HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_030274.jpg

Netanyahu originally planned to come to Washington with a generous peace proposal to entice the Palestinians back to the negotiating table. But Obama painted him into a corner and made him change his script by notifying him, as he was about to board his plane, that the President was going to call for Israel to return to its 1949-1967 lines, without also calling for the Palestinians to give up their right of return. By thus preempting the prime minister, he forced him to become more defensive of Israel's bargaining positions and less willing to offer specific, generous concessions. The result was a powerful speech in defense of Israel by Netanyahu, an overwhelmingly positive response from Congress and a movement away from peace negotiations. All in all, the President's well-intentioned efforts to jump-start the peace process have backfired, not so much because he favors one side over the other, but because of the ham-handedness of his negotiation strategy. A negotiator or mediator whose statements move the parties further away from the negotiating table than they were before he spoke deserves a failing grade in the science of negotiation. What the President should have done is to insist that both parties immediately agree to sit down and negotiate without any preconditions. It's not too late. But it will take yet another "explanation" of what President Obama really meant in his ill-advised speech. Dershowitz's most recent novel is "The Trials of Zion." HOUSE_OVERSIGHT_030274