I was watching an episode of “Diplomatic License” on CNN the other Sunday. It was hosting one of those supposedly fair and evenhanded discussions on the Palestinian Uprising (the “intifadah”).

Of course, each side was represented: on the right corner, you had the two debating champs representing the Israeli point of view, one of whom is the editor of one of the leading “current affairs” magazines in the US, and the other the head of one of the myriad Israeli lobbies. And for the Palestinian side, you had two protagonists (how admirably neutral of CNN): one was a spokesman for an Islamic organization that is as famous in the United States as the author of this article, and another who heads a Jerusalem Studies Centre that must have been established on the day on which “Diplomatic License” was recorded! And so the debate raged on and on.

Richard Roth, the program’s presenter and debate arbitrator par excellence, presided over the proceedings and portrayed an image of utmost impartiality. Equal time was given to each side to air its views, Richard acted graciously, both sides raised their issues, and the program concluded with a quote from Kofi Annan’s speech before the recent Arab Summit in Amman. Kofi Annan, god bless him, was of course a picture of justice and righteousness. His quote had something for both sides – yes, the Arabs had every right to be miffed by the continued occupation of Palestinian territories, but Israelis had a right to worry for their security.

On the other side of the world, on the same day, Slobodan Milosevic was being arrested. Read More »