|
Many in the Arab world portray Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon virtually
the same way as the Bush administration portrays Saddam Hussein. The parallels
are astounding.
The Bush administration says
that Saddam has twice invaded his neighbors -- Iran in 1980 and Kuwait in
1990. Well, Israel has invaded its neighbors three times -- Egypt in 1956;
Egypt, Jordan, and Syria in 1967; and Lebanon in 1982.
Saddam claimed he was fully justified
in his attacks. Iran under Ayatollah Khomeini had been urging Iraqi Shiites
to overthrow Saddam's secular Baath regime as part of the Iranian leader's
insidious scheme to export his Islamic revolution. Kuwait had to be stopped
from stealing Iraqi oil from a shared oil field on their border.
Similarly, Israel claimed self-defense
in its incursions. Its Arab neighbors employed terrorism, used the Palestinians
to subvert the Jewish state, and threatened war. Sharon fought in all three
wars and actually planned the 1982 advance into a helpless Lebanon.
The motives of Saddam and the
Iraqis and Sharon and the Israelis can certainly be called into question.
Self-serving interests -- control of waterways and oil for Iraq, and control
of land and marginalizing Palestinians for Israel -- lay behind their so-called
defensive strikes.
The Bush administration says
that Saddam terrorizes and represses people under his control. The Iraqi
dictator incarcerates his opponents or assassinates them at will. The Kurds
in northern Iraq have been systematically repressed and whole villages have
been destroyed. Well, Sharon comes from a long line of prime ministers who
have kept Israel's Arab citizens in second class, destroyed Arab villages,
bulldozed Palestinian homes, laid siege to their leaders, assassinated their
militants, and terrorized ordinary Palestinians.
The Bush administration says
that Saddam continues to develop biological and chemical weapons of mass
destruction, or WMD, and is seeking to develop nuclear arms. He has at least
20 Scud missiles tucked away, the administration claims, and has promised
fierce resistance if attacked. Saddam threatens his neighbors and is too
irrational to be deterred or contained.
Sharon, of course, actually has
a robust stock of WMD, including an estimated 50 nuclear weapons. He controls
the most lethal air force in the region and maintains a large arsenal of
both cruise and ballistic missiles. Sharon has made no secret of the fact
that Israel will retaliate with "weapons of its own choosing" if attacked.
The Bush administration links
Saddam to international terrorism, including a definite connection to al-Qaida.
He is also, Bush has said, "a guy who tried to kill my dad."
Israel has been known to hunt
down opponents in far-off lands (even Sweden) and kill those on its list
of enemies.
Finally, the Bush administration
condemns Saddam for violating 16 UN resolutions, thereby flouting the will
of the international community.
Well, Israel has flouted even
more -- over 25 by one count. Only days ago, a UN Security Council resolution,
approved with 14 votes to one abstention (the United States), demanded that
Israel end its siege of Yasser Arafat's Ramallah compound. Sharon continued
the siege even after receiving a personal message from Bush urging him to
end it.
Is it any wonder that Sharon
is Saddam for most of the Arab and Islamic world?
If Bush is willing, even eager,
to go to war against "evil man" Saddam, it should surprise no one that many
dream of doing the same against Sharon for essentially the same reasons.
There are aphorisms, of course,
explaining why some like Sharon and hate Saddam and vice versa:
"Where you stand depends upon
where you sit." The United States sits among a strong population devoted
to Israel and who have enormous political clout. The Arabs and Palestinians
sit next to a hard-line Israel.
"It all depends upon whose ox
is being gored." Israel is a U.S. ally that can be counted on to gore Washington's
enemies when the chips are down. Israel is goring Palestinians, much to the
dismay of Arabs and Muslims.
All this adds up to the United
States -- because of Israel -- having one hell of a time trying to convince
the world that it has a righteous case for an assault on Saddam.
Nicholas Berry, director of
ForeignPolicyForum.com in Washington, contributed this comment to The Moscow
Times.
|
