A rchive Date
[ 23-03-2002 ]
Category
[ International Relations ]
sub-Categoy
[ Israel ]
|
[http://www.canoe.ca/Columnists/stanway.html
Israel can be tormented but not destroyed
By PAUL STANWAY -- Edmonton Sun
March 20, 2002
I've been fascinated with the Middle East since my first exposure to its volatile mix of history, religion and politics as a rookie foreign correspondent in 1973.
The region demonstrates both the best and worst of which human beings are capable. But you don't need me to tell you that. You can read about it in your newspaper every day.
Unfortunately, in the daily coverage of the latest terrorist bombing and inevitable bloody retaliation, the context gets lost. That was the problem with Foreign Affairs Minister Bill Graham's recent mild chastising of Israel.
Pointing out that tit-for-tat violence solves nothing is simply stating the obvious, adds nothing to the debate and only serves to irritate the Israelis. They know that violent retaliation will not foster a lasting peace with their Palestinian neighbours.
They don't do it to promote peace or in the faint hope that the Palestinian leadership will suddenly abandon terrorism. They do it because they are a small nation surrounded by enemies and believe they must make themselves look bigger and more aggressive than they actually are. Israelis believe that a really determined attack by their Arab neighbours could destroy in a matter of hours everything they have worked for half a century to create. It is an article of faith and a creed of self-defence which binds all Israelis together: doves and hawks, liberals and conservatives, soldiers and peace activists. Being Israelis, they can disagree on everything else, but they will all agree on that.
And they're wrong.
This was not always the case. The destruction of Israel was a real possibility during the Cold War. Until the late 1980s, a successful attack by Soviet-backed Arab armies would have been the end of Israel, because the U.S. would not have gone to war with the Soviets to restore the Jewish state.
Israel knew it and the Americans knew it. Thankfully the Russians were never sure.
But a lot has happened in the past dozen years. The Soviet Union is gone and Moscow is no longer able or even interested in financing Arab armies. Without Soviet involvement Israel is well able to defend itself, but if its survival were threatened there is no doubt that the U.S. could and would go to war to preserve Israel.
The proof, ironically, lies in the American defence of Kuwait. The clear message of the Gulf War is that the U.S. is willing and able to use its military clout to support its allies. The elimination of Israel by its Arab neighbours is no longer even theoretically possible.
That should have brought peace between Israelis and Palestinians a lot closer, and in a way it did. I was in Israel during the latter months of the Gulf War and witnessed the incredible restraint shown by Israel under bombardment by Iraqi Scud missiles. Israel could have had warplanes over Iraq within minutes of the first Scud launch, but for the sake of peace they resisted the impulse.
More than that, once the dust from the Gulf War had settled the Israelis agreed to the creation of a limited Palestinian state in the West Bank and Gaza as an experiment in peace. Sadly, that experiment is close to failure thanks to the Palestinian leadership's willingness to use the new state as a base of operations for terrorist attacks.
That isn't going to change any time soon. Over the years I have met a number of Palestinians who yearn for peaceful co-existence with the Israelis, but the culture of violence and hatred for Israel is so ingrained in Palestinian culture that to promote peace is to risk intimidation and death. The terrorist attacks will continue.
The difference is that no Arab armies wait in the wings to come to the aid of the Palestinians, who should become increasingly isolated as the U.S. war on terrorism continues.
Israel can be tormented but it cannot now be destroyed, and in light of this fundamental change Israel has room to rethink its policies towards the Palestinians.
If Bill Graham had said that, he would still have been hissed at. But at least he might have said something useful.
Letters to the editor should be sent to letters@edm.sunpub.com.
 World Fact Book (CIA)]
|