Continuing with her theme of "birth pangs" of a new Middle East, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice tried to downplay expectations of a quick fix in Lebanon or the Middle East. "I am a student of history, so perhaps I have a little bit more patience with the enormous change in the international system and the complete shifting of tectonic plates, and I don't expect it to happen in a few days or even a year," she said aboard the plane on her way to Asia.
Clearly it is the neocon mindset that inspires such grandiose, if dangerously na•ve, statements. The student of history in Ms. Rice should be saying, "what we are doing in the Middle East alone outdoes the natural disasters that have befallen the earth in recent years." So dark is the outcome of US policy. Doesn't the secretary know the world is not clamoring for instantaneous change? Instead it is railing against a US policy that is illogical, illegal and ill fated. Here is the illogical part.
Washington's stated goals are the same as Israel's - to disarm, if not destroy the Hezbollah, neutralize Iranian and Syrian influence in the region and to strengthen the Lebanese government. Washington likes and also mobilizes Arab support for these objectives.
Meanwhile, Israel's security context has not improved. Instead the "threats" are ever increasing. At the core of these threats is Israel's aggressive search for security and the unresolved Palestinian issue. Both promote political extremism and encourage armed militias across the Middle East.
Ironically a nuclear-armed Israel, a regional superpower, still remains insecure.
How is the policy illegal? The US works to selectively implement UN Security Council resolutions. While it awards a carte blanche to Israelis to pursue its security as it considers fit, it remains indifferent to the plight of Palestinians. US policy has enabled Israel to violate legally laid down parameters for state behavior. It remains a state that refuses to lay down its borders. Israel occupied Lebanese territory for two decades and continues to occupy Syrian territory. Its gross and systematic violation of Palestinian rights and occupation of their homeland continues. It terrorizes the Palestinians at will - all in the name of self-defense.
The media tells thousands of stories of the atrocities committed by Israel. In cyberspace endless postings of the tormented and tortured Lebanese and Palestinians appear. Even some Israeli citizens are boldly criticizing their government's policies and conduct. Millions and millions are reading these dispatches from the killing fields of Lebanon and Gaza daily. Endless articles report Israeli defiance of the International Committee of Red Cross, preventing water and electricity supplies to Palestinians in Gaza. Israeli state terrorism needs no formal branding of illegality. But for those seeking that, hear the words of UN officials from the secretary-general and others. Read the endless UN resolutions that Israel, supported by the US, has violated.
And finally for the future of US policy. It is ill fated. The time between policy implementation and its abysmal failure is now shrinking. First Iraq and now Lebanon. Reporting on what went on inside as Bush began formulating policy after Israeli's brutal and relentless attacks killing and displacing Lebanese civilians, the latest issue of Time magazine says: " For now his focus was to win the support of friendly Arab leaders." Bush's message to the leaders of Jordan, Lebanon and Egypt was that Iran is trying to control the region, that Israel might dislodge the Beirut government and that Syria might take back Lebanon. Yet his main goal is to win their agreement that the villain is Hezbollah. Bush tells them that the real culprits are the militant wings of Hamas and Hezbollah. Capturing the atmosphere in the Bush circle, Newsweek reports: "The calls go well; the Arab leaders agree with the president. Listening on their own handsets, US National Security Advisor Stephen) Hadley gives Bush the thumbs up and Rice grins." Bush was following former US Secretary of State Henry Kissinger's strategy. Line up elite Arab support against all the elements within the Arab world that threaten Israel's security. Rest will follow. Kissinger in the 1970s opted for the "salami tactic." Then US policy went in with its weapons supplies, exploited existing cleavages within the Arab governments and also their growing discomfort with continuous support of the Palestinian cause. The governments concluded there was an internal and external cost for providing genuine political support for the Palestinians. The inter-play between this, the US pro-Israeli policy and the US advocacy of Israel within the Arab world created a shared objective - that of containing the Palestinian problem, not actually working to resolve it. Alongside this containment the US worked for Israeli security. And the end result is an insecure and aggressive nuclear state in the heart of the region fighting to kill the spirit of the Palestinians. But the message of the Palestinian struggle is unambiguous: Never give up.
And on this latest round. Within less than three weeks the White House must be reassessing its policy. The policy was articulated as one that would work for "a sustainable peace." Its primary objective was to ensure Israeli security by destroying the Hezbollah - even if it means support for Israel's endless destruction of the Lebanese people and their country. The outcome has instead been Hezbollah's increasing popularity among the Arab public cutting across all religious and sectarian divide, increase in anti-American sentiment, Arab government's forced review of their policy on Lebanon and muting of their criticism of Hezbollah, increase in Lebanese support for Hezbollah, heightening of Israel's siege mentality. Now the US is doing the exact reverse of what it did in Bosnia. Washington helped stop or contain killings in Bosnia; it is facilitating killings in Lebanon.
The Arab hostility toward Israel was inevitable given that its creation was at the cost of the Palestinian's homeland and Arabs' pride. But instead of neutralizing the Arab hostility by working for a Palestinian homeland Washington sought to wean away or frighten the Arab regimes from supporting the Palestinian cause with the disastrous results we see today.
The Washington mindset is best described in this week's Newsweek. "Bush thinks the new war vindicates his early vision of the region's struggle: of good versus evil, civilization versus terrorism, freedom versus Islamic fascism...Yet he still trusts his gut to tell him what's right and he still expects others to follow his lead. For Bush diplomacy is not the art of a negotiated compromise. It's a smoother way to get where he wants to go..." (July 31)
