The Latest From the Middle East
One of Troy's recent posts prompted this post.
Troy,
You know that in general my tent is in your camp when it comes to the Israeli government.
I agree with Sandalstraps when he mentions Bush's connecting the current atrocity in Lebanon with the War on Terror, thus sanctioning Israel's response. This is the same president that linked Iraq to the War on Terror. If you give this guy enough time, he'll link the outcome of American Idol to the War on Terror.
I can't help but wonder if Bush were truly interested in promoting democracy in the Middle East, he might actually come to the defense of Lebanon. If this. . . man, knew anything about the Middle East he would never have invaded Iraq and he would know that one of the best shots at representative democracy was slowly, painfully developing in Lebanon. After a half century of French colonial rule, three decades of civil war(accelerated by Israel's activity in the 1970's), the oppressive terrorizing forces of Syria and Hezbollah, frequent incursions by Israel, not to mention the assination last year of a popularly elected Prime Minister, Lebanon was emerging as a growing stable democracy in the Middle East. Many in this nation were becoming hopeful that they might conrol their own destinies and make something for themselves.
All this seems to be obliterated with the events of the last week. It may be only a matter of time before foreign nations and more foreign terror groups return to wreak havoc on this ancient country. George W. Bush could end all of this tomorrow by making one call to Ehud Olmert and tell him that he is not getting one more dime of American money or loan guarantees, not to mention weapons or settlement construction subsidies until he stops flying sorties over civilian areas of Beirut. His doing this would send a clear signal that Israel has the right to protect itself, as does any nation, while throwing the fledgling free society in Lebanon a rope.
But he sits idle. Content in endorsing the actions of one nation, so long as it helps him perpetuate his own misguided war. What is the messgae to the world? Sandalstraps is again correct when he says the president's actions conjoin the U.S. and Israel in fighting a war on Islam at worse or insensitivity at best.
And he is the poster boy for this nation.
If George W. Bush were interested in promoting democracy in the Middle East. He might do something other than what he is doing. But alas, he is not interested in that. He is content to be in bed with misguided Christians in high places who believe that the defense of Israel at all costs is the key to hastening the return of the Lord and they are willing to do anything short of painting a cow red to hasten this return. He sleeps well while Lebanese hopes for freedom from fear die with the roar of 'precision' guided missles.
I'll say it again, the man has blood on his hands. So does the nation he leads, even the people who did not vote for him.
Pray for the Lebanese, for Israel and for us.
Peace.
2 Comments:
FunKiller,
Thanks for your thoughtful comments on such a difficult subject, and I wish you and your family well as you move.
I'm no expert on anything, much less something as complex as the Middle East, but I have to wonder if we aren't often conflating two goals as though they were the same thing:
1. Spreading democracy to the Middle East, and
2. Making peace in the Middle East.
While I certainly am thankful to be a citizen in what is still a liberal democracy (even if both the liberalism and democracy of our country have been threatened by a growing movement to recast America as a contemporary theocracy), it is by no means clear to me that we have a moral right much less a duty to attempt to impose a particular political philosophy on another region; and it seems unwise to me to attempt to impose that philosophy on a region whose history includes few of the ideas which led the West to arrive at the ideal of liberal democracy.
I often suspect that our attempt to evangelize our own mode of government in fact makes the serious and morally imperative business of spreading peace much, much more difficult. Additionally, it is by no means clear to me that if we achieve the first goal (which is so often connected to the more noble second goal) the second goal will necessarily or even probably follow.
Most people in the Middle East don't trust us, and their reasons for not trusting us are obvious and need to be honored. We talk a good game about peace, but have more violence in our culture than any other developed nation. We talk a good deal about non-proliferation, but have more nuclear weapons than any other nation, enough to destroy the entire world many, many times over. We talk a good game about just conduct in wars, while our bombing runs kill countless civilians demonstrating very little concern for the lives of non-combatants. And we talk a good game about pluralism, but still hold that our way of doing things is the normative one, and should be binding on all cultures.
It is difficult to find partners for peace when our actions are so duplicitous. It is difficult to find partners of peace, further, when our actions show no real concern for peace.
We should, I think, be about the business of making peace, not exporting and imposing democracy. A liberal democracy is a high ideal, and a fine way to govern a nation, but it is not the only high ideal, and it is not the only way to govern a nation, and it cannot succeed when the will of the people of a region (those governing and those being governed) is not behind it.
Wishing for everyone to be like us is no way, in other words, to win their respect and to make peace.
Sorry to rant at you. I hope that you can see from this comment that the rant isn't directed at you so much as it is at our collective way of thinking. I've read a few of your pieces here, and can see that you are a very sincere and thoughtful person, and I do very sincerely wish you and yours the best as you prepare for your move.
May peace be with us all.
The two of you have both said fascinating things. In Funkiller I hear an anger at the current administration which I identify with so well, in Sandalstraps the point is made clear: democracy is not always easily implanted and is not the only way to govern, even govern humanely.
Thanks Funkiller for taking the time to respond to the issue. I know you're into this topic.
What has to be rexamined are the original Palestinian wounds. The methods and behaviors of Israel in 48 when the Palestinians were bulldozed from their homes. Those wounds persist.
And I do still think that many Christians, in America at least, whether they think it has anything to do with the 2nd coming or not, support Israel as God's chosen people, still (though the temple, as Jesus predicted, was destroyed and with it the covenant and cultus, in my view). Israelis are white, mostly, they're a great group to root for because of centuries of abuse, and they read the OT. Lay them alongside Muslim culture and many Americans do in fact take sides.
Thanks again to both of you.
t
Post a Comment
<< Home