By resisting Israel’s continuing control over the Palestinian
territory, the leaders of Hamas hope to end the occupation. Similarly,
Hezbollah’s militia, which emerged during the 18-year Israeli
occupation of Lebanon, hopes to stop Israeli air and ground incursions
into Lebanon. Yet, both Hamas and Hezbollah remain oblivious of the
fact that in the long run no militant Arab resistance can prevail over
Israel’s armed forces, the strongest military in the Middle East.
Israel’s government, which routinely denounces all Arab resistance
as “terrorism,” also harbors unrealistic expectations.
After four weeks of a devastating air and land war against Hezbollah’s
militia in Lebanon, the Israelis have only worsened their isolation
in the region. They simply fail to recognize that no amount of destruction
inflicted upon their neighbors can ever bring them lasting security,
nor can Israel ever achieve peace with Arabs and Muslims by military
means. Unless the Israeli government decides at long last to end the
39-year occupation of Palestinian lands, both they and their American
friends are prone to encounter ever more Muslim hatred, hostility,
resistance, and potential terrorism.
The Olmert government, as well as the White House and most members of Congress,
appear determined to stay their hopeless, unconditionally pro-Israeli course
that offers no resolution to the conflict. They demand the enforcement of U.
N. Security Council resolution 1559 to disband Hezbollah’s militia, but
they choose to ignore the over sixty resolutions that call for an end to Israel’s
numerous transgressions against its neighbors, most of all against the Palestinians.
If President Bush and Israel’s cheerleaders in Congress recognized the
futility of the present confrontation between Israel and Hezbollah, they could
easily use America’s financial clout to end this tragic bloodbath immediately.
Wherever in the Middle East the Bush administration got involved, its assessments
proved to be unrealistic. In Afghanistan, the Taliban threat has been increasing.
In Iraq, the U.S. commander, General John Abizaid, concedes
that the sectarian violence “is probably as bad as I’ve seen it.”
Fortunately, President Bush has so far resisted the neoconservatives’ urging
to take military action against Iran and Syria. Although Israel and the U.S.
accuse both countries of supporting Hezbollah, the President has not allowed
Secretary Rice to address the issue with their leaders face to face. The Bush
administration wants Iran to give up its right to the enrichment of uranium under
the Nuclear Non-Proliferation Treaty but it refuses to discuss any curbs on Israel’s
arsenal of some 200 nuclear weapons.
The peace that Mr. Bush wants in the Middle East apparently requires the continuing
American domination of the region, with Israel as the enforcer.
Muslim governments that object are viewed as threats. Such neocolonialist policies,
however, are neither in America’s national interest nor in the interest
of an Israel that wants to live in peace with its neighbors.
Due to his unrealistic assessment of Hezbollah’s military and political
strength, Mr. Bush has--for four long weeks--refused to support a ceasefire.
He still seems to expect that Israel’s superior armed forces will totally
eradicate Hezbollah’s militia. He even ordered sophisticated American precision
bombs to be rushed to the Israeli air force so that it could hasten the destruction
of Lebanon’s infrastructure. Nevertheless, Hezbollah’s militia continues
to fight.
Instead of ending the slaughter, the President’s mismanagement of the crisis
has turned not only the Muslim world but also America’s European allies
against him. In Iraq, moreover, Mr. Bush gave Moqtada al-Sadr’s Shi’ite
militia another reason to foment another uprising.
What we are presently witnessing in the Middle East is not only a series of brutal
confrontations, it is also a tragic comedy of errors on all sides.