Lebanon's Cost in Iraq

The United States has shown unequivocal support for Israel in the current conflict in Lebanon. This is not new for the Bush administration, which long ago abandoned anything resembling even-handedness in dealing with Israel and its enemies. Through much of the conflict we have been able to play the role of honest broker, making it possible for Henry Kissinger and Presidents Carter and Clinton to mediate between Israel and Egypt, Syria, and the Palestinians. Now we express "our strong concern about the impact of Israeli military operations on innocent civilians," but put no pressure on Israel to end those operations before it is ready. That statement is about the current crisis, but the approach is the same taken toward every Israeli attack since the Bush administration came into office.

Now, let me quickly say, that Israel has been reacting to strong provocation. Neither Hezbollah nor Hamas, nor Fatah before its electoral defeat behaved responsibly. All three fostered terrorism; all three deserve much of the punishment that Israel has dealt out. But it has not been in the longer-term interests of Israel to have the United States seen to be Israel's apologist. Instead, Israel needs to have a United States that can speak to and negotiate with all parties in these conflicts. Only with American mediation can Israel hope to get the peace that Israel, like everyone in the Middle East, needs.

The actions of the administration in the current crisis have added to the view, held by many in the Arab "street", that the United States is an enemy of the Arab world. Not only do we fully back Israeli actions, we also refuse to speak to Syria even as we make demands of it. Nor do we speak to Hezbollah, Hamas, or Iran. As I've written in other entries, this has had its costs.

One cost that has been mentioned rarely if at all, is that it becomes ever more difficult for people in Iraq to gravitate toward us. We play into the hands of those that hate and fight us in Iraq--including Al Qaeda and its allies--by siding completely with Israel.

This is not true only of the jihadists and those irreconcilably opposed to the United States. One of the characteristics of the Arab world and parts of the Moslem world more generally, including Iran, is that many take events in the Arab-Israeli conflict personally. This is similar to the way many Americans understand the September 11 attacks: Mohammed Atta and his team were attacking not just on strangers in distant cities but all of us. For Arabs, for Iraqis, Israel's attacks are similar; Israel's successes are the failures of all Arabs.

So when Iraqi Prime Minister Nouri al-Maliki came to the United States, he condemned Israel's "hostile acts against Lebanon" and was under pressure from parties within Iraq's parliament to cancel the trip altogether. He remarks garnered criticism here, but they were the least he could do.

The criticism of Maliki was ill-considered. One hopes that the need for him to make it has entered the considerations of those developing our policy toward Israel and the conflict in Lebanon.