Opponents of the Iraq war are either predicting we will lose, or are advocating that we depart prematurely - which will make defeat a fact. Many of them use the analogy of the US withdrawal from Viet Nam or Reagan's withdrawal from Beirut as the basis for their argument.
But there is an equal argument that the US pullout from Beirut was the first of many strategic military mistakes made by the US that has contributed to the horrible situation in the Mideast today. The US pullout from Lebanon emboldened Iran and their Lebanese surrogate, Hezbollah. Since then, Iran has become the epicenter of state sponsored Islamic extremism in the Middle East, and Hezbollah has transformed from a minor terrorist group into a large scale army whose existence is devoted to provoking instability in Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, Israel, Gaza, as well as in Iraq.
The critics of the Iraq war cry "pull out", as if there are zero consequences. When we pulled out of Viet Nam in 1975, it led to horrors that engulfed the region. The Khmer Rouge killed 1-2 million fellow Cambodians in a genocidal rampage. In Viet Nam, up to a million died in re-education camps and millions fled, mostly by boat. The defeat of the US in Viet Nam emboldened Brezhnev and the Soviets went on a geo-political offensive in the third world for over 10 years. While I am glad we left Viet Nam, there were consequences that we didn't anticipate. I say this as a former anti-Viet Nam war activist.
The pretenses that led the US war in Iraq, whether you think they were morally right or wrong - are totally irrelevant to the discussion of "what do we do now". There is no doubt that Iraq is a mess, but the reality is that the coalition forces are making slow progress that, even today, far exceeds the doomsday pre-war predictions. Do we want our troops out of harms way in Iraq? Of course. Do we want to leave open the possibility that millions could die as a result of a premature withdrawal? No. Do we want to see the US further vilified in the global community for letting Iraq and her neighbors convulse in a spasm of violence that may last decades? No. Do we want to embolden the global jihadist Muslim extremists? No. Do we want to send the wrong signal to our allies that we aren't to be trusted? No.
Rather than opposition to the war in Iraq based on partisan opportunism, maybe the discussion of ending the war in Iraq should center on pressing our military leaders to develop more potent techniques and strategies in order to win the war. Winning a war has always taken longer than losing.
Monday, June 25, 2007
Friday, June 15, 2007
The Silver Lining to the Hamas coup in Gaza
The violent coup in Gaza by the Islamic extremist terrorist group Hamas this past week is a tragic turn of events for the Palestinians and for the prospects for peace in the region. There are, however, useful lessons that the West can learn from this tragedy.
First and foremost, Western pressure to impose democracy doesn't necessarily work the way we expect: The Palestinian people overwhelmingly voted for Hamas, a group whose goal is the total destruction of Israel. We also have learned this lesson in Iraq.
Secondly, giving legitimacy to puppet "heads of state" doesn't work: Facts on the ground should trump our desire for peace. The West wasted substantial diplomatic currency and valuable time by giving former Palestinian PM Abbas undeserved international legitimacy - when he was obviously powerless and not endorsed by the Palestinian people.
Lastly, diplomacy has its limitations: Papering over a conflict with a worthless peace agreement is more damaging than doing nothing.
The Israeli government has clearly stated that it is not pleased with the consolidation of the Gaza strip under Hamas. This takes the likelihood of peaceful two state solution as envisioned by the quartet off the map, and forces all the parties to examine how this deterioration happened (even after the Israelis pulled out of Gaza 3 years ago) – and where the parties go from here.
Of course, the prime suspects in this deterioration are Egypt and Iran. In an effort to give Islamic extremists a place to vent their violent tendencies outside of Egyptian territory, Egypt allowed the large scale smuggling of Islamic fighters from across the Arab world, and allowed the smuggling of massive quantities of arms into Gaza. Iran, on the other hand, trained the fighters and supplied the explosives that were being smuggled into Gaza.
The silver lining to this event is that the pretenses that have allowed this deterioration to develop are gone. Now the conflict may actually reach a climatic end where it is allowed to "burn itself out' - and the possibility of peace could once again emerge.
First and foremost, Western pressure to impose democracy doesn't necessarily work the way we expect: The Palestinian people overwhelmingly voted for Hamas, a group whose goal is the total destruction of Israel. We also have learned this lesson in Iraq.
Secondly, giving legitimacy to puppet "heads of state" doesn't work: Facts on the ground should trump our desire for peace. The West wasted substantial diplomatic currency and valuable time by giving former Palestinian PM Abbas undeserved international legitimacy - when he was obviously powerless and not endorsed by the Palestinian people.
Lastly, diplomacy has its limitations: Papering over a conflict with a worthless peace agreement is more damaging than doing nothing.
The Israeli government has clearly stated that it is not pleased with the consolidation of the Gaza strip under Hamas. This takes the likelihood of peaceful two state solution as envisioned by the quartet off the map, and forces all the parties to examine how this deterioration happened (even after the Israelis pulled out of Gaza 3 years ago) – and where the parties go from here.
Of course, the prime suspects in this deterioration are Egypt and Iran. In an effort to give Islamic extremists a place to vent their violent tendencies outside of Egyptian territory, Egypt allowed the large scale smuggling of Islamic fighters from across the Arab world, and allowed the smuggling of massive quantities of arms into Gaza. Iran, on the other hand, trained the fighters and supplied the explosives that were being smuggled into Gaza.
The silver lining to this event is that the pretenses that have allowed this deterioration to develop are gone. Now the conflict may actually reach a climatic end where it is allowed to "burn itself out' - and the possibility of peace could once again emerge.
Tuesday, June 05, 2007
Resurrect the idea of expelling the Palestinians
As distasteful as the idea of "expelling" a people from one area, and re-settling them in another may be – especially in the current climate of political correctness, the need for Mideast peace and the lack of viable options necessitates legitimizing this idea, if only for the sake of discussion.
No one bats an eye when the press or Iraqi politicians mention moving Sunnis to one district, Shiites to another. The world gave a Nobel peace prize to those who moved Cypriots and Greeks to different sides of Cyprus in order to achieve what negotiations couldn't.
At the end of the day, all the wasted breath on who did what to whom is just an endless cycle of regurgitated propaganda. Israel is a full fledged country, just as legitimate as Australia or the United States. No one is demanding that America give the USA back to the Indians, and I don't see the Australians beating themselves up because they crowded out the Aborigines. At his stage of the world, facts on the ground trump Arab/Muslim sensitivities that can never be satisfied.
If the world's political leaders want the Mideast conflict settled, then they should look for better solutions than what they have put forward to date. A good place to start is for "Palestinian expulsion" to be accepted in the marketplace of ideas. At the very least, just legitimizing the conversation might make the Palestinians realize that the world – and Israel – has a limited amount of patience, and that they will pay a price for their folly. Enough of this catering to the Palestinian's love affair with victimhood.
As for where these expelled Palestinians are to go? That is likely to be a far easier solution than settling the current conflict. It's an Arab problem with an Arab solution. There is no shortage of arable vacant land in the Arab world, and there is no shortage of Arab/Muslim petro-dollars to make the transition easier.
No one bats an eye when the press or Iraqi politicians mention moving Sunnis to one district, Shiites to another. The world gave a Nobel peace prize to those who moved Cypriots and Greeks to different sides of Cyprus in order to achieve what negotiations couldn't.
At the end of the day, all the wasted breath on who did what to whom is just an endless cycle of regurgitated propaganda. Israel is a full fledged country, just as legitimate as Australia or the United States. No one is demanding that America give the USA back to the Indians, and I don't see the Australians beating themselves up because they crowded out the Aborigines. At his stage of the world, facts on the ground trump Arab/Muslim sensitivities that can never be satisfied.
If the world's political leaders want the Mideast conflict settled, then they should look for better solutions than what they have put forward to date. A good place to start is for "Palestinian expulsion" to be accepted in the marketplace of ideas. At the very least, just legitimizing the conversation might make the Palestinians realize that the world – and Israel – has a limited amount of patience, and that they will pay a price for their folly. Enough of this catering to the Palestinian's love affair with victimhood.
As for where these expelled Palestinians are to go? That is likely to be a far easier solution than settling the current conflict. It's an Arab problem with an Arab solution. There is no shortage of arable vacant land in the Arab world, and there is no shortage of Arab/Muslim petro-dollars to make the transition easier.
Subscribe to:
Comments (Atom)