Samaria on the Caribbean [Israel should do what Reagan did in Grenada]

It was 20 years ago this week, on October 25, 1983, that US armed forces stormed onto the small Caribbean island nation of Grenada, toppling its radical Marxist government and securing the lives of hundreds of American medical students who were based there.

Though the operation was mocked at the time by various observers, and provided late-night television hosts with plenty of fodder for their comedy routines, the Grenada campaign in fact proved to be a turning point in the Cold War.

It marked the first time since Vietnam that Washington had been willing to employ military force to roll back communism, sending a strong signal to the Soviet Union and its allies that the United States was prepared to take a stand for freedom and defend its neighbors against communist encroachment.

In retrospect, though, the operation takes on an added measure of significance because it offers some important lessons for both Israel and the US as they confront the challenges posed by the current global war against terror.

The trouble in Grenada began in the fall of 1983 following a split in the ruling New Jewel Movement headed by prime minister Maurice Bishop, a former prot g of Cuban dictator Fidel Castro. Marxist hardliners belonging to the Revolutionary Military Council overthrew Bishop in a bloody coup, executing him and threatening to impose an even more extreme version of communist rule on the island.

Six of Grenada's neighbors quickly appealed for American intervention, fearing the consequences of a radical pro-Moscow and pro-Havana expansionist communist outpost rising up in their midst, one which might very well seek to spread havoc throughout the region.

In his autobiography An American Life, then-US president Ronald Reagan writes that, in addition to the geopolitical consequences, "there was one other thing we had to consider: Eight hundred Americans who attended medical school on Grenada, all of them potential hostages."

Fearful that if news of the operation were to leak, it would lead the Grenadans and their Cuban allies, who had military forces on the island, to take hundreds of Americans captive, Reagan decided to launch the invasion with the utmost secrecy.

And so, an initial force of over 1,900 US Army Rangers and Marines landed on the island, swiftly overcoming the brief resistance they encountered. Though 19 Americans died in the fighting, most of Grenada's population welcomed the US intervention with open arms. A year later, free and fair elections were held, and Grenada to this day is a peaceful and thriving democracy.

Looking back on the US invasion of Grenada in light of recent events, it is hard not to see it as a forerunner, or prototype, of Us President George W. Bush's current policy of preemption. Rather than waiting for the Cubans and Grenadans to spread communist mayhem off the southern coast of the United States, Reagan stepped in with force to quash the danger before it could pose a real threat to regional security, just as Bush has delineated the need to thwart any potential risk which terrorists and rogue regimes may pose in the future.

AND JUST as time proved Reagan right in his actions in Grenada, so too will history one day judge Bush accordingly, for having the foresight and wherewithal to intervene in Iraq and Afghanistan and remove Saddam and the Taliban from power.

Moreover, Reagan was willing to invade Grenada even though he knew it was unlikely to be popular with America's allies. Because of his desire to preserve secrecy and forestall leaks, Reagan decided not to give British prime minister Margaret Thatcher advance notice of the operation, despite the close personal friendship they had developed.

In his memoirs, Reagan notes that he was in the middle of briefing the Congressional leadership about the invasion, which was already underway, when he was called out to take Thatcher's call. "As soon as I heard her voice," he writes, "I knew she was very angry Grenada, she reminded me, was part of the British Commonwealth, and the United States had no business interfering in its affairs."

Despite Thatcher's protestations, Reagan did not call off the attack, but insisted on persevering because he was convinced that it was in America's best interests. Bush, too, followed a similar line in Iraq, defying European opposition and UN hostility, for he knew his ultimate responsibility is to protect the security and well-being of the United States, regardless of what others might have to say about it.

As he presses ahead with the war on terror, Bush should keep these lessons in mind, and not allow the naysayers and critics to deter him from defending America against those who would destroy it. But it is also time for Israel to learn the lessons of Grenada and act with the same resolve and determination that guided America to victory in the Cold War.

As Reagan himself wrote, "No rational person ever wants to unleash military force, but I believe there are situations when it is necessary for the United States to do so – especially when the defense of freedom and democracy is involved or the lives and liberty of our citizens are at stake."

That must become Israel's guiding principle in the current conflict with the Palestinians. Instead of limiting itself to pinpoint attacks on terrorist targets, as it did this past Monday in the Gaza Strip, Israel should follow the "Grenada model" and topple the regime that threatens it.

The Palestinian Authority is a terrorist entity, one that is dedicated to killing as many Jews as possible and undermining the very existence of the Jewish state. Regardless of who is in charge, the PA poses a direct threat to the well-being of Israel's citizens, and it is a threat that Israel has no choice but to eliminate forthwith.

As both Reagan and Bush demonstrated, we should stop being so concerned about how the world, or even our allies, might react, and be more concerned with defending ourselves and our citizens from the terrorist onslaught.

For as Reagan himself put it when describing the Grenada intervention, "We didn't ask anybody, we just did it."

The writer served as deputy director of Communications & Policy Planning in the Prime Minister's Office under former premier Binyamin Netanyahu.

What do the names Judea and Samaria refer to?

Judea and Samaria, located west of the Jordan River, with Jerusalem approximately in the center, are historical parts of the Land of Israel. They are currently called the "West Bank", a name created by Jordan after the War of Independence in 1948 when Arab armies overran Judea and Samaria. Despite the fact that virtually the entire world rejected Jordan's annexation, and even after Israel drove the occupiers back across the river in the 1967 Six Day War, the phrase "West Bank" has stuck, and is used to the near total exclusion of any other.

The mountains of Judea are first named in the Book of Joshua, in the account of the conquering of Canaan by the Israelites during the creation of the Land of Israel. From that time to the present, more than 3,000 years, the name Judea has been consistently used to describe the territory from Jerusalem south along the Judean mountain ridge line, extending east from the mountains down to the Dead Sea.

The hill country north and west of Jerusalem has been known as Samaria since the days of King Jeroboam, first king of the breakaway ten northern tribes of Israel after the death of King Solomon.

Judea and Samaria have been known by these names for unbroken centuries, and were registered as such on official documents and maps, by international institutions and in authoritative reference books right up to about 1950. When the correct names became a problem for Palestinian Arabs trying to make their newly-minted claim on the land, it somehow became "politically correct" to use "West Bank" or "occupied territories" instead of the historically accurate names Judea and Samaria.

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.