In Impromptus today — the last installment of my “Davos in the Desert” journal — I cite a man named Marc Otte. He is the EU’s special envoy to the Middle East, and you may agree he is perfect for the job. Here are his words to the Jordan Times:

“Things are changing. Look at Iraq, Lebanon, and other places in the region, [and] you will see that foreign occupation is not legitimate, whether it’s Israel, the U.S. in Iraq, or even NATO forces in Afghanistan.” I ask this question: Is it the official position of the EU that the presence of NATO forces in Afghanistan constitutes illegitimate foreign occupation? (This is to say nothing of the U.S. and its allies in Iraq.) Also, what would Mr. Otte have thought about international forces in France, c. 1944?

His statement, above, is morally, historically, and geopolitically perverse. But there’s more. Otte says,

“Israel wants Syria and Iran not to interfere in Lebanon. Fine, but we also want them to stop the occupation of Palestinian lands . . .”

First, I’m not sure I believe that Otte is sincere about “Fine.” Second, who decided that the disputed territories were “Palestinian lands”? How about Jaffa, Haifa, and Tel Aviv? A lot of people consider those “Palestinian lands,” too. Furthermore, Otte equates Syrian and Iranian designs on Lebanon to Israel’s occupation of the West Bank and Gaza (and Israel is now out of Gaza, to the immense sorrow of Gaza). Think about that historically, morally, etc., and you will again conclude, I suspect: perverse.

One more mot from Otte. He likes the Obama administration, saying, “They don’t speak about war and terror, but rather stress the importance of world peace.” Sure. And if you don’t speak about war and terror — maybe war and terror will, like, go away.

I have written about this in my “desert” journal. Just thought that Corner readers would be interested in meeting Marc Otte, the perfect — the ideal — EU envoy to the Middle East.