Bush baits a trap for Arafat

This was the question flashed at me by an American blogger within seconds of the President concluding his address on Thursday. The speed of modern thought is astonishing, impressive. I took a minute to make up my mind, almost fearing someone else might hit the buzzer first. But having now slept on it, I'm sure the answer is: "Continuation of something bigger."

On the face of it, you would expect a speech that once again told Israel to pull back from its present military operation to destroy as much as possible of the terrorist infrastucture in the West Bank would demoralize U.S. allies, Israel in particular. Nothing but happy noises from there, so deep as I am able to plumb Israeli officialdom. Qualified approval from the Arab world. Whether more or less "moderate," every Arab government agreed that the part about Israel pulling back was "encouraging." They then ignored or mildly rebuked the long and rather feisty sections about aiding and abetting terrorism. In other words, the parts addressed to them.

The timing was notable, as an example of diplomatic craft, for the speech was made the day before Tony Blair, the British Prime Minister, set out for Mr. Bush's ranch in Crawford, Texas -- in the awkward position of trying to support Mr. Bush while being obliged to tell him about opposition to his policies from many European colleagues. And the day after Romano Prodi, president of the European Commission, had publicly told the U.S. to step out of the "peace process," and let the European and "moderate" Arab states step in, to the task of grinding concessions out of Israel. I rather think Mr. Bush relished driving his truck over Mr. Prodi's foot.

Europe is in pain, the more excruciating because it cannot be discussed in the candour with which I will now discuss it. In France especially, but also right across Europe, there has been an extraordinary series of attacks on Jewish synagogues, schools, businesses, community centres and individuals. These appear to be still escalating, a new Kristallnacht in which Jews across Europe are now beginning to seek cover, and once again finding little sympathy from their non-Jewish neighbours.

The reality is that Europeans are increasingly afraid of their Muslim immigrants. They see what is happening now in the West Bank and Gaza, and they genuinely fear it may explode in Europe's face -- that the suicide bombers will soon be crashing into their coffee shops, their discos, their pizzerias. It is the fear that these attacks on Jews, by youth gangs from Europe's impoverished Muslim ghettoes and slums, are the dreaded precursor of a far worse "clash of civilizations" to come.

So it is not anti-Semitism, though some of the old "aristocratic" distaste for Jews certainly adds to the flavouring. Rather it is the old European instinct to appeasement.

If the existence of Israel so antagonizes the Arabs, then why must we think about this "shitty little country"? Why won't Israel just go away? If the existence of the Jews antagonizes the Muslims, then why won't the Jews go away? ("Surely there are wide open spaces for them in Wyoming," as one correspondent unselfconsciously explained.)

That the great majority of Arab and other Muslims came to Europe to escape the oppression of their own societies, and that they share in the dread of the Islamist agitators, should go without saying. They are the first to realize that the fire has begun, that it will take tremendous will now to douse it. And yet they are themselves easy to intimidate within their own ghettoized communities; and they watch their children carried away in the Islamist breeze.

One of the ways we have had in North America of coming to terms with racial and cultural tensions, is to talk about them openly within our "melting pot." If a single synagogue were firebombed here, it would be on the front pages. But if you look through the European press, you find little desire even to report on such distasteful occurrences. News of the new Kristallnacht is played down, as if, when no one notices, it will go away.

It is not just the desire to capture the large and growing potential Muslim vote. It is a real fear that anything done on behalf of the Jews may further inflame the radical Muslim constituency. The mood is: "Leave us out of this."

Instead, the effort is invested in trying to bring Israel to heel, through a more comprehensive "peace process"; in demanding that the Israelis tame their inflammatory habit of trying to defend themselves against the terrorist onslaught.

President Bush's speech Thursday, more than any made before, was addressed to the Europeans and Arabs. He knows already that the Arabs will be deaf to anything he says on the subject of terrorism; he is hoping the Europeans will listen. He has the unenviable task of trying to wake old Europe, of saying: "Look, we cannot stand for this."

He is saying (and I paraphrase): "Look, let's put all our cards on the table. Let us confirm one last time in clear public view whether Mr. Arafat will stop inciting suicide bombers, whether the moderate Arab states will acknowledge Israel's right to be, whether they will unambiguously condemn the massacres of Israeli civilians in their state-controlled media, whether in fact we have anything to talk about. We need perfect clarity on all these points, and then we'll take it from there."

This is not a new departure from established American policy. It is a development of the policy heralded a fortnight ago when the vice president, Dick Cheney, invited Yasser Arafat to meet him in Cairo -- on the condition he first publicly condemn, in Arabic, all terrorist strikes on Israel -- an invitation that Mr. Arafat then nervily declined. Mr. Bush is in effect repeating the question, and concentrating everyone's attention on Mr. Arafat's reply. I should think that Mr. Bush, by now, is already convinced that he will give the wrong answer; but he does want everyone to hear, before he proceeds.

As I wrote before, even two weeks ago Mr. Cheney and the U.S., were thus stepping between Mr. Sharon and Mr. Arafat, "taking the next dance" as it were. Even yesterday, the U.S. envoy, Anthony Zinni, was reminding Mr. Arafat of the new context in which he is viewed -- that his known alliances with international terrorists, and with regimes such as those of Iran, Syria, and Iraq, were making him into a direct enemy, not just of Israel, but of the United States.

With his speech Thursday, Mr. Bush began to make the case at large, and very publicly. One of its subtexts, addressed to the "moderate" Arab states, and by extension Europeans, was, "How can I take seriously your demands that I restrain the Israelis, when you either won't or can't restrain the Palestinians, and Mr. Arafat can't even stop inciting suicide bombers?"

The speech would certainly have been a cave-in, if there had been any indication that the U.S. was actually twisting Israel's arm. The most intrusive demand on Israel, that it stop extending settlements in the West Bank and Gaza, had already been accepted by the Sharon government.

The hourglass was set on the present "Operation Defensive Wall," which may now have only several days to run before the Secretary of State, Colin Powell, arrives in theatre. But this operation has already achieved most of its objectives, in a surprisingly short time, thanks largely to the preparatory work of "Operation Root Treatment" before it. There have been huge intelligence hauls in Ramallah and elsewhere, weapons collecting on an unprecedented scale, and a breakthrough round-up of wanted terrorists. The feverish Palestinian executions of "collaborators" are among several indications that they, too, give the Israelis high marks.

At the time of writing, the operation still had not extended into the Gaza strip. I believe the reason is that the whole thing was aimed at Mr. Arafat's own terrorist infrastructure. With the isolation of Arafat in Ramallah, Gaza has increasingly become Hamas territory, to be dealt with separately, and less urgently, since Hamas is clearly on the U.S. State Department's list of international terror organizations, and will raise fewer objections in future.

The vexing question, "What to do with Arafat?" will, thanks to Mr. Bush's present posture, become more and more a public one. Earlier this week, according to my information, both the Israelis and the Americans were negotiating with Morocco's King Mohammed about his future digs.

Mr. Bush is now putting this question before the world: "We have to do something. Don't pretend we can look away."

We can no longer pretend that World War III has not already begun. It started on 9/11/2001.

World War III is long over. United States of America's President Ronald Reagan, with a little help FRom a Pope and a Polish dockyard worker, was awarded the win in that one upon his KO defeat of the Evil Empire.

United States of America's President George Walker Bush's task -- already well in hand and under control -- is to fight and to win World War IV!

I love the smell of straight talk in the morning. It smells like victory

I especially loved it when GW moved to the 1st person singular--he said "I expect more from the Arab leadership, and I expect results." Reminded me of when I had a conversation with a Democrat last May about how much I believed in GW--said that I though it was great to have someone with an MBA in Business heading the country instead of a lifelong politician...I said that businessmen know how to look at a problem, get to the bottom line in a hurry, and demand results...everytime I hear him say that he expects results I feel tears spring into my eyes after so many years of stagnation and shame...

I also love it that the media keep underestimating the guy...I think that I can safely say that as a city dwelling Easterner we often underestimate the ability of country folks (especially Texans) to frame the case and close the deal...GW is very slowly winning over media types by his rock solid conviction and straight talk IMHO.

Yes indeed, President GWB is now making sure, who is with us or against us. When the bombing starts(after Israel withdraws), and Israel finishes off the Palestinian militants, and all their terrorist associates, any nations who will still support the militant palestinians, are against us, and are terrorists. " Those who support, housed, and feed terrorists are terrorist". The USA will be in high moral grounds to go after these terror loving nations, I'm sure the arabs will be among them.

Yes, Dubya is one cagey horse-trader, Texans are known for that.

A long time ago, President Reagan gave Gorby a video copy of one of his favorite movies, Gentle Persuasion...that's what George is doing, persuading gently, pointing at the obvious while standing firm on his foundation.

His house is not built upon sand, as x42's is

I get your drift, but I think it's only a question of semantics: is the following a "question" or a "statement"? "We have to do something. Don't pretend we can look away." Looks like a declarative sentence to me.

I don't understand your point. And I don't believe Bush is engaging in semantics, he is acknowledged as very plain spoken, and I think it's one of his strengths. You don't see him tip toeing around issues, in an attempt to avoid a question. If he isn't ready to answer a question he doesn't. In fact his whole administration is plain spoken, especially Rumsfeld. It makes them look very competent, and reassuring. But this speech was a blunder, he sacrificed the moral high ground, for little or no political gain. The authoritarian establishment in the middle-east will never support the replacement of one of their own(Iraq), with a democracy. These people only come to power by stepping over the corpse of their predecessor. They intend to die in office, not be voted out.

PLEASE TAKE ME OFF YOUR "PING" LIST, THANK YOU

America’s blind support of Israel’s gross violations of human rights and international law will not only cost billions of tax dollars but eventually American lives as well. No lobby for any foreign country should be allowed to jeopardize American interests and American lives just to serve the selfish interests of a foreign power. America’s government has only one justification for existence—to protect the lives and interests of Americans. It’s time to start asking Americans, including our elected officials: Which country are you loyal to?
--Charley Reese Aug. 20, 2001

Apparently you have seen NONE of the literature emerging from Arab scholars who agree that since 9/11 the Arab world, despite what they say in "the street" have developed a strong respectful fear of the U.S. that did not exist before.

They need that same respect and fear of Isreal. Forget negotiations.

The only thing that argues against any of this Syran stuff happening is that if the Arabs have any of these weapons, history has shown that they use them sooner rather than later. I would think that one of these countries would have already used bio or another weapon if they indeed had it and could deliver it, regardless of Isreal's nuke threat.

Actually Debka file confirmed the Intel I had been following earlier..Someone did run a covert op in Syria..they blew up Syrias largest underground facility near Homs.
The facility produces the newer Scud C/D,fuel..both solid and liquid allong with Syrias XV nerve agents.
Bush wanted to talk with North Korea prior to this operation in March..North Korea refused.
The reported operation mentions the deaths of many North Korean technitions..now..suddenly North Korea wants to talk to Bush.
The Suicide terror that was ramped up in late march was directed by Iran..to force Israel and U.S. away from Syrias missile command.
Recently the IAF have been destroying Syrian radar sites in Lebanon..most notably the large array near Baalbek.

All that was ever "good at the heart of Israel" was the notion of a re-born Jewish state where God said it should be. There can be no compromise with that. What was "rotten" was Americanized Jewish liberalism that has allowed this situation to develop, in which one "negotiates" with suicide bombers.

Hmm. Notice there has not been ONE suicide bombing since the Israeli "invasion?" I call that both fear AND respect.

It is the nature of inferior cultures to do stupid things. Arabic culture is stupid.

Interesting observation. I'd noticed that when dealing with Arabs, there is often less than meets the eye. Subtlety and finesse aren't in their playbook. Unsophisticated and brutish, they respect only raw force.

You mistake people who are not dressed in official uniforms for "civilians." And I wouldn't loathe any nation that protected itself from mad, suicidal terrorists such as the Pales. Why aren't you worried about the PALESTINIANS' "world image?" Answer: they don't have an image of humane or civilized action.

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.