Conosce bene la situazione, la violenza, i protagonisti, George Mitchell. Fu lui a guidare il team che scrisse il rapporto sulla seconda intifada. I commenti israeliani sono per ora molto freddi e contenuti, come dimostra questo articolo del conservatore Jerusalem Post. Quelli di chi conosce il Medio Oriente, molto meno freddi. Alastair Crooke, su Al Jazeera International, descrive in questo modo l’uomo con cui aveva collaborato all’inizio degli anni 2000:
I think Senator Mitchell is one of the few Americans who has credibility in the region and in the West. He’s probably now almost the only one, which is a reflection of the scorched-earth diplomacy of the past eight years.
What’s important is to see who he is a special envoy for. Only when we see the confirmation of his appointment will it be clear if he is a presidential envoy or if he is a super-envoy or a delimited envoy – in other words, whether he will stay within certain limits.
He does depend on what is the mandate that is given to him. He’s a good listener and he actually hears. He will change the language and he will introduce changes, but unless he has a mandate, he can do nothing.
You also have to ask if he is being appointed too late. One of the signals that can be seen in Gaza – where there was almost a suspension of certain moral considerations in terms of civilians – is the suggestion that we are not entering an era of politics and compromise. Gaza was a message of uncompromising military absolutism, not of openness.