Ignatius argues with great success that in order to conduct successful foreign policy in the Middle East, the United States must abandon the role of "moderator" and address what he says is the pervading desire for self-determination and "dignity" in the region. Largely reflective, he brings some three decades of experience as a reporter in Lebanon, Gaza and elsewhere into this piece. A diplomatic or political "middle," he says, no longer exists in the Middle East; any hope of building better relations with Iran and Syria, and making progress in Gaza rests on a recognition of this. Worthy of a second read, if you can handle it—the best I've seen on the topic.

Overall an interesting analysis of an impossible situation. It does warrant a careful reading.

Quite objective and nonpartisan; gives a description of the situation, mainly from the Arabic/Muslim position (understanding of which is lacking in the English speaking media) but without either demonizing them or taking the position of demonizing Israel, instead showing the internal logic of their position, which we will have to understand to treat with them.

Fine piece. Ignatius thinks most Israelis now see their invasion of Lebanon in 1982 as a blunder. I think the Israeli savaging of Lebanon in 2006 was also a bluder, but Ignatius skips by that. Ignatius argues that US military power cannot transform the Middle East. He sees Syria as an enemy of the US, but I think this is not true. Assad wants direct US involvement with any peace deal he makes with Israel. Assad correctly warned the US invasion of Iraq would lead to a catastrophe, a point Ignatius makes himself.