Friday, November 18, 2005

The Cost of Weakness - Here and In Israel

By all means, at all costs, let's preserve the Noble Lie - that Abbas is a "good" Partner for Peace.

I'm just wondering aloud about the price Israel and her citizens now have to pay for the perception of Bush as weakened.

Soccer Dad writing at Israpundit, weighs into the story a day later with an analysis of the editorial positions of the Washington Post and NYTimes. Since I've never seen the NYTimes' editorial staff adopt a position on Israel with which I agree, I no longer read what they have to say on the subject.

He also provides a link to Arieh Sullivan's article in the Jerusalem Post
In the small picture, giving up control of the Rafah crossing is just another price Israel paid for quitting the Gaza Strip. But in the larger picture, it shows the lack of Israeli vision about how exactly it plans to control the Palestinians as they assume greater sovereignty.

What would impact directly on Israel's security would be the importation of Katyusha rockets and artillery (such as long range mortars) since they are so far the only weapons that could seriously penetrate the Israeli shield erected around the coastal strip.

The danger of the Rafah precedent will be apparent when the Palestinians open their sea and air port where this sort of weapons could be more readily imported. It will be difficult for Israel to insist on a veto here after giving it up on the land crossing to Egypt.

Furthermore, the introduction of international supervision and Egypt also makes it all the more difficult to attempt to shut down the crossing should, for example, there be severe terrorist attacks in Israel.
I can't imagine first term Bush pushing Israel into this situation which is going to backfire and backfire hard.

And Scott at Powerline neatly sums up the matter by stating:

Why is it that "realists" seem not to comprehend the most basic facts regarding the war to exterminate Israel?...The problem with "realism" and the "realists" in the State Department is that they're so unrealistic.

Hence, the Noble Lie. Abbas is a partner for "peace". And "peace" and stability are the goal at all costs. As long as the cost is borne by someone else, and can go "undetected" if nothing blows up in the US. As Hitchens reminds us about Scowcroft, another realist:
Realism of the Scowcroft sort presided over the Iran-Iraq war with its horrific casualties and watched indifferently as genocide was enacted in northern Iraq. It allowed despots free rein from Saudi Arabia to Pakistan, and then goggled when this gave birth to the Taliban and al-Qaida.
Previous post on this topic: Were Condi's Demon Eyes Prescient?


Post a Comment

Links to this post:

Create a Link

<< Home