'Kifaya'

by George S. Hishmeh

At a briefing held in Washington earlier this week, at the prestigious Centre for Strategic and International Studies (CSIS), about the just released study on US-Arab relations, I asked the chairman of the group, former Defence Secretary William S. Cohen, for his insights as to why the Bush administration (and Israel) has failed to act on the repeated Syrian overtures to Israel to restart their peace negotiations.

Cohen looked around the head table, which fielded most members of the impressive study group, some former senior government officials, apparently seeking help. When no one offered to answer the question, he said lamely that he was not privy to the administration's thinking and abruptly proceeded to take the second question.

My question, the first during the morning session, followed a detailed presentation by Cohen and one by former Lebanese-American Ambassador Edward Gabriel about their forward-looking study that ought to be on the desk, not shelf, of every Bush administration official dealing with the Middle East. The secretary's demure manner followed a key prediction in the study, which he highlighted, that the report's recommendations "will not succeed unless the United States shows active leadership in forging a comprehensive solution that creates a democratic, secure, state of Palestine alongside the democratic, secure, Jewish state of Israel".

After noting that US-Arab relations are at their "lowest points in generations", and that the United States was facing "unprecedented opposition" in the Arab world, the study underlined "a clear-eyed assessment that broken Arab-US relations are a serious threat to the long-term security and interests of both sides".

The CSIS group admirably pledged to "reverse these trends", but none of the key panelists chose to enter into the fray when they were given an opportunity. This was all the more surprising since Lebanon seemed that day on the brink of a serious conflagration, reminiscent of the 15-year civil war that ended in 1990.

Is it because Israel is not interested at this stage, probably because of its projected withdrawal from Gaza, to engage in any negotiations with the Syrians over the Golan Heights? Or is it because Syria (and Iran) remains a thorn in the neocons' side?

Another commentator, Justin Raimondo, may have hit the nail on the head: "It's the payoff for the partial withdrawal from Gaza and the highly conditional concessions granted to the Palestinians."

Regrettably, there is little public opposition here, especially among former officials or pundits, to the way the Bush administration has chosen to humiliate Syria in leaving Lebanon, much as this is overdue. This American swashbuckling approach only serves to repel would-be allies of the United States, as some Syrian diplomats have been saying repeatedly.

The pro-Syrian turnout in Beirut, numbering anywhere from 500,000 to 1.5 million Lebanese, according to Al Jazeera, which is about 30 per cent of the Lebanese population (compared to some 100 million Americans) was very impressive. It illustrated the potency of Hizbollah, the Shiite group whose militia is credited in the Arab world with evicting the Israelis from southern Lebanon. Yet, despite this outpouring, Syria and its Lebanese supporters have to play their cards well lest some foolish and irresponsible incident should inflame the two neighbouring Arab countries, much as the assassination of Rafik Hariri, and thereby divert attention from the renewed regional preoccupation with a budding Palestinian-Israeli peace process.

Likewise, it may be equally appropriate to borrow the Egyptian and Lebanese slogan and tell Washington "kifaya", or enough, of this imperial approach, and learn how to win over the Arab masses who, as in Beirut, feel that "all our disasters are from America". A case in point has been the unexpected appointment of John Bolton as US ambassador to the United Nations which in the next few weeks will be the arena where, for a start, the Bush administration hopes to take on Syria and Iran.

Bolton's appointment is "welcome news to Jewish groups and pro-Israel advocates", although the man is not Jewish, reported the Jewish Telegraphic Agency. "Bolton has gained fans in the pro-Israel community for his tough talk against Iran and other countries that could threaten Israel with weapons of mass destruction. He has suggested that all options are on the table to combat the Iranian threat."

Even Sen. John Kerry, the Democratic Party's presidential candidate, said the appointment was "inexplicable". He wondered: "If the president is serious about reaching out to the world, why would he choose someone who has expressed such disdain for working with our allies?"

The CSIS study underlined that "Arab leaders from every sector warned us that unless the United States actively and visibly reengaged in the Middle East peace process, every goal our country pursued in the region would be suspect."

This article was published in the Friday-Saturday, March 11-12, 200 edition of the Jordan Times. It is used here with permission.