Re: Bush mideast policy

On Mon, 26 Mar 2001, Boles (office) wrote:

> > But it seems to me that
> > an eschatological interest in Jewish control of Palestine, and especially
> > Jerusalem, is the cornerstone of a significant part of the US elite,
> > especially that part of it that proclaims itself as born again (as W.
> > does).
> 
> But why Boris?
> 
> Because, as Steve "we don't want to get overly involved in 'peace
> processes'--we have missile defense systems to build!" ?  That sounds on
> target to me.
> 
> I suspect, in addition, that between Sharon and Bush Jr. there is an
> underlying ideological-morally affinity -- a "get tough again" kind of
> mentality.   This would seem why the odd position of Bush Jr. has less to do
> with his policy being driven by US Jewry, though no doubt the Zionists are
> strong and supportive.  And it is in this sense that Bush Jr. is seems more
> similar to Reagan than Bush Sr., if not attempting to emulate him and be
> another Reagan.

This seems to dovetail with the eschatology as well (incidentally, the
Second Cold War under Reagan was very heavily laden with this component -
a book just came out last year explaining the Reagan's foreign policy in
eschatology - sorry, can't remember the name of the author).  The basic
position seems to be:  no more utopian schemes to buy off the world or to
try to make it more like us - "these people" (whoever they happen to be)
only understand force, and the right thing to do is to isolate them in
order to ensure their collapse.  As for the "Zionists", they are always on
board whenever a president talks about doing right by Israel, of course,
but it appears that the Jewish community in this country is fairly divided
and uncertain about what concrete course to support next.

As for Richard's point about the weakness of Arab states:  I don't know,
but it seems to me that the nadir came about 10 years ago with the Gulf
War, when Iraq was crushed, the Gulf states were forcefully reminded of
their dependence on US protection, Arafat was forced to the negotiating
table, and oil prices plummeted.  Today, Iraq is virtually reintegrated
into the structures of Mideast diplomacy (and it is the US which is
finding itself more isolated on that issue), oil prices are rising
(forcing Bush to turn to a more domestic policy at the expense of reneging
on his environmental agenda), and the Arab states are taking a greater
hand in the Palestinian/Israeli affairs.  Overall, their position is still
quite precarious, to be sure, but it's better than it was under Bush Sr.
and Clinton I.

-- 
Boris Stremlin
bc70219@binghamton.edu