|
f, as widely expected,
Ariel Sharon is elected Israel's prime minister tomorrow, there is a high
probability the event will be marked by intensified violence. The Palestinians
have already declared they intend to make election day in Israel a "day
of rage." In all likelihood, their rage will only grow in the weeks that
follow and be expressed with acts of terrorism and attacks involving an
array of anti-tank, anti-aircraft, and other powerful weaponry smuggled
into Gaza and the West Bank ever since the Oslo peace accords were signed.
In the realm of Mideast possibilities, that would be the good news.
The bad news would be if, in addition to an intensified Intafada, Israel's
other foes notably Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, and Libya
perhaps joined by her two "partners for peace," Egypt and Jordan, were
to use Sharon's election as a casus belli. No one knows what such a regional
conflict would look like; would weapons of mass destruction be used and,
if so, by whom and with what effect? Suffice it to say, the bloodletting
that would accompany the Middle East's next round of Arab–Israeli hostilities
would likely make the previous wars pale in comparison.
The best hope for averting a renewed regional war is if Israel's enemies
perceive that Sharon's election signifies that the Jewish State has found
its footing again after years of irresolution and drift. Everything possible
should be done to dissipate the perception fostered by Ehud Barak's reckless
concessions and other acts of appeasement namely, that the Arab
war option foreclosed since 1973 has once again become viable.
Of course, the principal responsibility for restoring Israel's credibility
so as to deter widespread aggression rests with the government and people
of Israel. Should a majority of the latter give Ariel Sharon a mandate,
it will be a powerful signal of strength and resolve provided he
does not immediately adulterate that message by seeking a national unity
government that would assign key portfolios (such as defense and foreign
affairs) to failed Labor party figures like Barak and Shimon Peres.
There are, however, steps the United States can and should
take to reinforce with Arab and other audiences the folly of believing
that Israel can be attacked with impunity. Specifically, as the new Bush
administration congratulates the winner of Tuesday's Israeli elections,
it should also communicate the following messages to those who wish him
ill:
-
The United States is committed to the safety and security of the State
of Israel. An attack against the Jewish State would be regarded as a
hostile act against an American ally to which the U.S. would respond
appropriately.
- The
United States is determined to help maintain the qualitative edge of
Israel's military. It will also support Israel in retaining physical
control of territory necessary to assure its ability to defend itself.
- In
keeping with its practice in every other nation with whom it has diplomatic
relations and an official presence, the United States will place its
embassy in Israel in the capital of the Jewish State, Jerusalem.
- The
United States will scrupulously and honestly monitor evidence that Arab
nations and Iran persist in fomenting violence against the Jewish State
and her people behavior that is incompatible with peaceful coexistence
between the parties and a durable and just end to conflict in the region.
Eligibility for U.S. military assistance, financial support, and other
benefits that flow from cordial relations with the United States will
be adjusted accordingly.
As a candidate and as president, George W. Bush has repeatedly made clear
his commitment to stand with Israel. The best way to ensure that that
commitment is not put to the test under very ominous circumstances is
to signal in these tangible ways that he means to stand with Ariel Sharon's
Israel, come what may.
|