– Or the concept that they can only be victims?
– A parallel idea that Israel must always be responsible because it is held to a higher standard?
– Ignorance about Israeli politics and society?
– The seemingly rational view that they must be eager to get a state and end the largely nonexistent these days “occupation” and thus cannot be intransigent?
– The refusal to comprehend that the main theme of Palestinian politics is still wiping Israel off the map and not a two-state solution, though this, of course, is not the universal view among them?
– A Washington-centric view which is obsessed with Obama’s domestic political and electoral considerations far more than the actual situation in the Middle East?
– In some cases, though more rarely in America than Europe and certainly not in regard to this article, a deep-seated antagonism toward Jews?
– In some cases, though more rarely in America than Europe and often coming from left-wing Jews in the United States — certainly not the case with this article by Wilson — a deep-seated antagonism toward the existence of a Jewish state?
Wilson here provides us with the case of a reporter who is willing to work hard and genuinely wants to understand what happened. Yet he is only able to offer a series of scenes with no conceptual overview, along with the missing Palestinian factor. Or, to put it bluntly, Obama could stand on his head, Netanyahu could stop all construction on settlement for five years, and Palestinian ideology, goals, politics, and internal rivalries would still prevent any breakthrough to a comprehensive peace.
The bottom line is that there are only two permitted mainstream media positions: Either it is all Israel’s fault or it is simply an issue that is too tough and complex to resolve. The latter stance, as in Wilson’s article, is the best we can expect.