The Trebach Report

The administration's policy in the Middle East just took a dramatic turn in the wrong direction. This turn at once marks a concession to terrorism and a violation of principle.

Just as Israel was defending itself from unremitting, unbearable terror, President Bush stated that what Israel was doing -- targeting terrorists and militarily occupying the land they were coming from -- was "not helpful." As this paper reported, "[T]he State Department urged a complete withdrawal from all Palestinian cities and refugee camps retaken in the withering two-week crackdown." The New York Times reported that "Secretary of State Colin L. Powell had delivered a blunt private demand to Prime Minster Ariel Sharon to withdraw from the Palestinian-controlled areas to help American efforts to broker a cease-fire."

Until now, many of us who venerate democracy over dictatorship and decency over terror found welcome relief in President Bush's Middle East policies. Unlike his predecessor, he had refused to bestow upon Yasser Arafat the mantle of a responsible state actor, to bring Arafat to the White House and to pressure the democratic state of Israel to make concessions to the dictatorial Palestinian Authority. President Bush was seen as the most pro-Israel president in recent memory and thus as the one most supportive of democracy in the Middle East.

We seem to have forgotten that Palestinians celebrated in the streets on Sept. 11. Many in the Arab world understand what our Department of State does not: America's fate and Israel's fate are one and the same. Both countries are democracies. Both respect religious and ethnic diversity in citizenship. Both allow their citizens -- we could call them the "democratic street" -- to determine their political and economic policies. Both countries boast a thriving commitment to freedom of speech and press.

No such things can be said of the Arab nations, some of which are our allies, some of which are not. And while Palestinians celebrated the slaughter on Sept. 11, Israel lowered its flags.

Last September the United States was forced to deal with what Israel had been dealing with since its founding in 1948. Yet, if Israel concluded that the U.S. war against terrorism was responsible for the escalation of suicide bombings in Israel and asked the United States to refrain from its campaign in Afghanistan and withdraw its troops, we would be shocked and would refuse to do so. The United States has a right to defend itself and to root out those who would kill as many civilians as possible. Israel, our fellow democracy, has that same right -- and let us not forget that those who would destroy us are those who would destroy Israel, too.

A message has been reiterated with this recent turn in policy. It was first sent in 1991, when the United States asked Israel not to defend itself after Saddam Hussein launched Scud missiles at it during our liberation of Kuwait. The message was sent again when Arafat was given the respectability of multiple visits to the White House shortly after he allied himself with Hussein in the Gulf War. The message is this: Jewish blood is cheap. Kill civilians, expand suicide bombings, and you will be rewarded: Terrorism works. The message may not be deliberate, but it is tragically clear.

Israel is being pressured so that we can assuage countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Yet, it just so happens that those countries are responsible for the reappearance of the worst forms of anti-Jewish propaganda since Joseph Goebbels. A recently published Saudi government newspaper article claimed the Jewish holiday of Purim requires that "Jewish people must obtain human blood so that their clerics can prepare the holiday pastries. . . . [This] is a well-established fact, historically and legally, all throughout history." A recent Egyptian government daily claimed a Palestinian suicide bombing at a Jerusalem cafe was "heroic."

Meanwhile, Arafat has allowed the continued operation of Hamas in the West Bank and Gaza as well as the growth of the suicidal Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. His Fatah emblem covers the entire state of Israel with two rifles and a grenade. Israeli control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip is not the problem for the Arabs. Democracy is the problem. Israel's existence anywhere is the problem. Jews are the problem. This was not supposed to happen again. The world, we thought, would long note what the long march of Jewish blood libels, mixed with the ceding of land to dictators, caused.

We pressure Israel and make no demands on our Arab allies to cease the dissemination of medieval, terror-inspiring propaganda. Instead, the president appeased Saudi Arabia by inviting Crown Prince Abdullah to visit him at his home in Texas -- as if we owe the Saudis any favors, as if they don't owe us a great many explanations. And we are beginning to, yet again, bestow respectability on Arafat.

The Arabs' conclusion? Speak platitudes in English, foment terrorism in Arabic, and the United States will apply pressure to fellow democracies over and against those who rule by bullets rather than ballots. These lessons in double standards bode tragic for democracy, not just here at home or in Israel, but across the globe.

The writer is co-director of Empower America and author of the forthcoming book "Why We Fight: Moral Clarity and the War on Terrorism."

The fact that we two are in such complete agreement on this matter should be treated as a hidden signal of the extent to which 9/11 has served to pull together almost all segments of American society. As a people we are becoming strongly united on the need to protect our true democratic allies, like Israel, and to aggressively confront our real enemies with every political, economic, diplomatic, and, where necessary, military weapon at our command. The world is starting to relearn the compelling fact that a united American nation is to be feared by its enemies. As Mr. Bennett suggests, it is now time for President Bush to directly inform the Saudis and the Egyptians, among other Arab "friends," that we are on to their hateful games within their own societies, that we blame them for producing the 9/11 mass murderers, and that we must see change soon -- or they will face the consequences if and when we decide to place them fully in the enemy camp.

In my view, we also should place upon those so-called friendly nations the major responsibility for dealing with the Palestinians, whose pitiful plight they deliberately designed. At the same time I agree with another powerful editorial of the same day by Thomas Friedman in The New York Times that American troops may be necessary to police the ceasefire between Israelis and Palestinians if and when it is achieved.

Home IAL Info. NEWS Antiproibizionisti Notizie Daniel Pipes REUTERS Associated Press Christian Science Monitor The Times (London) Manchester Guardian (UK) San Francisco Chronicle Boston Globe Washington Post New York Times Miami Herald Los Angeles Times Jerusalem Post Ha'aretz Bookstore & Coffeeshop Legal Cases Treatment Abuse Mideast Terrorism/ Homeland Security Anti Semitism Media Commentary Articles & Speeches DPF History Paying The Piper Personal Background The Family Section Potpourri Search Recomended Links Letters Contact Us		Where Bush Rewards Terror By William J. Bennett Wednesday, March 20, 2002; Page A33 The administration's policy in the Middle East just took a dramatic turn in the wrong direction. This turn at once marks a concession to terrorism and a violation of principle. Just as Israel was defending itself from unremitting, unbearable terror, President Bush stated that what Israel was doing -- targeting terrorists and militarily occupying the land they were coming from -- was "not helpful." As this paper reported, "[T]he State Department urged a complete withdrawal from all Palestinian cities and refugee camps retaken in the withering two-week crackdown." The New York Times reported that "Secretary of State Colin L. Powell had delivered a blunt private demand to Prime Minster Ariel Sharon to withdraw from the Palestinian-controlled areas to help American efforts to broker a cease-fire." Until now, many of us who venerate democracy over dictatorship and decency over terror found welcome relief in President Bush's Middle East policies. Unlike his predecessor, he had refused to bestow upon Yasser Arafat the mantle of a responsible state actor, to bring Arafat to the White House and to pressure the democratic state of Israel to make concessions to the dictatorial Palestinian Authority. President Bush was seen as the most pro-Israel president in recent memory and thus as the one most supportive of democracy in the Middle East. We seem to have forgotten that Palestinians celebrated in the streets on Sept. 11. Many in the Arab world understand what our Department of State does not: America's fate and Israel's fate are one and the same. Both countries are democracies. Both respect religious and ethnic diversity in citizenship. Both allow their citizens -- we could call them the "democratic street" -- to determine their political and economic policies. Both countries boast a thriving commitment to freedom of speech and press. No such things can be said of the Arab nations, some of which are our allies, some of which are not. And while Palestinians celebrated the slaughter on Sept. 11, Israel lowered its flags. Last September the United States was forced to deal with what Israel had been dealing with since its founding in 1948. Yet, if Israel concluded that the U.S. war against terrorism was responsible for the escalation of suicide bombings in Israel and asked the United States to refrain from its campaign in Afghanistan and withdraw its troops, we would be shocked and would refuse to do so. The United States has a right to defend itself and to root out those who would kill as many civilians as possible. Israel, our fellow democracy, has that same right -- and let us not forget that those who would destroy us are those who would destroy Israel, too. A message has been reiterated with this recent turn in policy. It was first sent in 1991, when the United States asked Israel not to defend itself after Saddam Hussein launched Scud missiles at it during our liberation of Kuwait. The message was sent again when Arafat was given the respectability of multiple visits to the White House shortly after he allied himself with Hussein in the Gulf War. The message is this: Jewish blood is cheap. Kill civilians, expand suicide bombings, and you will be rewarded: Terrorism works. The message may not be deliberate, but it is tragically clear. Israel is being pressured so that we can assuage countries such as Egypt and Saudi Arabia. Yet, it just so happens that those countries are responsible for the reappearance of the worst forms of anti-Jewish propaganda since Joseph Goebbels. A recently published Saudi government newspaper article claimed the Jewish holiday of Purim requires that "Jewish people must obtain human blood so that their clerics can prepare the holiday pastries. . . . [This] is a well-established fact, historically and legally, all throughout history." A recent Egyptian government daily claimed a Palestinian suicide bombing at a Jerusalem cafe was "heroic." Meanwhile, Arafat has allowed the continued operation of Hamas in the West Bank and Gaza as well as the growth of the suicidal Al Aqsa Martyrs Brigades. His Fatah emblem covers the entire state of Israel with two rifles and a grenade. Israeli control of the West Bank and Gaza Strip is not the problem for the Arabs. Democracy is the problem. Israel's existence anywhere is the problem. Jews are the problem. This was not supposed to happen again. The world, we thought, would long note what the long march of Jewish blood libels, mixed with the ceding of land to dictators, caused. We pressure Israel and make no demands on our Arab allies to cease the dissemination of medieval, terror-inspiring propaganda. Instead, the president appeased Saudi Arabia by inviting Crown Prince Abdullah to visit him at his home in Texas -- as if we owe the Saudis any favors, as if they don't owe us a great many explanations. And we are beginning to, yet again, bestow respectability on Arafat. The Arabs' conclusion? Speak platitudes in English, foment terrorism in Arabic, and the United States will apply pressure to fellow democracies over and against those who rule by bullets rather than ballots. These lessons in double standards bode tragic for democracy, not just here at home or in Israel, but across the globe. The writer is co-director of Empower America and author of the forthcoming book "Why We Fight: Moral Clarity and the War on Terrorism." © 2002 The Washington Post Company I agree with every word and nuance of William J Bennett's above editorial which appeared in The Washington Post of March 20. It is a superb summary of the historical crossroads at which we now stand in our war on terror. It is not only democratic Israel that faces total destruction; our way of life and democracy everywhere is under attack, The agreement between us on the awful realities we now face is remarkable on a number of counts, not least that I have been in open disagreement with almost every public utterance of the man for many years. I suspect that we could not previously agree on the time of day. The fact that we two are in such complete agreement on this matter should be treated as a hidden signal of the extent to which 9/11 has served to pull together almost all segments of American society. As a people we are becoming strongly united on the need to protect our true democratic allies, like Israel, and to aggressively confront our real enemies with every political, economic, diplomatic, and, where necessary, military weapon at our command. The world is starting to relearn the compelling fact that a united American nation is to be feared by its enemies. As Mr. Bennett suggests, it is now time for President Bush to directly inform the Saudis and the Egyptians, among other Arab "friends," that we are on to their hateful games within their own societies, that we blame them for producing the 9/11 mass murderers, and that we must see change soon -- or they will face the consequences if and when we decide to place them fully in the enemy camp. In my view, we also should place upon those so-called friendly nations the major responsibility for dealing with the Palestinians, whose pitiful plight they deliberately designed. At the same time I agree with another powerful editorial of the same day by Thomas Friedman in The New York Times that American troops may be necessary to police the ceasefire between Israelis and Palestinians if and when it is achieved. Arnold
Email This Page Send email to Info@trebach.org This site and its contents, unless otherwise indicated, Copyright Arnold S. Trebach, 2000-2001-2002-2003