|
In the Middle East, again... Ah, more of the same: politicians acting like they know and understand history, the concept of liberty, or the role of government intended by the framers of the U.S. Constitution. President Bush, probably in an effort to salvage some sort of positive legacy after eight years of extreme unpopularity, has once again visited the Middle East in an attempt to solve the Palestinian crisis.
Gotta love U.S. foreign policy: put the country smack dab in the middle of deep-rooted, millennium-old blood feuds and see what happens. Never mind that there's no Constitutional authority for such a policy. Never mind it flies in the face of the principles of restrained government espoused by the Constitutional framers. Never mind that this is a regional problem and, no matter how good our government's intentions may be, "America" is just getting in the way. Bush told reporters, "I assured the president [Abbas] that a Palestinian state is a high priority for me and my administration. A viable state, a state that doesn't look like Swiss cheese, a state that provides hope." In this humble writer's opinion, it is certainly noble to wish for the Palestinians to have their own state. Their cause has been misunderstood and misreported for decades, and they've been largely abandoned by their fellow Arabs and Muslims around the world. They deserve their own country, period. So, having said that, what should America's role be in all of this? Let's see what Bush had to say: "I am confident we can achieve the definition of a state. I am also confident it's going to require hard work. To that end, I'm going back to the Middle East." This all sounds dandy, but the problem lies in the fact that by putting ourselves in the middle of this mess, we immediately make enemies. Millions of them. In any conflict, there are winners and there are losers. No matter what the U.S. government does, millions of Arabs, and millions more Muslims across the globe, will hate Americans for it. It's no secret that our government has strongly supported Israel in the past. Of course, our government has also supported most of the Arab countries surrounding Israel as well (via state-sponsored bribes that we call "foreign aid"), but that all falls to the wayside because our support of Israel is all that matters to many people in the region. Israel is the devil, therefore America is the devil. Suddenly we have tens of millions of rabid enemies. As the years pass, that hatred only grows. All because some policymaker in Washington decided it would be a good idea to put this country in the middle of that conflict. It would be different if we hadn't made that fateful, blundering decision so many years ago to begin meddling in the Middle East. If we were truly a neutral party where the Middle East is concerned, we might have been invited to be a mediator of sorts during real discussions between Palestine and Israel. We can hardly act as such a mediator now--too many millions of Arabs, not to mention a fair amount of Jews, hate the United States. This is what happens when the U.S. government decides its role is not to be a beacon, but to be a billy-club. I'm all for a Palestinian state, but I think history shows that we'd best serve that region by simply getting out of the way. What a simple, Constitutional foreign policy that would be.
|
