Sunday, November 12, 2006

THE SOLUTION FOR IRAQ

THE SOLUTION FOR IRAQ AND PEACE IN THE MIDEAST

For peace to return to Iraq, the United States must begin initiatives that fundamentally change our role in the Mideast, change our relationships with the countries of that area, and the perception of our goals in the minds of the people in those areas. If we can view the turmoil in Iraq as a subset of the overall turmoil in the Mideast, and focus our initiatives on the Mideast, we will have a better opportunity at helping restore peace in Iraq.

The initiatives are twofold: Disengagement with Israel and direct talks with Syria, Iran and the Hamas political party.

Disengagement with Israel:
Beginning with the premise that we recognize Israel's right to exist, we must, however, radically change our policy to jump start a peace process. We must disengage from our military and financial support for Israel. Put Israel on notice that all military contracts, all financial aid, etc will be suspended until Israel unilaterally withdraws to the original UN defined green line. Be assured that with this move, we are not abandoning Israel. To the contrary, we would be doing this with the expectation that a final peace can come to Israel, within its original borders. Of course, this will be painful, expensive, and will depend on the political will of the Israeli government and its people. However, by our immediate act of disengagement, we will have changed our relationship with the entire Mideast area for better, regardless of how long it takes for Israel to accomplish this. The next move will be up to Israel, but at least, the US can be seen as a force for good and no longer trapped in a dysfunctional relationship with Israel.

Disengagement from Israel is absolutely the first constructive step that must be taken to create an atmosphere for peace talks resulting in a lasting peace among all countries in the Mideast. Concurrently, we must address the millions of Palestinian refugees, still living in camps (and in limbo for over two generations) through-out the Mideast. Disengagement, along with the absolute acceptance of the right for Israel to exist within its original borders will be painful for the Palestinians to accept, as well. This represents the ultimate imposition of a two-state solution, a solution that many Palestinians do not want, in favor of returning to original lands within Israel. There will unhappiness on both sides (the usual trademark of a successful compromise). However, the pain on all sides will be worth it, if peace finally comes to the people of that area, and more importantly, to the children and grandchildren of that area.

Mideast diplomacy:
Coupled with disengagement with Israel, we need to start talks with other Arab countries, previously (and unfortunately) labeled under the banner: axis of evil. This will also cause a profound change as we agree to open dialogue from a position of mutual respect, with countries like Iran and Syria, and political parties like Hamas. Of course, there are militant voices and actions in these countries, but surely the United States is secure enough to reach though the saber rattling and open up dialogues with peace as the objective.

War in Iraq:
How will all of this help in Iraq? Iraq is in a civil war, coupled with a complete breakdown of civil authority, but not all of it is internally created. There are outside forces, currently fueling the fires, that could also become major influences for a peaceful solution. The Sunni faction has its supporters in Saudi Arabia, Egypt and Jordan. The Shiite faction has its supporters in Iran, Syria and the Palestinians. If we had full diplomatic relations with all of these groups, we could encourage them to help us find a peaceful solution.

Regardless of the political nature of these countries, whether republic, theocracy, or monarchy, they would rather choose peace and prosperity over turmoil, if they truly believed that the United States was not a threat. If we can get beyond the rhetoric, and if other Mideast countries begin to see us, not just as a powerful military and economic force, but as a force for good, they will become our allies in forging a workable compromise that creates an environment for peace in Iraq.

The required compromises will be uncomfortable for all sides, including the United States, but the result will be peace and stability, which are needed to nurture a fledgling democracy. Diplomacy has not been a strong trait of the current administration, although past presidents of the same political party have been considerably more effective. One has only to look back at the Nixon – Kissinger era and the profound change to the world political landscape caused by opening a dialogue with China. We forget how much "saber rattling" was going on, then. We were the "capitalist pig" and they were the "red menace". However, in that single astute decision to open a dialogue with China, Nixon forever changed the balance of power and considerably defused tensions between all superpowers of that era. The same could be accomplished in this "era of terrorism", if we choose diplomacy over rejection, name calling and isolation.

The Future after Iraq
Actually, the future is now, for as soon as we begin installing these policy changes, we will have changed the future for the better. Peace in Iraq will take time and the road will not be easy, even with the consensus of all Mideast neighbors. The long term strategy, beyond Iraq, is to increase tolerance and understanding between Islam and the West. Temporary disengagement with Israel, peace in Iraq, a reduction of the US military presence in the Mideast and the diplomacy of respect and understanding will significantly defuse Islamic anger. Continuing incidents of extremist terrorism will be met with firm and effective resistance by an expanded, cooperating alliance of religions and nationalities.

A progressive administration will have a permanent Islamic task force as a source of cabinet guidance for integration of Islamic and "western" goals. This panel will include innovative thinkers like, Fouad Ajami, Merve Kavakci and Tariq Ramadan. Understanding is key to a peaceful and prosperous future. We do not want to repeat a history of 1,000 years of debilitating conflict between Islam and the West. Future generations of children growing up in peace in Israel, Palestine, Iraq, Iran, the United States and other countries of the world, will look back on this US policy shift as one of the most significant and positive turn of events in the 21st century.

2 comments:

A Force for Good said...

This week the Washington Post presented an article on the Iraq Study Group, a group made up of prestigious Americans, led by former Secretary of State James Baker. It began with this sentence: "The Iraq Study Group has few options...that haven't already been tried or considered".
Not surprising, when the ideas are no better than, "greater emphasis on training Iraqi troops".
However, there was one incredibly encouraging statement: "Baker is also exploring whether a broader US initiative in tackling the Arab-Israeli conflict is needed to help stabilize the region."
This is exactly why the message is more important than the candidate. Now, if Baker can only take the leap from "broader initiative" to "disengagement", we will be one step closer to peace.

Anonymous said...

You mention Tariq Ramadan as a potential member of an Islamic task force. I find it interesting that someone who could help increase our understanding has been denied a Visa, 3 times, by the Homeland Security. Unfortunately, at times, Homeland Security exhibits the same guilt by association, scare tactics that was so emblematic of the McCarthy era in the 50's.