A Pre-emptive Statement?

Submitted by Ron Thompson (United States), Feb 13, 2011 at 15:36

In a very fluid but potentially hopeful situation, many people are legitimately worried whether the forces that gain power in Egypt will sensibly concern themsleves with the domestic political and economic well-being of Egypt, or turn to the utopian violence of Islam and (ignoring that domestic self-interest) focus on attacking the only well-functioning society in their region.

Wouldn't it be interesting if just for once the United States or some (unlikely) government voice in Europe, while actively encouraging and applauding every step in the direction of democracy and indepenedent civil institutions in Egypt, at the first sign of a turn in the direction of unappeaseable Islam, came out with a strong pre-emptive statement that the Palestinians, through their own and other Arab and Moslem leaders, are 95% responsible for the predicament they are in.

That is, instead of pretending the Israelis and Palestinans are equally rational and responsible entities with "both sides" engaged in a genuine "peace process", and passively waiting for some sign of credible reasonableness from either the PLO or Hamas, what if for once we seized the initiative and made the above statement - which should have made at the very latest after the 2000 initative of Clinton AND Barak was torpedoed by Arafat.

Granted, this would be shocking, not least to all those in the West who share the profound delusion that 'both sides' bear equal failure for the emergence of a genuine peace. But since the odds are extremely, one might say overwhelmingly high, that nothing about the otherwise potentially hopeful events (i.e. domestically for the Egyptians) offers any sign of a change in popular attitudes toward Israel, why not, JUST ONCE, take the initiative. And, while offering all possible encouragement for peaceful and democratic change, preempt what will certainly happen in Egypt's foreign policy toward Israel. Such a stand might also reinforce the likely feeling of the Egyptian military, which probably wants to continue to enjoy its perks and to receive largesse from the US (the cutoff of which could be quietly threatened if a wave of Islamist anti-Israel feeling is stirred up).

Alas, it is undoubtedly too much to hope that such a bold stroke is remotely likely. But the tragedy is that by failing to change the terms of discussion at this moment of great fluidity, we will be complicit when it becomes obvious that Peace is as far away as ever with regard to the self-maintained predicament of the Palestinians, and the Security of Israel may well have become more endangered and more expensive than at any time since 1979.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".