Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: FaultLine who wrote (25821)	4/17/2002 8:39:52 PM
From: Bilow	Respond to of 281500

Hi FaultLine; Re "Islamofascist". It's a great term, and I inyend on using it whenever I can. -- Carl

To: FaultLine who wrote (25821)	4/18/2002 3:28:52 AM
From: stockman_scott	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

Like his father, Bush frustrated by Israeli agenda By PAUL ADAMS The Globe And Mail Wednesday, April 17, 2002 Here's the scenario. Partly to improve relations with the Arab world, U.S. President George Bush launches a Mideast peace initiative. He is frustrated, however, by Israel's right-wing prime minister, who manoeuvres to avoid meaningful negotiations. Exasperated, Mr. Bush pulls the plug on a multibillion-dollar financial-aid package to Israel, and makes it clear he will relent only if Israelis elect a new government, which they obediently proceed to do. If that last bit doesn't sound familiar, it's because the year isn't 2002 but 1992. The president is George Bush Sr., who used his country's economic clout with the Israeli voter to topple the government of Yitzhak Shamir when he blocked progress during the so-called "Madrid process" of peace efforts. Now the former president's son faces a similar challenge. George W. Bush decided long ago that Palestinian leader Yasser Arafat is an obstacle to peace negotiations, although the Bush administration hasn't worked out a way to proceed without him. But Mr. Bush's impatience with Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon has been growing as well. There are differences, however, between the situation a decade ago and now. The senior Mr. Bush was operating at a time when terrorism hadn't attracted nearly the level of condemnation as it has since Sept. 11; he certainly hadn't proclaimed a "war on terror." He also had a different set of domestic political considerations: He had more or less given up on wooing votes from the United States' Jewish community, whereas his son seems determined to cultivate them. But one thing hasn't changed. Like Mr. Shamir before him, Mr. Sharon is deeply skeptical of, if not hostile to, negotiation with Mr. Arafat, as well as the establishment of a full-fledged Palestinian state on Israel's borders. Moreover, both he and Mr. Shamir subscribed to an ideology of Israeli self-reliance, born in the horror of the Holocaust. Accepting U.S. support for Israel is one thing; depending on any outsider to defend the Jewish state is another. While Mr. Bush and Mr. Sharon share uncompromising views on terrorism, their views of their national interests differ, which turns their relationship into something of a battle of wills. Washington has powerful levers -- military, political, economic and financial -- over Israel. Israel is the largest recipient of U.S. foreign aid, amounting to about $3-billion (U.S.) a year, not counting loan guarantees, and outright loans that are commonly forgiven. Mr. Bush has already hinted at a willingness to use this leverage in some circumstances. Recently, his administration quietly blocked a supplement in annual aid to Israel being promoted in Congress. What he cannot rely upon now is the reaction of ordinary Israeli voters if they are subjected to outside pressure. In the face of the Palestinian uprising, the Israeli peace movement has atrophied and the political left has withered away. Unlike his father, the President has no guarantee that if he does ditch the Prime Minister, the successor will be any easier to deal with. theglobeandmail.com