The two dogmas of foreign policy sophistication on the Middle East: (1) the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is the source rather than a symptom of Middle East political pathologies and (2) the Israeli-Palestinian conflict would be resolved if Israel was willing to make reasonable concessions. Brzezinski covered the first dogma yesterday so - in the spirit of bipartisanship - here's Rice to demonstrate the second:

Despite frequent negotiating sessions, two trips to the region by Bush and eight more by Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice, the sides have little to show for their efforts and have acknowledged the year-end target will not be met. "Even though there was not an agreement by the end of the year, it is really largely because of the political situation in Israel," Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice told reporters aboard Air Force One as Bush back from a summit in Peru.

Not really news since she's been saying that since June. But worth noting as the kind of incisive foreign policy analysis you'd expect from someone who opposed the surge but described Hezbollah's takeover of Lebanon as a "positive step."

And of course - as left-leaning peace process diplomats now admit openly - it's actually Palestinian political instability that suffocates the peace process. Abbas can't make peace and Hamas won't make peace. But somehow that turns out to be Israel's fault. Because if it wasn't then Israeli concessions wouldn't translate into a peace deal. And then it wouldn't be possible to diplomatically stabilize the Middle East. And then where would the State Department be? So Rice is angling to have UN call for a new Arab state. Because why not?

And because I've now gotten two obnoxious emails on this question in two days: the problem with misguided US foreign policy toward Israel isn't just that it screws a major US ally. It's that diplomats who focus obsessively on Israel do it as a result of willful denial about political Islam. If you believe that political Islam is a global threat driven by a pathological ideology expressed through asymmetric and urban warfare - then Israel is incidental. But if you really need terrorism to be an misguided response to underlying political problems - which is to say, if you're the State Department - then Israel becomes the central issue. Which is why domestically the US-Israel alliance is such an ideological bloodbath. And why misguided approaches to Israel aren't really about Israel.

References:
* Brzezinski: Israeli Campaign Against Iran Will Detonate US-Israel Relations [MR]
* Rice: Peace deal delayed due to political situation in Israel [YNet]
* Condi: Failure Of Inevitably Doomed 2008 US Peace Deal Is Israel's Fault
* Fried Rice [Power Line]
* Iran Takes Over Hezbollah After Hezbollah Takes Over Lebanon (Plus: State Department Naturally Urging Israel To Cede More Land... To Hezbollah) [MR]
* Former Peace Process Diplomats To Obama: Renewed Peace Process Guaranteed To Fail [MR]
* Olmert, Livni vs. Rice's Plan for UN Vote on PA State [A7]

Previously:
* New Data Confirms Old Data: Blaming Israel For Gaza's Medical Collapse Is A Vicious Lie
* World Bank: Failure Of Corrupt, Mismanaged, Civil War Hampered Palestinian Economy Is Israel's Fault
* UN: It's Israel's Fault That The Palestinians Are Dumping Raw Sewage Into The Mediterranean