Nancy's Magickal Oriental Journey, And Other Fantastical Fictions

Nancy Pelosi is a genius. In one brief trip to Jerusalem and Damascus she did what Condoleezza Rice, George W. Bush, Colin Powell, George Mitchell, Bill Clinton, King Abdullah, Madeleine Albright, Dennis Ross, James Baker, Terje Larsen, and a general assembly of others have failed to do.

The Israelis told her they were willing to talk peace with Syria. The Syrians told her they were willing to talk peace with Israel. It's that simple, folks:

She conveyed a message from Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert that his country is ready to engage in peace talks, and Assad gave assurances of his willingness to participate, Pelosi said.

Actually, she's that much of a folksy simpleton if she believes these wily Oriental gentlemen. If she was credulous enough to believe the show that was put on for her in Damascus (the Arabs call it Sham), she probably bought splinters from the true cross and the bones of seven saints too.

The Daily Star says Syria "constructed a fantasy" - both for her and for themselves. Just as Pelosi apparently believes Bashar al-Assad's placebo promises, some in Syria apparently believe that Pelosi's visit signals a sea change in American policy.

For those who are giddy over Pelosi's mission, I have two responses: a history lesson and a thought experiment.

The history lesson goes back to the Madrid talks in 1991. Syria and Israel were willing to negotiate then, and have been willing ever since. But conditions have proliferated, and continue to. Israel will negotiate only if Syria forswears support for terrorist organizations. Syria will negotiate only if Israel agrees to comprehensive talks with all the Arab countries - including Palestine. But Palestine is currently headed by Hamas, a terrorist organization supported by Syria.

The thought experiment: imagine a member of an Iranian opposition party came to the U.S. trumpeting a promise of better relations if his party came to power. How would we respond? Naturally, it would confirm our preconceived notions of the current regime, right or wrong, and it would ultimately erode our respect for the entire system of government. After all, what self-respecting country allows what-if negotiations by aspirants to power? If President Bush met with such a politician, it would be grounds for his exclusion from politics in most countries, and he might be hung for treason in an uncompromising place like Iran. So how do you think Syrians view America after Pelosi's generous, non-confrontational visit? If the regime there learns anything from it, it is this: that a Democratic president will overlook their intransigence, their thuggery in Lebanon, and their political oppression. They have but to hang on for two years, and maybe help guarantee an American failure in Iraq, to have a kinder, gentler America, and a freer hand in Lebanon, Palestine, and Iraq.

Update: See the opposing view from our man in Damascus. Prof. Joshua Landis' comments on the Pelosi visit are briefer than his usual. I agree with Dr. Landis that engagement with Syria is better than not - but not in such a way as to allow the Syrians to triangulate to our detriment.