Posted on 10/25/2001 11:59:54 AM PDT by FresnoDA
Boris Shusteff
October 25, 2001
For more than half a century the American State Department has stubbornly tried to push through its pro-Arab policies, unable to realize that by doing so it has only been tightening the knot of the Arab-Israeli conflict. Already in 1948 the American Secretary of State threatened to resign, trying to prevent President Truman from recognizing the newly born Jewish state.
It is not surprising at all that the State Department is so unsympathetic to Israel. One of the reasons is simple arithmetic. Professor of Political Science William Quandt, who served in 1977 as Office Director for Middle Eastern Affairs, honestly admitted that:
"With nearly twenty embassies situated in Arab countries, the State Department inevitably produces more Arabists than it does specialists on Israeli affairs. In a general way, too, the experience of living in Arab countries and studying Arabic seems to make foreign-service officers more, rather then less, sympathetic to Arab concerns...
Diplomats see their jobs as 'improving relations' between United States and the countries to which they are assigned, and this requires a degree of empathy and openness to other cultures and their concerns. Some of this stays with diplomats long after they left the Arab world" (1).
If we take into account the fact that the chief emotion the Arab world harbors towards Israel is hatred, it is clear that a love for Israel cannot be born within the State Department by itself.
It could have been expected that the tragic events of September 11 would have made crystal clear the gaping blunders of American diplomacy, which have helped to whet the appetite of fundamentalist Islam, the cornerstone of anti-American Arab terror. The tragedy of September 11-th was a wake up call. A call for America to reconsider the relations and attitude towards some of its Arab "friends." America should have remembered that Saudi Arabia is the homeland of Wahhabism - the brutal and irreconcilable variety of Islam that is preached by Osama bin Laden. And that it is no "secret" at all that Osama himself receives a great deal of support from his admirers in Saudi Arabia.
However, the State Department has chosen to remain blind to the reality. Sadly, its desire to ignore the facts and continued intention to maintain the anti-Israel orientation is first of all detrimental to America itself. By trying to be "politically correct" the State Department sends a signal to the terrorists that America is not yet ready to seriously wage war against them. Attempts to pay the terrorists off by forcing Israel to surrender create a fertile ground for new and more devastating terrorist attacks on American soil. Recently, State Department policy has started to border on the absurd. Speaking in Washington on September 20 at a hearing of the House Government Reform Committee Tom Lantos, Democrat from California, presented an example of this policy:
"Some months ago I introduced a piece of legislation calling for the government of Lebanon to secure its entire border with Israel, not allowing Hezbollah to engage in cross-border terrorist strikes. The Department of State saw fit just a few months ago to send two letters to all of my colleagues urging them to oppose my amendment and not to vote for it. It passed by the narrowest of margins: 216 to 212."
Even more shameful was the State Department's frontal assault on legislation to impose sanctions on the Palestinian Authority if it does not meet its commitments to fight terrorism. On September 28, Secretary of State Colin Powell, in order to stop an amendment to the Foreign Operations Bill, which was due for a final reading after already having achieved a majority in the House of Representatives, sent a letter to Senator Dianne Feinstein. In the letter Powell stated:
"The Palestinian compliance legislation you introduced with Senator McConnell would be counterproductive to our coalition-building and peace process efforts and we would like to see it withdrawn... The bottom line is that we agree with the need for the Palestinians to comply with their commitments and control the violence... But in this critical period I ask you not to tie the President's hands and restrict our ability to engage with both parties to help achieve these goals."
Colin Powell did not elaborate what he meant by the word "ability." However, when Israel, devastated by the assassination of the Tourism Minister Rehavam Ze'evi started to act a little more decisively, the State Department did not even pretend to be "evenhanded." In a rude statement, its spokesman Philip Reeker demanded on October 22, that:
"Israeli defense forces... be withdrawn immediately from all Palestinian-controlled areas and no further such incursions should be made."
For all her unceasing devotion and staunch friendliness to America, the Jewish state was spat upon and received a kick from the master's boot. What unbelievable hypocrisy Reeker's statement was. "We deeply regret and deplore Israel Defence Force actions that have killed numerous Palestinian civilians over the weekend. The deaths of those innocent civilians under the circumstances reported in recent days are unacceptable."
At the time when hundreds of equally innocent Afghan civilians are killed by American bombs in Afghanistan and their deaths are accepted as "collateral damage," the State Department is suddenly worried about "numerous innocent Palestinian civilians."
It is a pity that Mr. Reeker did not elaborate on the issue of their "innocence," and did not mention that according to a recent Palestinian Arab poll conducted between September 11 and 17 in the West Bank and Gaza strip "81.7% of the Palestinian Arabs supported military operations INSIDE Israel and 72.7% rejected a state limited to the occupied territories and Jerusalem" (2).
Speaking on October 19 at the National Press Club in Washington William Burns, Assistant Secretary of State for Near Eastern Affairs, said, "We have no monopoly on wisdom in the Middle East, and I have always thought that a little humility goes a long way in the exercise of American power and American leadership." What a pity that the State Department does not act in accordance with this statement.
How unfortunate that yet another of Burns's statements from the same meeting turned out to be completely empty words as well. He said, "The voices of publics are all too often ignored until they raise them to a shout." It is the American State Department that adamantly ignores the American public. A large majority of Americans believe that US pressure on Israel to make concessions to the Palestinians will only encourage more terrorism.
The results of a recent survey conducted by the New American Initiative and "The Chicago Sun Times" speaks for itself. In this national poll, carried out between October 12-14 by McLaughlin & Associates, "62% said that after the World Trade Center attack, forcing Israel to give up territory - including dividing Jerusalem - to Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat for a Palestinian state, would encourage terrorism. 28% had no opinion, and only 9.7% thought that pressuring Israel would end terrorism." When asked if "the Arab world seeks the eventual destruction of Israel," 62% said they "believe the Arab world does seek to destroy Israel," and only 14.6% said they "believe the Arab world sincerely accepts Israel's right to exist."
Shamelessly ignoring the American and the Israeli public, the State Department betrays the only true American ally in the Middle East, well aware that Israel will always offer to America the hand of help when the war against terror becomes serious.
1. William B. Quandt. Decade of Decisions: American Policy Toward the Arab-Israeli Conflict 1967-1976. University of California Press. 1977. 2. Jerusalem Media and Communications Centre (JMCC) Public Opinion Poll No. 42 On Palestinian Attitudes Towards Politic including the Current Intifada - September 2001. www.jmc.org. Quoted from Independent Media Review and Analysis (IMRA), 09/28/01. www.imra.org.il
This article is from a group which is on the hardest of the hard-line right in Israel. I suppose it has some value in showing how one extreme wing of the political spectrum thinks but if you are looking for balanced thought, this ain't it.
Conventional wisdom now says that the U.S. ought to form as wide a coalition as possible as it prepares to do battle against terrorist forces around the world.
It also praises the United States for having the forbearance to wait until the culprits for the attacks on Washington and New York are identified before firing the first retaliatory missile.
Above all, goes on received wisdom, let's not hit the innocent, and let's do something to correct the "causes" of terrorism. And, for God's sakes, don't single out Islam.
These are all sensible propositions put forward by men of good will. They also couldn't be more wrong.
What binds together the societies that throughout history have been willing to commit suicide terrorism -- the Assassins in the Middle Ages, the Irish terrorists in the 19th century, the Tamil Tigers today -- is a lack of self criticism. The fault always must belong to a foreign power.
These are the roots of the rage and the grievances in some Muslim countries and there is little that outsiders can do to change this state of affairs.
There are a great many groups and minorities all over the world who have more legitimate grievances and yet they do not commit terrorism.
To start with the top one, the idea of establishing a broad coalition of civilized nations is nothing less than an invitation for paralysis. This includes even a coalition of Western governments. Some of America's European allies, Britain first and foremost, will give America critical support. Others, however, will be reluctant. And all, even Britain, will insist on having their say before decisions are taken.
Already, even before the dead are buried, voices are heard saying that the main assignment is to prevent America from acting hastily and indiscriminately. Keep a "cool head" advises German Foreign Minister Joschka Fischer. Reaction should be proportionate, say others.
But what is proportionate? About twice as many people were killed in New York as in Pearl Harbor, and all were civilians. Proportionate means civilian casualties. But members of the coalition will insist on not harming the innocent. They will also demand foolproof evidence, but even if this evidence is forthcoming in a timely fashion, they will think of other reasons for inaction.
This will be especially the case if America draws Muslim and Arab countries into the coalition as it did at the time of the Gulf War. Again, this is a most sensible proposition -- and again, it is quite unrealistic. Some Muslim governments abhor terrorists, no doubt, but they fear public opinion even more. They assume that if they were to cooperate with the West against the terrorists, there would be violent demonstrations and they might be toppled."
This Gamala website contributor goes on to paint every Arab nation with the same broad brush......evil.
But of course Bush only has America's interest as his first and foremost priority, which some Americans with dual loyalties disagree with....
Debkafile (Don't Use)
Gamala (Don't Use)
CNN APROVED FOR USE!!!
O.K. We are clear on it now!! Thanks!!!
He's right, of course. The same brush applies to the State Department. It's so full of clintonistas that Bush should have an exorcism performed there. And an extra-grade exorcism on Powell.
Would you think it strategically wise (and balanced, of course) to encourage China to establish bases in Mexico/Cuba/Panama in order to further trade and general good relations among our good friends in the war on terrorism?
Only Israeli forces are not allowed to take the fight to their enemies wherever they are. Only Israeli firms are wrong to sell to PLA businesses.
These privileges are only for franchisees of the U.S. military-industrial complex. (e.g. Loral, Boeing, GE.)
Perhaps Powell is merely following his CIC's lead...
Which has been clearly stated by Bush. The Palestinian terrorist question is second or third on his "hit" list.
His immediate priority is to first pursue ,[if it is not that too objectionable to your particular objectives],and to extinguish Bin Laden and his cohorts- "in Afghanistan and those countries who harbor them" .
Sharon is rocking the boat...the coalition of Muslim states are cooperating with the Administration's aims, not Sharon's or other 'proud' Zionists who have placed their selfish interests even above that of the United States'.And sadly also by some bifurcated citizens of the United States ...
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.