Ultimately, memoirs will not redound to President Barack Obama's credit. Special envoy Martin Indyk (on foreign affairs), former Secretary of Defense Robert Gates (on Afghanistan), former Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice (on relations with Israel), and now former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton -- each individual has laid out a critique of the president in his or her book. In Clinton's memoir, she reveals some of Obama's missteps: his abandonment of former Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak, his opposition to providing assistance to the anti-Assad groups in Syria, and his hard-line position toward Israel concerning the settlements, despite "unprecedented" Israeli compromises. Lurking beneath Clinton's memoir are probably certain political interests. It would be difficult to forget her belligerent struggle with the current president during the 2008 Democratic primaries. Perhaps Clinton has sought to distance herself from several of the Obama administration's failures, especially in the field in which she is most experienced. Some readers are likely going to perceive her memoir as a sort of self-evaluation. The book is being released amid a crisis of confidence between the U.S. and Israel governments. The current secretary of state, John Kerry, rushed to declare Washington's recognition of the Fatah-Hamas government The U.S. did that despite an earlier commitment not to, arguing that the new Palestinian government is comprised of technocrats. Israel responded with a decision to advance new settlement construction. In the current U.S. administration's eyes, settlements -- not a Hamas government -- are a sin. A swarm of commentators were quick to fire off criticism not against the U.S., heaven forbid, but rather Israel. But shockingly, pro-Obama newspaper The New York Times published an editorial admonishing the administration over its acceptance of the Palestinian unity government. Is it possible that Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu was right to begin with- The New York Times reminds us that Hamas is a pernicious organization known inter alia for its "hatred of Israel." The editorial also posits that chances of a successful cross-organizational reconciliation among the Palestinians are slim at best. According to the New York Times editorial board, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas seemingly chose this strategy simply "to make trouble" for Israel rather than promote the peace process. It must be understood that, compared to the Israeli decision to advance settlement construction, the Palestinian unity government is much more detrimental to peace. The U.S. peace camp is already well aware of this. Apparently, so is Netanyahu.
