America and the Middle East Pt-4: Palestine and Israel

With almost three weeks of violence between the Israeli Defense Forces and Hamas, many American politicians and news pundits have taken up the rallying cry on both sides.  On one side are those sharing the horror stories of young children in Gaza who have been killed or maimed by Israeli missiles.  They see Israel as an apartheid that wants nothing more than to eliminate the Palestinian territories and deny Palestinian Arabs any political rights.  On the other are those who stand with Israel and her right to protect her citizens from rockets launched by Hamas.  For them the Israelis have been very patient with the Palestinian Arab communities and have very little to show for it except dead soldiers, children, and more rocket fire.

So who’s right?  Who has the correct handle on the situation?

Unfortunately, the situation isn’t a clear, black and white matter.  Like the Crusades, the American Civil War, and the Cold War, the Arab and Israeli conflict is complicated and doesn’t nicely fit into any one particular narrative.  But in terms of the current situation, I’d have to side with Israel for one very simple reason: Hamas has and will continue to be an obstacle for the peace both sides want.

Yes, you did read that correctly.  Both sides want peace, hard as it may be for some of you to imagine.  And it isn’t too hard to understand if you think about it.  For the Palestinians, peace means no more defeats with high casualties and a chance to address their grievance outside of the context of war.  For the Israelis, it would mean safety for themselves and a chance to take an active role in the world instead of constantly having to fall back on defensive reactions.  All of these things are greater and far more beneficial than the current unrest and instability.  Unless, you are Hamas.

Hamas is a terrorist organization formed in 1987 that had ties with Iran, Syria, and Egypt when the Muslim Brotherhood was in power.  Its founding charter declared the group was totally opposed to the existence of the Jewish state of Israel and planned to raise “‘the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine'” (CFR).  And so far they have remained true to that goal.  Through suicide bombings and rogue mortar and missile fire, Hamas has done everything in its power to antagonize and lead a Palestinian revolt against Israel.  They have even used schools run by the United Nations to stockpile rockets and are known to booby trap houses abandoned by civilians.  Yet all that has become of it are the deaths of hundreds of Palestinians, often civillians.  Any rational group of people would say that violence isn’t working if their goals haven’t been reached and if more of their people die than their enemies.

But Hamas is not rational.  Every defeat it suffers it then twists into a sick game of “morality” to curry favor in the West.  “Sure we send in suicide bombers and use tunnels to kidnap Israelis and smuggle weapons to carry out jihad.  But can you blame us when Israel responds so strongly and barricades us into what little land we still have?  We’re the real victims here.”  Never mind the fact the true victims are the Palestinian children who grow up either in fear of another Israeli invasion because someone in Hamas fired rockets toward Tel Aviv or in a blind hatred of anyone who isn’t a supporter of Hamas.  The true victims are the Palestinians who want to live out their lives but are seen as potential martyrs for the cause of Hamas and jihad.  The true victims are the Israelis who think nothing good can come from Gaza.  But nothing can be done for them if mad dogs like Hamas are given sympathy and international legitimacy.

America and the Middle East Pt-1: Egypt

About two years ago, citizens and leaders of the free world witnessed something truly astonishing.  The Arab and Muslim dictators were being openly and successfully defied by their people who wanted free elections and representative governments.  News reporters hailed it as an “Arab Spring” with many talking-heads declaring how the Middle East was slowly leaving the strong men of yesterday for the freedoms of the modernized world.  From Tunisia to Egypt and Libya, the Arab world to seemed to be turning itself around for the better causing some to believe that there might be hope for the region after all.  Today, it is hard to find that kind of hope anywhere.  Many Americans praised the fall of Gadhafi, but were horrified at the attacks of an American consulate in Benghazi.  Many were glad to see tyrannical regimes fall by the wayside in place like Tunisia, but were saddened to see Muslim fundamentalists take their place.  Yet the greatest disappointment for the believers of the “Arab Spring” has been Egypt where the most hope and joy occurred during the protests in 2011.

Egypt had been ruled by Hosni Mubarak for about thirty years.  He began is career as a member of the Egyptian air force and was even given a position of command by his predecessor President Anwar Sadat.  Sadat proceeded to groom Mubarak and appointed him as his successor in 1975.  A few years later, Sadat was killed by Muslim fundamentalists and Mubarak took control.  He wasn’t a very nice man and he did abuse his powers to silence political opponents and religious dissenters who felt that he was too secular.  However he did offer some protection for Coptic Christians and other religious minorities, though this doesn’t mean they were free to do as they pleased politically and socially.  And he did take a more moderate view towards Israel, receiving criticisms toward the end of his presidency for being too lax in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  And perhaps more importantly, he was an ally for the United States.  But these little facts were overlooked as supporters of the Arab Spring, including President Obama, pushed for Mubarak to resign and elections for a new government to commence.  Democracy, after all, must be given a chance.

Unfortunately, democracy had its chance and the result was a resounding victory for Muslim fundamentalist parties particularly for the Muslim Brotherhood.  The party won the majority of seats in Egypt’s Parliament as well as the presidency with the election of Mohamed Morsi.  However the group is known for carrying out terrorist attacks as well as participating in assassination attempts against Egypt’s leaders including Sadat and Mubarak.  They are also antagonistic to the Jewish state of Israel and non-Muslim Egyptians.  And they support sharia law and jihad.  Clearly a group that isn’t open to Western ideals and liberties.

But what is sad is not that they won.  What is unfortunate is not that President Morsi used his powers to pressure secular opponents and to ignore judicial attempts to rewrite the Egyptian constitution.  No, what is sad and unfortunate is that all of this was predicted by foreign policy analysts and experts in Middle East politics and we in the West didn’t pay attention.  We let our love for democracy and civil liberties blind us to the harsh realities of the Arab world.    Just because we hold certain truths to be self-evident doesn’t mean the average Egyptian or Libyan does.  Just because a few charismatic, secular leaders who admire America are leading a non-violent revolution doesn’t mean that they have enough support to be democratically elected.

Of course some of you may be wondering, “Why regurgitate old news?  Why bring this up?”  Because we as a people and our government haven’t fully appreciated the repercussions of our actions.  Not only did we support a democratic uprising that voted for an unfriendly regime, but we also ousted an ally and planted distrust in future dealings with Egypt.  Mubarak wasn’t a nice man, but he was our ally and we did have adequate leverage to make him do what we felt was necessary.  If we really wanted greater political freedom, we could have pressured him to allow free elections while guaranteeing to support his position as president.  If we wanted more civil liberties for all Egyptians, we could have stated that future aid and military support will come at the price of a bill of rights that are respected.  These trade-offs aren’t pleasant and are by no means ethically pure.  No one’s right to free speech or fair elections should be bought with fighter jets.  However, the international arena in politics is a messy affair.  Sometimes bad or less than pleasant deals must be made in order a greater good to be brought about.  This isn’t “the ends justify the means” but “slow and steady wins the race.”  Sudden changes like those in Egypt clearly don’t work.  What is needed is a series of small, incremental steps toward a better tomorrow.

Sadly we may have to stall future democracy building in Egypt in exchange for relationship building.  After Pres. Obama’s public call for Mubarak to step down, America has lost credibility as a reliable ally.  The current military order is now looking for new friends, specifically Russia which would enjoy nothing better than to see America’s influence in the region to disappear.  And you can bet Russia is not going to push for civil liberties and equal rights because doing so would upset a status quo which has more in common with Russian interests.  So what is it going to take to get back to the way things were before the “Arab Spring”?  A lot.  First, the White House needs a wake up call that its handling of the “Arab Spring” had less than optimal results and that to continue backing Pres. Morsi is only going to alienate the military leaders who currently govern Egypt.  Too bad this would require Pres. Obama to make that realization himself as his advisors will most likely not bring it up and the GOP is too busy self-destructing to make this an issue in 2014.  And considering his current track record with international relations, he probably isn’t going to come up with it on his own.

Second, we need to be lenient toward the Egyptian military since it is the one running the show at the moment and perceives America to be treacherous.  We can condemn shooting protestors and ask that political targets be spared.  But at the end of the day, they need to know that we are not out to get them and that we are not going to aid their enemies.  And finally, for the second step to work we’re going to have to show why we’re better partners than the Russians.  This could come in the form of economic aid, joint military practices, etc.  But whatever we offer, it needs to be big and it needs to be offered fast.  Stunts like the one we pulled with Mubarak are not quickly forgotten or forgiven.  However, they can be compensated if the price is right.  And dear readers, we better get it right soon.