Part two... Withdrawing from Durban was not a sign of unilateralism, but a protest over the rampant anti-Semitism there (the highlight: Syria's attempts to maintain that the Holocaust never happened.) Israel's policies have been based on self defense and furthermore in recent years it has shown surprising latitude for compromise. Barak gave Arafat 90% of what he demanded; that was still rejected. Morally we are obliged to defend Israel. Strategically, defending a nation looking toward the future makes greater sense than defending lands still caught in the past. In other words, the conflict is not economic, but religious and cultural in nature. Israel has no oil; its economic value is relatively miminal. It is not as if our support for Israel during the Clinton administration was particularly wholehearted. But it was there. Bin Laden's own comments again and again come back to Israel as the source of conflict between America and Middle East nations. Just this year, two key meetings among the heads of major terrorist organizations dealt with the "Jerusalem question," and how to expel Israel from that city. The actions on Tuesday were fundamentally tied to America's policy toward Israel. Indeed, bin Laden himself obviously cannot have too much a problem with the world economy, as his fortune comes from oil, and he helped fund the latest attacking by shorting the stock of European insurance companies. Perhaps Chomsky is correct that other problems exist with American foreign policy. The US's foreign policy has had more than its share of mistakes. Very few are directed toward the Middle East however. Furthermore, I do not see how less unilateralism or more introspection can change this. We will continue to (and indeed must) support Israel because this is the right thing to do. There is no "lesson" to learn from this except that the barbariansare at the gate. Their problem with America is that it is Western and it supports Israel. We cannot moderate these positions; indeed to give into the desires of these terrorists would be dangerous. As soon as we let nationalism run rampant, we get ca. 1939 all over again. Individual liberty must be defended against rouge states who see the individual as only part of the collective.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0: Sat 12 Feb 2022 12:30:44 AM EST EST