The EU's totally unimportant Jerusalem resolution

"If there is to be a genuine peace, a way must be found through negotiations to resolve the status of Jerusalem as the future capital of two states," the statement from EU foreign minsters said.

You'll notice that the statement doesn't explicitly say East Jerusalem -- defined according to 1967 borders -- should be the capital of the Palestinian state.

That was Israel's main concern: There was a lot of fear that the EU would demand the 1967 borders be locked in place. If those borders were fixed, then major Jewish settlements like Gilo would become part of a future Palestinian state -- an unacceptable outcome for the Israeli government. The original policy document, drafted by Sweden, made just that demand, but it was watered down in last-minute discussions this morning.

Al-Arabiya reports that a number of foreign ministers, including Luxembourg's and Sweden's, were opposed to the changes. "East Jerusalem is not part of Israel," Luxermbourg's foreign minister said.

Most news stories lead with dire predictions of "Israeli anger," but I think the Israeli government will actually treat this as a victory. Indeed, the Israeli foreign ministry released a statement that was largely dismissive of the resolution:

"Given the Israel Government's efforts to renew the negotiations, Israel regrets that the EU has chosen to adopt a text that, although containing nothing new, does not contribute to the renewal of negotiations," the statement added.

I'm curious to hear what our readers think: Should the EU have insisted on 1967 borders?

As the EU dithers over a pointless resolution, meanwhile, the Jerusalem Post reports that the Netanyahu government has adopted a policy of barring foreign leaders from visiting the Gaza Strip -- an attempt to further delegitimize the Hamas government.