Posted on 11/19/2001 9:07:12 PM PST by ouroboros
"Israel controls the Senate," said J. William Fulbright, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, in 1973. "We should be more concerned about the United States' interests." That nothing has changed was evident this weekend. Secretary of State Powell received a letter, instigated by the Israeli lobby and signed by 89 U.S. senators, directing him not to interfere with Israel's crushing of the Palestinian uprising.
President Bush may have promised the Peace Party, Tony Blair and the Saudis he will use his muscle to broker a just peace. If he did, he made a promise he cannot keep. For the conditions of peace that seemed present when Ehud Barak led Israel no longer exist. The moment has passed, the window has closed.
Real peace requires something close to what Barak offered Arafat: a Palestinian state with full sovereignty over Gaza, the West Bank, Arab East Jerusalem and the Islamic holy places. This would entail a dismantling of Israeli settlements and withdrawal to something like the borders of 1967.
That is impossible now. Sharon not only distrusts Arafat, he detests him and rejects the Oslo formula of land-for-peace. Sharon believes the Arabs will use a Palestinian state as a base camp for a new war of annihilation. He won his office by accusing Barak of pandering to terror and inviting national suicide. Should he offer Arafat a similar deal, his Cabinet would break up and he would be replaced by Benjamin Netanyahu.
More important, with this latest intifada marked by massacres of children at pizza parlors, Israelis no longer believe security can be found cheek-by-jowl with an Arafat-led Palestinian state. Who can blame them?
But if Arafat is considered by Israelis to be a terrorist, among the Palestinians, he is increasingly viewed as a poodle of America and an appeaser of Zion. Palestinians have lost 700 dead in this uprising – including women and children – and thousands wounded. For fighting against Israeli troops, it is Hamas and Islamic Jihad who are capturing the hearts of the young. Arafat's mandate is running out.
Moreover, Bush cannot force Sharon to give up occupied land, for he cannot threaten Sharon with a cut-off in aid. Should he try, he will call down the rage of Congress and the wrath of the Israeli lobby and its Amen Corner. Not since Dwight Eisenhower, safely re-elected, ordered Ben-Gurion to get his army out of Sinai in 1957 has a president compelled Israel to meet U.S. demands.
When Israeli and U.S. policies clash, it is U.S. presidents who back down. For 30 years, the United States has held that settlements in the territories occupied in the 1967 war were "illegal" and impediments to peace. Yet, despite $100 billion in U.S. aid to Israel since 1972 – $20,000 for every Israeli – the number of settlers has risen from 8,400 to 357,000. Israel ignores U.S. pleas and demands, for it knows they are bluster and bluff, designed for Arab consumption.
Should Bush invest his postwar popularity and prestige in a Palestine with its capital in East Jerusalem, he will see both dissipated, while failing, even as his predecessors have failed.
Already, Bush's suggestion that he supports Israeli concessions for a Palestinian state, to draw down anti-American venom in the Islamic world, was met with Sharon's retort that Israel will not play the role of Czechoslovakia to Bush's Neville Chamberlain. In a normal relationship, such a gross and gratuitous insult would have brought a recall of the U.S. ambassador. Instead, it produced a wimpish little peep of protest from Ari Fleischer.
Bush should look over the horizon and ask himself what Israel will demand as the price of a Palestinian state. It is: scores of billions of U.S. dollars to take down settlements, whose building we opposed, and a permanent U.S.-Israeli military alliance, backed up by the presence of U.S. troops. This would guarantee Americans fighting in every future Israeli war. And this we cannot give.
Prediction: Bush and Powell will start up the road to a brokered peace and find they are on a political Highway of Death. Karl Rove will walk into the Oval Office and say, "Mr. President, it is not worth it, it is not working – we are down to 60 percent in the polls. Let's go back to benign neglect."
Israelis will emerge victorious and delighted. The Arabs will be frustrated and outraged, and Bush's prestige in the Arab world will vanish as his father's did after Desert Storm. In Kuwait, they no longer name their children Bush, but Osama. So, the downward spiral toward an Arab-Israeli and U.S.-Islamic war will continue and the enemies of peace, on all sides, will be exulted, and exalted.
Where have you gone, Gen. Eisenhower?
Patrick J. Buchanan was twice a candidate for the Republican presidential nomination and the Reform Party’s candidate in 2000. Now a commentator and columnist, he served three presidents in the White House, was a founding panelist of three national televison shows, and is the author of six books. His current position is chairman of The American Cause. His newest book, "Death of the West," will be published in January.
Why is it so difficult for people to see how so MUCH immigration and so many illegals are overwhelming our nation? What is so scary about bringing things back under control? " Grrrrrrrrr
Thanks for the ping.
this is true. the conditions have not existed since 1 ad. biblical prophecy tells us that peace in the middle east is not going to happen.
Congratulations on buying into the mass anti-Buchanan hysteria promoted by any who disagree with him. Your highlighting of this phrase without any sort of supporting context makes you guilty of exactly the same sort of slander liberals are famed for.
Since you seemed to have missed the context: What Buchanan is saying is that the US cannot guarantee peace in the mid-east, because we cannot force Israel into any action, and any threat to do so - a threat backed by the removal of the foreign aid - would be shouted down in Congress. Do you disagree with this analysis, or are you just supersensitive to offending anyone?
I say if Israel must, take another 50 miles as a wider perimeter, as a pre-emptive move for their own security.
Would you guarantee, and permanently post, US troops in the region to support this, thus also guaranteeing the involvement of US troops in evert Arab-Israeli skirmish down the road?
Actually during the 73 war Israeli tanks were wel no their way to damascus when Nixon told them NO (as that could have pushed things into wwIII) they turned around and went back to the golan.
Guys, HERE'S one for you. Shows what needs to be done. Agrees with Buchanan. Peace and love, George.
After many months of pressure from the US government, Prime Minister Sharon finally agrees to meet with Arafat to discuss the creation of a Palestinian State.
They walk in the room at the same time, and, along with their respective staffs, take their seats on opposite sides of the long, negotiating table.
Arafat speaks first, eager to get started.
"Well, let's get going, time is wasting."
Sharon looks across, and speaks: "It is traditional for us, that before meetings of such importance we tell a story from our History, would that be OK?"
Smuggly, Arafat gives him the "go ahead."
Sharon begins:
"After wondering 40 years in the desert, Moses finally leads his people to the Promised land. He watches them put up their tents on a river side, readying themselves for the long process of settling the area."
"Moses looks at the clean, sparkling water in the river, and thinks that it is time to cleanse his body. He disrobes and enters the cool water, spending the next several minutes washing himself. He finishes and walks out of the water, looking for his clothes; to his utter dismay, he realizes that they are gone, taken from the rock where he left them."
"He looks around and sees nothing other than two Jewish children tending to a small flock of sheep nearby."
"He hides his nakedness behind a rock and shouts at them, asking if they had seen his clothes. The children shout back that they had seen some Palestinian kids take them a few moments earlier."
Arafat jumps up from his seat in anger, shouting at Sharon.
"It's always the same with you, always "blame the Palestinians", they are all lies, even your History is built on lies!"
Red and out of breath from the angry outburst, Arafat shouts at Sharon.
"Lies, all lies! There were no Palestinians back then!"
To which Sharon quietly replies: "OK, then...NOW we can begin the talks."
Fair enough.
"Israel controls the Senate," said J. William Fulbright, chairman of the Foreign Relations Committee, in 1973.
First sentence, same stupid obsession. ¡Adiós!
Screw Israel and cater to Islamic Arabs. Beautiful!
I don't know why Pat would bemoan racial and cultural diversity. Pat's attitude is especially ironic since he is descended from Irish immigrants.
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.