<Got any better ideas?>
Yes.
Over and over, every time a Moslem criticizes the U.S., their are two things they bring up: Israel, and U.S. troops in Moslem countries.
US OCCUPATION OF MOSLEM HOMELAND:
U.S. troops are seen as an army of occupation, to seize their oil fields and spread U.S. culture. The reason we have to have troops there, is oil. Without oil, there would have been no Gulf War, no "occupation" of Saudi Arabia since 1991, and Bin Laden would probably not have been able to recruit those college-educated Saudi young men with boxcutters. We would not have been a target.
A quarter-century ago, the oil embargo should have convinced us we needed energy independance. We should have instituted a Manhattan Project, to push every possible alternative to ME oil. This should have been seen, not as an economic necessity, but a crucial national security need. Actually, we did start to do this. But then, it didn't yield emmediate results, so our attention wandered, the projects petered out, and nothing was accomplished. If we had made this a priority, and kept at it, by now we would not need to import any ME oil. One defect in our national culture, is our inability to carry out LT programs to solve LT problems. We lurch from crisis to crisis.
The LT solution would have come from some combination of coal conversion to liquid or gas, wind, solar, fusion, or maybe something else that is just a gleam in some researcher's eye.
The ST (partial) solution is encouraging more energy-efficient houses and appliances and cars, and aggressively developing non-ME oil fields.
ISRAEL:
In 1956, we had a "tough-love" policy towards Israel. We cut off their oil, because they hadn't asked our permission, before they grabbed the Sinai from Egypt. They gave it back. We can do "tough-love" again, and it will work again; we have more leverage now than before.
We could order the Israelis to dismantle all Jewish settlements in the territory (95% of the West Bank and Gaza, plus E. Jerusalem) that they offered to give up, in their final offer at the Taba negotiations. If they refuse, we cut off aid. Then cut off weapons sales. Then a trade embargo.
The Israelis would first try to see if their lobby in the U.S. could get us to back down (this is what they did, when Bush the First tried and failed to tie aid to a settlement freeze.) If this end-around fails, then the Israelis would nave no choice but to comply. But we would have to have the courage to stand firm.
Then, we go to the Arabs, and say, "OK, we've done our part. The ball is in your court. You have 6 months." At the end of that time, we expect:
1. a peace treaty to be signed, based largely on the Taba negotiations. gush-shalom.org
2. the Palestinians will give up the Right of Return, the Israelis will give up E. Jerusalem. The Palestinian State will get a road connecting Gaza to Hebron, and Bethlehem through E.Jerusalem to Ramallah. The Israelis will get enough observation posts to verify a demilitarized Palestinian State.
3. A total cessation of all hostilities in Israel and Palestine. Anyone who expects to be treated as a serious negotiating partner, will help destroy the organizations (Hezbollah, Hamas, Islamic Jihad), that reject a compromise peace. Arafat will have to make a choice. That means all weapons, funding, supportive propaganda,etc., for all attacks on Israelis, must cease.
4. If, at the end of 6 months, the Intifada is still going on, and no peace treaty has been signed, then the U.S. will give a green light to Israel to do whatever they want to do, to pacify the Occupied Territories. Up to and including the mass expulsion of civilians into Jordan. When the Arabs realise that is the alternative to a compromise peace, they too will comply.
Do these two things, and we remove the main reasons for hatred of the U.S. in Muslim countries. Everything else can be finessed. |
