick Klepper: 678.588.1622 | Doug Wilson: 205.903.3272 | Kerry Gossett: 205.281.5681 | Doug Hughes: 205.527.0876 staff@counterthreatgrp.com

Every four to eight years the United States elects a new president. Nearly every one of them promises to present a Middle East solution- peace between Israelis and the Palestinians. “War and Peace” would seem like cliff notes compared to the volumes of books trying to explain the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian situation. Now, Donald Trump is about to attempt what every President before him has tried, and failed to do.  Bring the two sides together and agree to move forward in peace and harmony. Of course an optimist would say it is very possible, while the naysayers look at past history to argue how impossible it is to achieve this lofty goal.
Optimists might point to the fact that Hamas is trying to become a  “kinder and more gentle” Hamas in hopes to achieve the
“two-state solution”. The new charter even referring to the 1967 borders as a possible solution is stunning to the Pro Israel
crowd. Many in Israel are just tired of the constant battles with the Palestinians, so they are desperate enough to even negotiate from
a position of weakness. This is despite the fact that Israel has always beaten back its Arab neighbors with its superior military forces. They are even supported by many left leaning Jewish Americans in wanting to end the conflict. Even these optimists can see the holes in the
argument, whether they admit it or not.

The Palestinians are supported financially by sworn enemies of the State of Israel, not the least of which is Iran. Iran, who also has
declared America as its biggest target remains the worlds most infamous state sponsor of terrorism. Even if the new “softened”
Hamas position on borders would allow Israel to keep Jerusalem, that does not change the vote at UNESCO, which has condemned Israel. Israeli historians and politicians will continue to point to the continuous condemnations of Israel by the international community
including Geneva accords, U.N. votes and even the ICRC.

President Trump is an optimist and he should be as it has served him well in his life and his achievements. But even optimists, if they are objective, would warn the new President that taking on this challenge is at best, walking through a mine field. At worst, another footnote in history of another President’s failed attempt at formulating a Middle East solution.

Read More…