It turns out that this tour was run by -- wait for it -- AIPAC. He was sheparding a group of Hispanic politicians around the country.

Not a big shocker there, considering their "Everybody is against the Jews" attitude. I'll bet that if you'd listened longer, he would have brought up Israel as the Only Democracy in the Middle East (TM).

key to success all these years is the ability to control intelligence.

I think the point is that for a tour guide to suggest the Hizbollah could take over the West Bank after an Israeli withdrawal is misleading.

Yes, there has been a general alliance between Hamas and Hizbollah at the organizational level, but that doesn't mean that the West Bank is ripe to be taken over by Hizbollah.

The population in the West Bank most likely wouldn't be receptive to a takeover by a shiite party. There is a big difference between Hamas and Hizbollah having an organizational alliance and the West Bank being likely to support a takeover by a shiite group at the grassroots level.

Its misinformation to imply that one day the West Bank could be ruled by Hizbollah.

... take a bus from Jerusalem to Ramallah (it's 5.5 sheckels to go from the bus station near the Damascus Gate to the bus station in Ramallah)

... hang out there and talk to some of the Palestinians, ISMers, and various internationals there

... if you're in Ramallah on Wednesday go to the wall protest in Nil'lin or if you're there on Friday go to the wall protest (you can take a bus to get there for very little)

... go see Qarqilliya for yourself, though I think you need a permit to get through the checkpoints leading into it, as you know it's completely surrounded

critic of the Israel Lobby, was killed in Israel, I think there would be accountability. I think if/when he goes there, he's treated with kids' gloves, because no one wants to attack him, because everyone realizes what the repercussions would be. I think this is Mearsheimer-esque hyperbole. So - is he still pining for the return of the Cold War?

Why? Hezbollah is an extension of Syrian foreign policy, so militants can move freely between Lebanon and Syria.

Hezbollah operatives could easily skip in the West Bank by crossing over northwestern Jordan and infiltrate West bank border towns.

We know this because they've done it before numerous times. The scare-tactics used by libertarians and leftist when it comes to Israel is becoming redundant.

AIPAC is not a fringe lobby movement. When you actually look at its philosophy, policy-wise there is not a huge difference between the reports it releases monthly and actual mainstream, military intelligence.

It's perfectly logical Israelis have a heightened fear to give up new ground to any unreliable peace partner. Israel left Gaza and received 8,000 sweet rockets and mortars as a thank you. Israel left Lebanon and received a built-up Hezbollah armed with scud missiles, rather than a disarmed hezbollah as promised by the USA and United Nations.

Israel's relations with the West Bank is improving under the current leadership. IDF cooperates with the PNA efficiently, check-points have been reduced by 60%, and Israelis are barred from enter the largest Palestinian cities.

But anyways Drezner, you should really start fact-checking and perhaps..oh, I don't know - read a book on the history of armed conflict involving Israel? You sound like a pompous self-hating academic...oh wait, you already are one.

Wow, there's an intelligent comment. FP's mideast column is making TIME's former mideast blog look downright intelligent by comparison. That's digging a pretty deep hole.
.
Dan should stop playing dumb American tourist and either provide some actual intelligent insight or just go and actually stay as a tourist rather than trying to play analyst while on vacation.

The comments to this post are exactly the same as the comments left on any post regarding Israel and Palestine.

It would be nice if people actually read what Drezner was saying before lashing out with the same pointless arguments.

All Drezner was saying is that he received what seemed to be a balance assessment of what the West Bank situation. He clearly said that his guide discussed the "humanitarian issues that arose with the creation of the barrier, the security gains that came from it, the economic disparity between the Palestinian cities and the settlements", while the APAC guide just talked about the security threat of taking down the barrier.

It seems to me that his main point is that a guide who seems to have extensive knowledge of the situation was giving a good assessment of the issue, pointing out that the barrier has raised humanitarian issues, but has also provided security benefits and has had complicated economic effects. His guide was assessing the policy with a cost-benefit analysis. It is ridiculous to argue that the current Israeli policies do not have harmful costs, or beneficial benefits. As with all policies, the Israeli policies regarding Palestinian areas must be objectively examined. ALL policies have costs and benefits. The job of policy makes is to choose the policy that minimizes costs while maximizing benefits.

The APAIC guide was looking at the current policy in a simplistic, one dimensional way, much in line with how most people(if these forums are any guide) look at the issue. There is no simple solution here, and both fear mongering to maintain the current policies, or calling Israel an apartheid state in an attempt to get these policies changed, are misguided and ineffective ways to reach a solution that inevitable must be met.

In short, it seems to me that Drazner was pointing out that people on the ground in Israel, people whose lives are affected first hand from the policies of Israel, are looking at the situation in a more realistic way, while others are simple promoting the same kind of simplistic thinking that has caused this problem in the first way. Saying that Israel policies have had negative humanitarian affects is not being anti-Semitic, it is being factual (just as the policies of ANY country in conflict have have negative humanitarian effects.) But at the same time, it is ridiculous to deny that pulling down the barrier tomorrow would cause huge security threats to Israel.

When I hear these one sided arguments posted here, from both sides, I am not surprised at all that there still has not been a solution to the Israel Palestine issue.

Hamas is almost certain to take over the West Bank militarily. What was likely said on the tour that Hamas and Hezbollah, who with Hamas at the helm would be welcomed in for limited purpose of staging operations against Israel, would likely take over the West Bank. This is not a controversial position - it is one shared by nearly all military analysts, including those of Jordan and Egypt.

of the post was it - the post was about AIPAC, the nefarious, lying, lobby, that somehow misleads American politicians with their Jew lies. Dual allegiance, right wing tendencies and all. And why not, Protocols of the Elders of Zion and Mein Kampf are both best sellers in the Islamic world. Why not take the ideas espoused in these works to their logical conclusion.