Long Spoon Diplomacy (Tom Friedman ULTRA BARF)

NY Slimes ^ | Oct. 9, 2003 | Thomas Friedman

[Alouette]

There is an old proverb that says, "If you're going to sup with the devil, use a long spoon." Does the White House pantry have any long spoons? I ask because if President Bush really wants to achieve his objectives in Iraq, he may have to sup a little with Yasir Arafat, the Iranian leader Ali Khamenei and Syria's president, Bashar al-Assad.

First, let me state my own bias: Iraq is the whole ballgame. If we can produce a reasonably decent, constitutionally grounded Iraqi government, good things will happen all around the Middle East. If Iraq turns into a quagmire, it will be a disaster for U.S. interests all around the world. So, for me, everything should be focused on getting Iraq on the right path.

Which is why we may need to let some of the Axis of Evil out on parole — or at least out on work-release. We can't allow the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to spread into a Israeli-Syrian-Shiite-Hezbollah conflict. It would greatly complicate the ability of Iraqis to work openly with us and would greatly enhance the ability of anti-U.S. forces in Iraq to mobilize militants.

I have enormous sympathy for Israel's predicament in confronting the madness of suicide bombers. No society has ever faced such a thing. But every military strategy Ariel Sharon has tried has failed. Maybe the only way Israel can deal with this phenomenon is by trying anew to do business with Mr. Arafat — indirectly, through his new prime minister, Ahmed Qurei.

Here's the logic: Israel says Mr. Arafat is totally irrelevant as a negotiating partner and totally responsible for all Palestinian terrorism. But Israel keeps him totally powerless under house arrest, and the Bush team says Israel can't kill or deport him. Israel has the worst of all worlds: it's getting nothing for keeping Mr. Arafat locked up — except the inability to get any other Palestinian figure to work with Israel, because Mr. Arafat still holds the legitimacy.

The former Mideast envoy Dennis Ross has a useful suggestion: Israel should try to strike a deal with Mr. Qurei. Offer to give him what he needs: "a two-way ticket" for Mr. Arafat (so he can come and go without fear of deportation).

In return, Mr. Arafat would have to give Mr. Qurei "carte blanche," Mr. Ross says, to crack down on Islamic terrorists in exchange for Israel's easing up on Palestinians. I know there are no simple solutions or sure things here, but to not explore every alternative, again and again, is to invite total despair. Moreover, the best way to create an alternative to Mr. Arafat is to strengthen Mr. Qurei.

As for the Syrians, they got the message from the U.S. invasion of Iraq, but maybe too much so. They are so convinced they are next on the Bush hit parade that they have been easing the entry of anti-U.S. guerrillas into Iraq — because the more preoccupied the U.S. is there, the less likely it is to invade Syria. It may be worth a new high-level strategic dialogue with the Syrians to strike a deal assuring them they will not be treated as part of the Axis of Evil if they stem the flow of militants and arms into Iraq.

Finally, Iran. There is enormous pressure within the Bush team to confront the Iranians before they develop a nuclear option. Iran, though, is worried about a pending U.S. invasion. I would use that leverage to open a strategic dialogue with Iran about the nuclear issue and about using its considerable influence among some Iraqi Shiites to help stabilize Iraq.

As Ray Takeyh, an Iran expert at the U.S. National Defense University, wrote in the latest issue of The National Interest: "The Bush administration finally has the opportunity to arrive at the modus vivendi with Iran that has eluded previous U.S. administrations. Washington should capitalize on Iran's emerging pragmatic tendencies and reach a settlement with the theocracy on issues of common concern."

The Bush team's tough-minded approach to all of these bad actors has gotten their attention. Hats off. But now it has to decide whether U.S. interests can best be served by trying to take them all down at once, which the U.S. public has no energy for and which would clearly hamper us in Iraq, or by trying to engage them — with a long spoon — to maximize the chances of success in Iraq.

Trying to remake Iraq is hard enough — trying to do it with the opposition of all the neighbors would be even harder. And most important, a liberalized Iraq would be the greatest long-term force for change in Iran and Syria. I don't see what we have to lose by trying, but I sure know what we have to win.

[Alouette]

In return, Mr. Arafat would have to give Mr. Qurei "carte blanche,"

Earth to Tom: Qurei is out, and Arafat is ready to croak.

[Alouette]

FRmail me to be added or removed from this pro-Israel ping list.

[Support Free Republic]

Strong Conservative Forums Help Prevent Candidates Like This From Winning Elections
	Finish Strong. Donate Here By Secure Server Or mail checks to FreeRepublic , LLC PO BOX 9771 FRESNO, CA 93794 or you can use PayPal at Jimrob@psnw.com
STOP BY AND BUMP THE FUNDRAISER THREAD- It is in the breaking news sidebar!

[Cicero]

Not only that, but the real point of the proverb, "He who would sup with the devil needs a long spoon" is this: "Don't sup with the devil unless it's absolutely unavoidable. It's a bad idea."

What a maroon.

[okie01]

Without Thomas Friedman constantly creating brilliant new diplomatic initiatives, where would this world be?

[Shermy]

Like the "NYTimes/Saudi Peace Plan" plagiarized from the King of Jordan?

[Salem]

I'll condense this naive globalists' whole article thesis: We throw another thousand innocent Jews to the blood-thirsty, insatiable maw of Middle East Islamic terrorism to learn what naive globalists' like this haven't already learned--militant Islam isn't making any "deals."

This guy is incredible.

  


If you'd like to be on or off this
Christian Supporters of Israel ping list,
please FR mail me. ~
    
Letter To The President In Support Of Israel ~
'Final Solution,' Phase 2 ~

[section9]

Friedman is right about the Iranians. If Bush went to Tehran it would set off an earthquake in the Middle East, the present architecture of which still relies on an assumption of Iranian-American enmity. It might also give the Iranians a grubstake in our efforts in Iraq.

But he is altogether wrong about the Pallies. They backed the wrong horse, and Yasir is yesterday's news.

Be Seeing You,

Chris

[spectacularbid2003]

blah blah blah blah blah - and Jimmy Carter can work out all of the details.

When are these guys going to learn?

[Akira]

Maybe the only way Israel can deal with this phenomenon is by trying anew to do business with Mr. Arafat — indirectly, through his new prime minister, Ahmed Qurei.

See my tag line. Why don't people realize that any prime minister Arafat will allow won't be allowed to do anything Arafat doesn't want. Any PA PM is a puppet and we are still dealing with Arafat. Arafat DOES NOT want a two-state solution, he proved this beyond the shadow of a doubt when he rejected Barak's deal without even making a counterproposal! He's a proven terrorist and there's no reason Sharon or anybody else should have to deal with him.

His take on Syria is also off.

[Tabi Katz]

"Iran, though, is worried about a pending U.S. invasion. I would use that leverage to open a strategic dialogue with Iran about the nuclear issue..."

Maybe this will work as well as it did in North Korea.

[Norse]

Who is "Jimmy Carter?" Oh, you mean "Jimmah Cattah"