Foibles not follies

There's another beleaguered executive making news and his name isn't Bush. Soon to be former Prime Minister of Israel Ehud Olmert sat down for an interview this week to discuss the state of Israel. Typical of a politician, Olmert has now called for action that needs to be taken when he can do nothing about it (he resigned due to corruption charges earlier this month but remains the interim PM until a new government is formed). His formerly astringent stances have been softened into calls for a unified, realistic strategy of engagement and dialogue with Palestine, and more importantly, Iran.

It's convenient that Olmert chose this moment to reshape his own policy views. The Israeli stock market has been largely unaffected by global credit problems and with the New Year just around the corner, his interview is front page news. And the right type of front page news, an about turn from his corruption battles the past few months. Olmert now knows an Israeli withdrawal from the West Bank, along with a partition of Jerusalem, is the bare minimum for sustained peace.

Just as important, given the recent rumors about preemptive strikes on Iran, is Olmert's assertion that Israel must act within the international system in addressing the threat of Iran. For all the rabble rousing both candidates spout regarding Iran, it is important to note this about turn. Ahmadinejad is up for re-election in June 2009. His apocalyptic, "Hidden Imam" brand of Islam not only contradicts the Ayatollah's more compromising Mashad understanding which values preservation, but is quickly losing support from the populace. His control of the nuclear program is dangerous but overstated, just like his rhetoric. Olmert's realization that unilateral action is even more dangerous than Ahmadinejad represents a correct and noteworthy policy shift. It may be a particularly weak turn given his current position, but it is one worth supporting.