By Ted Belman
In trying to understand the thinking of the US administration in pursuing the Declarations of Principals, I kept wondering how does it serve American interests to weaken Israel.
Kissinger explains what its all about or almost all of it.
The US, having destabilized the ME with the invasion of Iraq, is now trying to bring stability back with a realignment of forces. Only with success in this endeavour can they contain Iran and maintain their hegemony.
Thus they have defined the opposing sides as the radicals v the moderates. The radicals are united but the moderates aren’t. Hence the new peace initiative.
The Arab “moderates” are leery of this overall plan because,
-
1. They aren’t ready to embrace peaceful co-existence with Israel
2. Peace with Israel wins them no brownie points, but betraying the Arab cause can hurt them immensely.
3. They lack confidence in American resolve.
Kissinger warns
“If either America’s Arab or Israeli friends are asked to take on more than they are able to withstand, there’s the risk of another, even larger blow-up.” and
“American leadership on realistic parameters with Israel and moderate Arab countries is an essential precondition to success in Annapolis. In its absence, deadlock and American isolation beckon.”
The dots that need connecting are
-
1. The US is now building a US air force base in Northern Lebanon and training four brigades of the Lebanese army. So clearly it is committed to stopping Syrian and Hezbollah designs and influence. Hezbollah has virtually declared war against the US to stop this “occupation”. DEBKA REPORTS “Lebanon will be a second Iraq, says Hizballah in strident threat against US bases”. They found it easy in to chase the US out of Lebanon in 1882 they bombed the US marines barracks. They will find it harder now because US interests are at stake.
2. The US authorized the recent bombing of the Syrian nuclear facilities by Syria. This was a huge event that caused little, if any, uproar, I believe due to the fact that the action was supported by the European and Arab allies of the US. It mattered not at all that it was a clear violation of International law.
3. The US has turned the tables in Iraq by winning over the support of the Sunni tribes in the north. Next they plan to do the same thing with the Shia locals in the south. They should succeed here because the Shia in Iraq do not want an Iranian style theocracy nor do they want to be dominated by Iran.
4. The US is in intense negotiations with Russia to offer them enough to get them to reduce their support of Iran. Judged by recent leaks, they are meeting with success. See Bush and Putin Rough out Breakthrough Strategic Deal for Dumping Iran
5. The US is working to mollify Turkey and keep them from invading Iraq. The consequences of such an invasion would be disastrous for US plans. All is not going well. DEBKA reports today
Turkish attack began Sunday, Oct. 21, after more than 12 Turkish troops were killed in an ambush by rebel Kurdish PKK guerrillas. He said F-16 jets and artillery pounded at least 63 rebel positions inside the Kurdish-controlled region and 300 Turkish commandoes were dropped by helicopter into Iraq to hunt down PKK fighters.
Military action was overwhelmingly approved by the parliament in Ankara last week. This month, PKK fighters killed 42 Turkish soldiers and civilians in hit-and-run cross-border raids. Washington has also urged Iraq and its Kurdish leaders to crack down on the PKK hideouts.
The Democrats have backed off their resolution to identify the genocide of Armenians as “genocide”. I believe that the US can succeed in reducing terror attacks in Turkey perhaps by lending support for Kurdish attacks on Iran. Currently Iran is shelling the Kurds.
6. The US has stepped up the rhetoric directed at Iran. Both Bush and Cheney have made speeches to the effect that the US is committed to preventing Iran from going nuclear. Israel’s bombing of Syria was in fact a pre-emptive strike but the Democrats hardly whimpered about it. A US general recently stated that the US military has the resources to take on Iran. We don’t hear anymore about how the US is stretched too far to do so.
All these things would be in play even if there was not now an active peace process.
I would argue that whatever success the US has in meeting its goals at Annapolis, it will do little if anything to garner them more support in the Arab World. So why take the risk of failure.
In fact to focus on the peace process is to deflect attention from the other theaters. Perhaps that’s its purpose.
It is peculiar is it not that America to advance her interests is always engaged in what crassly might be called bribing nations to be her allies in some cause or another and bribing her adversaries to not put more roadblocks in America’s path towards self interest then they already have.
You don’t see Russia, China, the Saudis, the UAE, Egypt, Jordan, Lebanon, Iran and Syria begging America for help and trying to buy America’s co-operation and assistance.
Somehow it always America that finds itself in a position of weakness at every bargaining table it seeks to sit down at. Every table that is except the table with Israel where America can and does push Israel hard to make suicidal concessions for peace which is the price of admission for America to just sit down at other Middle Eastern bargaining tables.