A Checkered Story in The Game of Mid East Chess

Shelby Steele and Bernard Lewis wrote two outstanding op ed pieces in Monday's WSJ.

Steele wrote about the distinction between wars of choice and survival and that Obama could be right in suggesting we talk directly with Iran's leaders because, at the very least, it would give us moral standing.

Steele's concept of choice and survival wars is a valid one. However, as the distinction between them greys, as rogue nation states come to possess nuclear capability and possibly so will terrorists in due course, making this distinction could mean taking on a more ominous risk. Steele is correct in linking a war of choice with a moral mantle, because again, as he points out, it has proven difficult, if not impossible, for us to sustain a war of choice in the absence of moral weight and authority.

The op ed by Bernard Lewis makes a simple point. If the Annapolis Conference is about boundaries then there is a basis for reaching some accord. However, if the conference is about Israel's survival then there should be nothing to negotiate. If the Arabs and the Palestinians expect Israel to concede its existence a lot of air travel and concomitant gasoline has been wasted.

The Palestinians once again have a choice to make - peace with a neighbor whom they accept has a legal and moral right to exist or a neighbor they wish to continue thinking about and exploring ways of destroying. History does not favor Palestinians making intelligent and sensible choices. They seem to prefer victim hood status because it has earned their corrupt leaders "big bucks," which the world continues to throw their way and it permits Arab leaders to manipulate the Arab street as their peoples sink lower and lower economically.

Olmert, too has a choice. He can meet the extreme demands of the Arabs, doing so at his political peril and possibly Israel's survival or he can make reasonable concessions. If his concessions are rejected, Olmert can pick up his marbles and go home. In the event the Annapolis Conference is a failure, no doubt Israel will be blamed, but Olmert can, at the very least, return home with a clear conscience - a commodity he might find comforting in view of a possible indictment and the forthcoming Winograd Report.

Going beyond Annapolis let's take a simplistically broader view of what has been happening in the region over the last 60 years as Israel begins the celebration of a six decade birthday.

First, the Arabs, unhappy with the establishment of Israel, encouraged the Palestinians to renounce the U.N.'s offer of creating a Palestinian State. After all, the Arabs said, we plan to attack Israel and you can have it all. Time after time the Arabs did attack Israel and time after time they lost. Many Palestinians were displaced and as Professor Lewis points out were abandoned by their Arab brothers for a variety of reasons but mainly because they caused trouble as in Jordan or were a convenient excuse to stir the Arab street and perpetuate Arab hatred of Israel.

Meanwhile, for decades the Saudis created and financed a monster through various religious schools. The consequence of this religious education one can liken to the formation of an Islam Mafia. As a result of Sadaam's attack on Kuwait, the elder Bush began the The Gulf War and we stationed forces on Saudi soil defiling Islamic sand according to Mafia leadership. This became the pretext for the Islamic Mafia to strike at us - 9/11. Prior to 9/11, Iran and Libya had been killing both our own citizens and military as well as those of other nations. Iran's murderous reach extended to Argentina, Lebanon and beyond.

Then came the Saudi Tower episode after which the Saudis both kicked us out as well as impeded our investigation. The threat to the Royal Family and their kingdom, however, continues to build so they have begun playing the Arab game of pandering to both sides again. Egypt did it, the Saudis do it and now various Gulf Region states are beginning to do it. On the one hand the Arabs seek our help and military equipment and on the other they are beginning simultaneously visits to Russia and are making diplomatic overtures and purchases from them.

Russia helped create another monster - a nuclear Iran - which is causing angst among the same Arab Sunni world which is causing them to turn to Russia to purchase arms. Russia needs to sell arms to finance its own military renaissance while China needs oil from Iran. Europe needs to sell a variety of goods and services so it continues doing business with Iran and everyone either looks to the United States to now protect them. In the case of Russia and China, they are involved in thwarting our efforts to stop Iran.

Consequently, GW, becoming fearful Israel may choose to attack Iran unilaterally, succumbs to Sec. Rice and Arabists within our State Department and creates a conference in Annapolis whose purpose is two fold - bring the Arab Sunni concern regarding Iran into the open while at the same time bring pressure on Israel to make concessions to untrustworthy partners in order to pacify these same Arab Sunnis. These are the same Arab Sunnis who have demonstrated continual contempt for the Palestinians and who could have solved the Palestinian problem which they helped create when they repeatedly attacked Israel starting from the time of its birth in '48.

The U.S.'s involvement has not been always on the up and up either. We too have been engaged in playing one Middle Eastern nation against the other because of our own initial desire to thwart Russian intrusion into the region during the Cold War and because we continually need Saudi oil or just oil from wherever.

We brought down governments in France and England as a favor to the Egyptians who were leaning towards Russia and who were about to lose the Suez Canal. We helped prop up Iran's tyrannical leadership, lost and then financed and assisted Sadaam in his "gas" war against Iran. We ignored Sadaam's blatant slaughter of the Kurds after signalling we would assist them and, as stated above, assisted Kuwait in rescuing them from the clutches of this same Sadaam!


Somewhere in there, after a period of indifference, we even began assisting Israel so it could survive and eventually saw them as a strategic democratic ally but in doing so infuriated the Arabs whose oil we need.

Coldly and objectively speaking what has evolved is the old story of the criminal coming into court after murdering his parents and pleading orphan status.

Let's face it, throughout recent history, Arabs have used Palestinians as pawns in their game of Middle East Chess. Quite a "checkered" story to say the least and the West has also used the Arabs as pawns for their own nefarious and narrow purposes. In the scope of human history, nothing has really changed except rogue states now have nuclear capability and can make a lot more trouble than ever before.

Dick