Western Resistance

Governor Bush's support for Israel extended to Israel's need for territory to serve as a buffer. One of his favorite campaign anecdotes centered about his trip to Israel:

[...] I was able to learn a lot about the security needs of our strong friend and ally, Israel. It's hard to believe as a Texan how small Israel is, I mean, we're used to huge spaces. I just got off the campaign where I spent nearly everyday in a King Air trying to get from one stop to the other. Had I gotten on that same King Air and I took off out of Jerusalem it would have been no time before I'd be in either Jordan or in Syria. It's a small country and it was important for our Israeli host to remind our delegation of how really small it was so I got on a helicopter one day and flew with the foreign minister Ariel Sharon to see first hand how small the population was between, what has been over the course of history, enemy lines and population centers. We went to the Golan Heights where I was able to hear a general brief us on what the war was like to take the Golan Heights and then how important the Golan Heights are to the security of the people living in northern Israel.[...]

After winning the 2000 President election and taking office, President Bush was faithful to his promise. Until early 2002, the President received considerable flak in the press for not being "evenhanded" in the "Israeli-Palestine question". But the policy changed in April-May 2002, when the President castigated then-Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon for not being "helpful" by pursuing terrorists a little too eagerly. National Review's Jay Nordlinger wrote about the change

The Bush administration's new stance on Israel is familiar, but also surreal. Every administration has treated Israel's determination to defend itself as an inconvenience; but this Bush administration seemed different, especially after Sept. 11: The president seemed to "get" that Israel was engaged in exactly what the U.S. now had to do.

Bush also seemed sure to fulfill a campaign promise: not to interfere unduly in the Arab-Israeli conflict, not to make demands on Israel that put it in a weaker position, and cost it lives.

But then the president decided that Israel's attempts to protect itself weren't "helpful." He dispatched his pitiful, uncomprehending envoy, Anthony Zinni, to the Middle East, to further, or restart, or talk about the "peace process." One TV newscaster said that Zinni arrived there "facing a mounting death toll." Gee, that's nothing compared with what the victims and their families face!

The administration, only a half-year into the war, seems to view the Arab-Israeli conflict as a problem for the U.S., above all. According to a "senior official," speaking to the New York Times, Colin Powell told Ariel Sharon to "get out of Ramallah and the other areas. The implication being, "This is the president's mission, the president's decided to send Zinni, and it's not going to be good if it's interpreted that your actions are undermining the president and his envoy in their attempts to end the violence."[...]

Since then, President Bush has consistently leaned on Israel in order to jump-start the mythical peace process. What prompted Bush's change?

The shift was caused his strategy for victory in the "War on Terror", what would later be known as the Forward Strategy of Freedom. The FSF operates under the assumptions that Islam is compatible with Democracy, and that, once Democracy is adopted, Muslim extremism will be defeated, and freedom will thrive. If you believe the assumptions are correct and the FSF is a sound strategy--I don't--how do you go about implementing it? The devil, as always, is in the details.

The Bush administration has tried several things: several media campaigns and approaching "moderate Muslims" (whatever that means.) Bush has proclaimed his love for the "great Religion" of Islam, and the invasion of Iraq was undertaking, in part, to make Iraq a democracy that would serve as an example other "Arab" (e.i., Muslim) nations would follow.

And then, there is the Jewish State of Israel, and its desire to protect its citizens. Whenever Israel kills Muslim murderers the Islamic Press reports and distorts the news, igniting hatred in the Muslim World. That hatred, however, is not only directed at Israel, but against the United States as well. It becomes harder for the United States to convince Muslims to adapt our ways.

That is how Israel's actions are "unhelpful." Israel's self-defense is unhelpful if your goal is implementing the FSF. In fact, Israel's existence is unhelpful to the sorry souls in the State Department trying to implement the Forward Strategy of Freedom. (So, wonder no more why the State Department is so anti-Israel and pro-Islam.)

The solution to this dilemma, of course, lies in rejecting the FSF and adopting an strategy of relentless, unapologetic self-defense. But sadly, that will have to wait. Our peoples still dream of peace, when there is no peace to be had, and our leaders still pursue broken dreams we should not have dreamt in the first place. It will be up to us to change the present state of affairs.