Last Thursday, Siberian Airlines flight 1812, flying from Tel-Aviv to Novosibirsk, the capital of Siberia, crashed into the Black Sea, killing 67 Israeli citizens and 11 crew members. Both Russian and Israeli authorities, conducting a joint investigation, quickly concluded that SA flight 1812 had most likely been destroyed by a terrorist attack. Hours after the plane had plunged into the Black Sea, Russian President Vladimir Putin publicly stated that terrorism was almost certainly the culprit in this tragedy.
Not long after the crash of flight 1812, the Pentagon boldly asserted that an Ukrainian missile had accidentally misfired during one of the Ukrainian military's training exercises and hit flight 1812. This is highly unlikely. First, the Pentagon proposes that an S200 ground-air missile hit flight 1812, despite the fact that the S200 has a range of no more than 240 kilometers, while the distance from the Ukrainian military exercises in the Crimea to the point at which flight 1812 was downed was more than 300 kilometers. Second, the S200 missile is fitted with a self-destruct device that would detonate immediately if the missile were to go astray. Both Russian and Israeli authorities favor the theory that a hand-held radio bomb had been planted in the plane before it left Novosibirsk for Tel-Aviv by a terrorist working for a Siberian airport crew. Why, then, is the United States still so insistent that an errant Ukrainian missile downed flight 1812?
Quite simply, if the United States were to admit that terrorism had destroyed 67 Israeli lives on Thursday, Oct. 4, then the American public, already shocked from the World Trade Center attacks, would stand even more firmly behind Israel and increased pressure would be placed on the United States to include Israel in its anti-terror coalition. This is precisely what the Bush administration does not want for the moment, so diplomatic pressure has been exerted on both Russia and Israel to keep quiet about flight 1812. Even if, by some bizarre occurrence, it turns out that flight 1812 was not downed by a terrorist attack, this does not excuse the fact that the United States almost immediately ruled out terrorism as a possibility for the tragedy, even though the United States had no evidence other than alleged satellite pictures which have yet to be released. The United States, it seems, is still more than willing to ignore terrorism on Israel when it suits the United States' political purposes.
Ever since President Bush announced his "war on terrorism," his administration has made very clear that Israel, the United States' best ally in the region, would not be included in the anti-terrorism coalition. At the same time, the United States has invited Syria and Iran to join the terrorist coalition - two states which harbor and support countless terrorist groups and are two of the only seven nations listed by the State Department as terrorist-supporting states. Earlier this year, Iran held a conference which included the heads of most Islamic terrorist groups. What ever happened to making war on all the states that harbor terrorism, as Bush has promised repeatedly to do?
More troubling is how the Bush administration, and particularly Secretary of State Colin Powell, pressured Ariel Sharon, Israeli Prime Minister, into agreeing to declare a "cease-fire" with Palestinian Authority leader Yassar Arafat. Bush spoke with Sharon over the phone and demanded that he declare a "cease-fire," and when Sharon expressed reservations (three such "cease-fires" have been declared already, only to fall apart amidst new waves of Palestinian violence), Bush accused Sharon of being the only leader to refuse an American request since the World Trade Center attacks on Sept. 11. Bush might have done well to remember that, despite repeated requests since Sept. 11, Syria has not dispelled any of the numerous terrorist groups it harbors, Syria and Iran are still backing Hizbullah, a militant Islamic terrorist group and Saudi Arabia has refused to allow the United States to use Saudi air space in upcoming attacks.
But Sharon obliged Bush by agreeing to call a "cease-fire" with the Palestinian Authority. Since this "cease-fire," Arafat's own forces were involved in a terrorist attack in Afula, in which three Israelis were killed and 16 wounded. On Monday, the 100th Palestinian suicide bomber to attack Israeli since September of last year claimed another Israeli life, and since the "cease-fire" of Sept. 26, another four Israelis have been killed and over 20 have been wounded in other terrorist attacks. Yet, until Oct. 4, the United States was poised to send a high-level diplomatic envoy to discuss the formation of a Palestinian State. Whether the Palestinians deserve a state or not is another question, but by proposing the formation of a Palestinian State now, after a year of unrelenting terrorist attacks against Israel, the Bush administration is doing little more than rewarding terrorism.
Why has the government of the United States been so unsympathetic to Israel, which has suffered from almost daily casualties by terrorist attacks for over a year? One reason is that, since hatred for Israel is so overwhelming in Arab nations, if the United States took a decidedly pro-Israel stance right now, the region would shortly erupt in total war, of which Israel would bear the brunt and for which the United States is not prepared. So perhaps the Unites States is playing down its relationship with Israel to stall for time until it can consolidate its regional position. For friends of Israel, this is a consoling thought, however unlikely it may be. More likely is that the United States is merely searching for a "temporary solution" in Israel, like the one Neville Chamberlain imposed on Czechoslovakia in 1938. Israel, however, will not be so obliging in accepting its own doom, meted out from its supposed allies. As Sharon said, "We will not be Czechoslovakia . Israel will fight terrorism.
Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The News-Letter.