Opinion, May 2003, Al-Jazeerah.info
Human Price of the Israeli Occupation of Palestine
Israeli daily aggression on the Palestinian people
Mission and meaning of Al-Jazeerah
Cities, localities, and tourist attractions
Neo-conservatives do not typify US,
Luc Debieuvre
Gulf News, Paris |
Where is America? The question may sound odd to all those who rightfully
are witnessing the implementation of the Pax Americana in the region and,
to start with, in Iraq: a State Department official appointed as a Civil
Administrator, a retired American General looking after "small
business between friends", another American supervising the future
oil policy of the country, an American company chosen to implement a new
TV channel, not to forget the American crony Chalabi who should build up a
20-year career opponent in just a few months time.
As the American blueprint put it, next talk of the town in Iraq will
match with free market, privatisation, electronic stock market trading,
tax overhaul.
The U.S. Agency for International Development is on the verge to award a
$70 million contract to Bearing Point Inc. for part of the work, no
bidding of course, and other friends are joining soon. Elsewhere in
the region or, even, wherever in the world since Richard Perle's magic
words "we will not stop there; we shall continue through all means to
fight against the countries who host terrorists or develop MDW's", a
"new strategic dynamic" is taking place.
Syria was warned: it is no more "I put a spell on you" but
"We'll keep an eye on you"; Big Brother is looking after
everything, from the nine identified Palestinian organisations whose
offices in Damascus should be shut down, to the Israeli-Palestinian
conflict and the implementation of the roadmap.
The Golan Heights was not mentioned, but it should only be a missing
element. Secretary of State Colin Powell has just completed a tour in the
region with so much apparent strength and imperial willingness, however,
that the day the U.S. Ambassador in Israel remitted the roadmap to Sharon,
another U.S. official, Elliot Abrams, was holding private talks with him
in order to assure him that he would never face any pressure from the U.S.
over it.
Indeed, hasn't time come to start wondering whether the new giant has not
become something of a paper tiger? Beyond what the Financial Times calls
"the immediate incompetence of Rumsfeld who is making a mess of the
peace", total chaos which now seems to prevail in Iraq is a first
illustrative example. "One major conclusion one may draw from that
war is that it is possible to make a totalitarian regime collapse without
inflicting severe damages to a country", wrote Perle. He probably
could not visit Iraq recently nor look at TV reports.
Even Baker acknowledges that "the looting was regrettable, but fully
consistent with the experience of other people adjusting to the shock of
liberation". That is something to say to the families whose children
are put into pieces by fragmentation bombs which the U.S. army "did
not have time to collect". Baghdad has become a town where one should
better assume his own protection: looting, thefts, threats are now common
practice; health diseases are growing elsewhere as in Basra, water is
missing.
The American army was able to isolate and demolish a weakened regime but
when the country collapsed into chaos, they stood-by or worse, shot aside
or killed half-perceived threats. In the meantime, Shia influence is
investing health, education, welfare and infrastructure fields in a
growing manner. "U.S. victory in Iraq war could benefit Islamists"
wrote the Wall Street Journal. Indeed, Muslim Brotherhood Group is among
those on the rise; was that America's plan?
Actually, the situation is not precisely better elsewhere. Not to mention
the likely consequences of the war on both economic and political grounds
in Jordan, Egypt or Turkey, how not to react to insane comments heard from
would-be analysts – actually wishful-thinkers – about the fake threat
of possible acts of terrorism due to the war?
Ninety people dead in Saudi Arabia last week; 30 or so in Morocco this
week, and others in Israel and Occupied Palestine. Bush thought that
leading a war in Iraq to make WMD disappear would put an end to terrorism.
He was obviously wrong. Not because no WMD could be found todate, but
simply because one does not need a mass destruction weapon to bomb a café.
Even a World Bank chairman, Wolfensohn, admits that "One may witness
that aggression, war and the lack of hope provoke a hate which can lead to
terrorism".
Indeed, how would any human being react to the words of an Israeli
general, Israel's Defence Forces Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon: "The
aim is to lead Palestine to internalise in the deepest recesses of their
consciousness that they are a defeated people". Here is inserting the
roadmap saga, precise content of which is in fact of limited interest, as
is the emerging dialectic between those who doubt that it may ever succeed
– namely a growing number of Arab States – and those who will never
accept it; or with so many conditions that would deprive it from any
substance – namely the Sharon camp.
The only valuable issue, actually, is to know who has the power to bring
the Israelis to the negotiation table; and the answer is the U.S. But is
this what the Bush administration wants to do 18 months before the
president runs for re-election?
When the dice are loaded, there are two ways to behave. One is to leave
the game, as some Palestinian organisations immediately put it. But isn't
a bothering element for consideration that the two clearly opposed parties
to the roadmap are both the Hamas and the organisations supporting Jews
living in Israeli colonies build in occupied Palestine.
Another way is to behave properly and not be reproached by anything. As
long as Mahmoud Abbas avoids the risk to be cornered into a hopeless
bilateral negotiation restricted to Israel and Palestine, and as long as
he understands that a future to the roadmap only lies with the U.S. and
the other members of the Quartet's hands, everything should be made to
give peace a fair chance, irrespective of what the Sharon government may
say, do or undo. No time is to be lost elsewhere.
A first move on the Palestinian side was to have another figure emerge
who, although still representative of his people, will be better accepted
by the Ameri-cans. That has been done, incidentally thanks to Arafat who
finally permitted it.
Another move could come from Syria. Because, among Arab countries, it
expressed a courageous view about the U.S. pre-emptive ideological war in
Iraq, Soon after the war Syria became a favourite target of the Washington
neo-conservatives. The role it was playing with some Islamist terrorist
groups was a major obstacle to any solution in Occupied Palestine, and
crushing the Syrian regime was thus the only way to finalise the roadmap
positively. Syria reacted swiftly, but it is likely that much remains to
be done even though, as Kissinger used to say, "Peace cannot be done
without Syria".
Syria stands at a geographical crossroads. For some reasons, it has
shelved some Palestinian extremist organisations, which also means it may
have a kind of control over them, and it is smart enough to find the
appropriate ways to favour the peace way to the roadmap targets within the
frame of a regional settlement.
Syria understood it in the past when it started to evacuate its army
from Lebanon. Going on would be a clear signal to the international
community that it is a serious partner.
As the French Minister for Foreign Affairs Villepin said, "In the
context of a global Middle East peace, we call on Syria to do everything
possible to facilitate the application of the roadmap and Israel to accept
to negotiate over a return of the Golan Heights to Syria".
Irrespective of any future relationship between Lebanon and Syria which is
obviously dictated by some basic geographical considerations, rewards
could be there.If nothing concrete materialises on the Israeli side, at
least the Arab world will be able to stand proudly with the sense of duty
done. It will then be to Bush to put his action in accordance with his
words.
It is true that one may expect little from a group of people such as
Richard Perle, Michael Ledeen, James Wolsey, all members of the Jewish
Institute for National Security Affairs, who once declared "Our only
concern is Israel".
But in same way as the Likud is not Israel, the neo-conservatives are not
the U.S. It is up to them to accept the idea that the "strategic new
dynamic" is not a one-way concept; or to become, as wrote Stephens in
the Financial Times, "A power without obvious purpose, an empire
without a role".
Luc Debieuvre is a French political analyst and an economic expert
 |
| Earth, a planet hungry for peace |
 |
| The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03). |
 |
| The Israeli apartheid (security) wall around Palestinian population centers in the West Bank (Ran Cohen, pmc, 5/24/03). |