|
 ince
September 11, after some 6,000 Americans were murdered by Islamic
terrorists, President George Bush has informed the nation that there
are thousands of trained Islamic terrorists in more than 60 countries,
including our own. NBC News has reported that U.S. intelligence
believes there's a 100% certainty that terrorists will strike here
again.
At the same
time, the president has gone to extraordinary lengths to publicly
and privately assure Arabs and Muslims that the U.S. is not at war
with them, but with terrorists and their sponsors. For this, the
president deserves much credit. But then, the president committed
a rare policy and diplomatic blunder that resonated throughout the
Middle East. He confirmed a news leak that his administration was,
in fact, entertaining the idea of a Palestinian state. The president
said that "the idea of a Palestinian state has always been
part of a vision, so long as the right of Israel to exist is respected."
Of course,
"the right of Israel to exist" has never been accepted
by its enemies, especially Yasser Arafat. Former Israeli Prime Minister
Ehud Barak learned this the hard way, after offering Arafat more
of Israel than Arafat had ever imagined occupying. Arafat rejected
all of it and then unleashed the current war against Israel.
The truth is
that no Republican president has ever supported a Palestinian state
as part of America's vision for the Middle East. And it wasn't until
relatively late in his term, when Bill Clinton was desperate for
a deal between Israel and the Palestinians as part of his drive
to build a legacy, that he was an outspoken advocate of a Palestinian
state. Bush's embrace of the Clinton vision, the timing of his changed
position, and the manner in which he surprised Israel with his public
endorsement of position, is and was a huge mistake.
Day after day
we read new accounts of Palestinian terrorists blowing up scores
of innocent men, women, and children in open markets and restaurants,
and shooting defenseless commuters. One cease-fire after another
is violated. Meanwhile, the U.S. repeatedly urges Israel to show
restraint in the face of this persistent carnage and to negotiate
with the perpetrators' backers — advice the U.S. would never consider
if offered by others in response terrorists attacks against Americans.
During his
September 20 speech to a joint session of Congress, the president
said that "Our war on terror begins with al Qaeda, but it does
not end there. It will not end until every terrorist group of global
reach has been found, stopped and defeated." Presumably, the
president's statement would include such terrorist groups as the
Islamic Jihad, Hamas, Hezbollah, and the Muslim Brotherhood, all
of which have direct or indirect associations with Arafat's Palestinian
Liberation Organization. Apparently, it does not. These terrorists
are not among those targeted by the U.S. for military annihilation.
The president
also said that " ... we will pursue nations that provide aid
or safe haven to terrorism. Every nation, in every region, now has
a decision to make. Either you are with us, or you are with the
terrorists. From this day forward, any nation that continues to
harbor or support terrorism will be regarded by the United States
as a hostile regime." Presumably, this statement would include
such well-known state sponsors of terrorism as Syria, Iran, and
Sudan. Apparently, it does not. In recent weeks, the U.S. has consulted
with these countries, either directly or through intermediaries.
Israel can
no more accept the cold-blooded murder of its citizens than the
U.S. It can no more tolerate terrorists invading its borders and
retreating to safe harbors in other countries than we can. Israel's
security cannot be a bargaining chip to attract and keep Arab and
Muslim nations in an antiterrorism coalition. The truth is that
these countries — ruled by monarchs, authoritarians, or dictators
— oppose terrorism not out of some sense of global goodwill, but
because of their own self-interest, fear, and weak hold on power.
The Associated
Press reported recently that the Jordanian royal family interrupted
a vacation on a yacht last year after receiving information that
terrorists linked to Osama bin Laden planned to attack the boat.
And bin Laden is known to want to topple the Saudi royal family.
Jane's Intelligence Report discloses that bin Laden's deputy, Ayman
Al-Zawahiri, "has been a central figure in the conflict waged
by Islamic zealots in Egypt since the 1970s, fighting alongside
the main Islamic group, al-Gamaa al-Islamiya, with the aim of establishing
an Islamic state." He was sentenced to death in absentia by
an Egyptian military court for terrorist acts against Egypt.
As the administration has said, Israel has no closer ally than America.
But America has no closer ally than Israel. After the atrocities
of September 11, there was shock and horror in Israel, prayer vigils
in solidarity with Americans, and the sharing of intelligence with
the U.S. government. Israel has also offered to join the antiterrorism
coalition (to no avail). The Palestinians, on the other hand, danced
in the streets and handed out candy to children in public celebration.
Arafat censored further media reports of these events.
Israel has
been a loyal ally in other ways. During the Gulf War in 1991, Saddam
Hussein deliberately attacked Israel with 39 Scud missiles and threatened
to strike it with chemical and biological weapons. Rather than retaliate
with its military might, the U.S. persuaded Israel to stand down
— fearing moderate Arab states (and Syria) would drop out of another
American-led coalition. And while the Iraqis were driven out of
Kuwait, Hussein was left untouched in Baghdad, from where he continues
to threaten Israel. Today it's a rare Israeli household that doesn't
store gas masks and have safe rooms.
And the slights
against Israel continue. During his visit to the Middle East, Defense
Secretary Donald Rumsfeld visited Egypt, Saudi Arabia, Oman, and
Uzbekistan, but reportedly declined an invitation from Israeli Defense
Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer to stop there. All nations — big and
small, free and not free — are encouraged to join publicly with
the U.S. in its war against terrorism, except for Israel.
There are those
who believe that Israel's receipt of some $2 billion a year in U.S.
aid justifies its treatment. On CNN's Capitol Gang, Mark
Shields put it this way when setting up Bob Novak for his usual
disparagement of Israel: "Bob Novak, your take on Ariel Sharon,
the prime minister of Israel, after $91 billion in foreign aid from
the United States to Israel, and the most steadfast ally Israel
has ever had — the United States?" In other words, Israel's
an ingrate.
When Japan
refuses to open its markets to U.S. commerce, you don't hear Shields
reminding viewers of the number of courageous Americans who died
fighting the Japanese in World War II, or the untold billions the
U.S. spent to revive its economy and is still spending to provide
for its defense. In 1986, when Ronald Reagan ordered U.S. bombers
in Britain to attack Libya, three of our allies — France, Germany,
and Italy — refused to cooperate in the strike, thereby endangering
the mission and American crews. The bombers were forced to fly for
a longer period of time and to refuel several times in the air.
Yet, no lectures from Shields on how the people of these countries
owe their liberty to America.
As the U.S becomes ever more dependent on Middle East oil, and the
Arab and Muslim populations (and political clout) continue to grow
here and elsewhere, Israel's future will become even more difficult
and dangerous. So, when the president dropped his policy bombshell
the other day, raising the possibility of a Palestinian state while
declaring war on terrorists and state-sponsored terrorism, Israeli
Prime Minister Ariel Sharon's undiplomatic response was not "unacceptable,"
as the president put it. It was natural. Clearly the Israelis had
hoped that the ruthless attacks of September 11 would strengthen
the bond between the U.S. and Israel, not embolden Israel's enemies.
|
