Newspaper and Journal Articles-Quoted

Main

Mr. and Mrs.President

See How They Ran

Anyone who has watched Bush both before and after September 11 cannot be that surprised by the speech. Before September 11, the Texan President enjoyed playing the lone gunslinger, doing foreign policy in his own way, on his own terms. Since September 11, the President has harnessed that individualism and iconoclasm in the service of one goal – eradicating terrorism.

To be honest, the goal is too big, too broad, too difficult to accomplish. Bush’s foreign policy constantly risks implosion, seemingly unable to sustain the weight of his own soaring rhetoric. Bush has been forced to compromise, to scale back, to overlook some huge and violent warts growing on some valuable American allies. Most notably, he has more or less forgiven the Saudi Arabians for their role in funding Islamic fundamentalism and producing 15 of the 19 September 11 murders. Furthermore, he has worked with Pakistan, despite its pro-terrorism, pro-Taliban, and pro-al Qaeda track record, to win his big victory in Afghanistan. Nevertheless, Bush’s "Just Say No To Terrorism" strategy has functioned as a moral compass for him. He may not rid the world of his "Axis of Evil" -- Iraq, Iran, and North Korea. He shall, however, keep a focus that would otherwise elude him and often eluded his shrewd and sophisticated predecessor, Bill Clinton.

That focus, that moral clarity which Americans crave, was on full display in Tuesday’s speech. After nearly two years of choosing terror instead of negotiations, and after nearly two years of enjoying much of the world’s support despite that immoral choice, Arafat and the Palestinians heard a clear condemnation from a major world leader. "I call on the Palestinian people to elect new leaders, leaders not compromised by terror," the leader of the free world proclaimed. "Leaders who want to be included in the peace process must show by their deeds an undivided support for the peace process."

To reinforce his message, to demonstrate that he does see things as they are, not as Europeans dream they would be, the President recognized that Iran, Iraq, and Syria were also part of the problem. Knowing full well that at the same time Syria was chairing the United Nations Security Council, an Islamic terrorist organization based in Damascus took credit for murdering Israeli commuters on a bus, Bush thundered: "Syria must choose the right side in the war on terror by closing terrorist camps and expelling terrorist organizations."

The Europeans and Kofi Anan are predictably, sticking by Arafat. Arafat, after all, is their Frankenstein, a monster they funded and legitimized, and continue to bankroll and embrace. Most Palestinians recognize Arafat for the dictator that he is. But most Europeans continue to believe that Arafat is the solution to the problem, rather than an essential part of the problem itself. Better to blame the Israelis for being terrorized than to acknowledge Arafat’s role in giving birth to the entire era of terror, let alone his failure to lead his people away from the politics of jihad and suicide bombing toward a politics of negotiation and compromise.

Of course, calling for the ouster of a leader – which Bush did implicitly though not explicitly – is dangerous. It risks encouraging the Palestinians to fall back in love with a leader whose pre-speech popularity ratings were hovering at 30 percent. But here, perhaps, is a great opportunity hidden in Bush’s challenge. Arafat should be promoted, not demoted, he should become the symbolic President of the Palestinians, while someone else should emerge as the democratically elected – and hopefully more statesmanlike – Prime Minister.

Arranging to have Arafat quietly bumped up not bumped off avoids the awkward problem of having outsiders choose the Palestinians’ leaders. It builds on the insight of many, ranging from the right-wing Israeli Cabinet minister Natan Sharansky to many moderate Palestinians, that without the establishment of a democratic political culture Palestinians will always be saddled with exploitative dictators such as Arafat, who views both his own people and Israelis as cannon fodder.

In lieu of permanent exile, perpetual motion could be just the thing. Let Arafat strut from European capital to European capital, kissing cheeks and reviewing troops, while younger, more flexible, more responsible, leaders emerge. A man who can call being imprisoned in his own stench in his own compound for weeks a "victory," while his people suffered and the terrorist infrastructure he built up was crushed, has a strong and active imagination. Arafat can certainly amuse himself endlessly as the Palestinians’ chairman of the board, having failed so miserably as their chief executive officer.

Gently elevating Arafat toward irrelevance might help re-start the peace process. Palestinians could use his ouster to step back from the culture of hate and the politics of terror; Israelis could use it as an opportunity to return to the spirit of compromise that established a peace with Egypt in 1979, and began the Oslo process in the first place. These days, tragic realities often trump sweeping hopes. But if magically, dramatically, this outside prod does jumpstart negotiations, we will have George W. Bush to thank. It will be yet one more victory for American straight-talking over European convolution.

Gil Troy is Professor of History at McGill University in Montreal. His latest book is Why I Am A Zionist: Israel, Jewish Identity and the Challenges of Today (available from www.bjec.org or from www.israelbooks.com).