The events of Sept. 11, 2001 did not begin a new era for the United States. Rather, they uncovered another layer of the darkening skies we as the safeguard of Western culture are going to face. Indeed, our next "phase" in the war against terror, a supposed military action in Iraq, may be the first step toward a brand new war: World War III.
Two weeks ago at the Beirut Arab Summit, the attending nations fleshed out and adopted a Saudi Peace initiative that many believe could spearhead a cease-fire and pave the way toward an accelerated peace process between Israel and the rest of the Arab world. If but this were true, it would be news. This is not the case, however. Wishing does not make it so, and an agreement to agree is not a contract.
The true nature of the proposal lurks in a supposed "fair trade." In this case, the sheiks, princes, and self-appointed presidents like the "Baghdad Butcher" and the rest of the usual suspects want the West, meaning the United States (as the Arabs have already bought and paid for the Europeans), to exchange Israel's sovereignty for supposed peace in the Middle East.
The deal cooked up in the casbah of Beirut demands the so-called "right of return," namely, to allow the influx of millions of Palestinian refugees, coupled with their staggering birthrates, to settle in Israel. This not too subtle demand is a call for the destruction of Israel because such an invasion of Muslims would destroy the identity and express purpose for which the State of Israel was created - to provide a sovereign nation in the Jewish homeland.
Plainly, Prince Saud al-Faisal, the acting Saudi head of state, means to trade recognition of Israel's existence and independence in exchange for "security" - his own. This is a one-way ticket to oblivion for the Israelis and likely just buys the royal family a little time before they are ultimately overrun by the hatemongering mobs he has sotto voce and otherwise, fueled against Israel and the United States.
Claiming the other day that, "all the neighborhood will be at peace with Israel, will recognize their right to exist," not only does the Saudi's Trojan Horse of a peace proposal demand allowing "the return of refugees" for Israel's security, but it would require a "full withdrawal from all occupied Arab lands." Apart from the fact that even the U.N. recognizes the disputed nature of much of these so-called "Arab lands," isn't the point of creating a Palestinian state so that they will have a nation of their own? Why then is it so important that the population to comprise this newly founded state be able to return to the land they abandoned voluntarily when they were convinced by the fathers of these Arab leaders that the Jews would be destroyed and they - the Palestinians - would walk back in?
These are not good faith proposals, however, when coupled with blatant lies, that "it is the actions of Israel that are creating these suicide bombers and it is that violence," then there is a fundamental lack of responsibility that resonates danger like the rumbling explosion of the World Trade Centers collapsing under the weight of Saudi masterminds.
The Arabs are galvanizing support among their masses in the streets of Beirut, Rabat, Damascus and elsewhere. While the French tolerate the burning of synagogues, and the Belgians and Germans exercise their free speech rights to anti-Semetic rhetoric, the treachery of the Saddam gang builds to a climactic moment. The newly crowned peace push of 2002 is only the war rhetoric of 1967 couched in kinder words. Yet this time around, there is another ultimatum, the implications of which extend beyond Israel. The other resolutions passed in Beirut present perhaps and even more troubling notion than the call to end Israel, which is only to be expected.
Rejecting American efforts to lead a coalition against Iraq, the financial backer and cheerleader of suicide murderers, the Arab summit declared the "demand [for] the respect of Iraq's independence, sovereignty, security and unity." A pointed jab in the face of Vice President Cheney, who had just spent two weeks in the region trying to rally support for such a war, this resolution effectively declared their own Warsaw Pact calling for a pan-Arab alliance. An attack against one nation will be "consider[ed] a security threat to the Arab states as a whole."
Unfortunately, this represents nothing new. From the hijackings of Pan Am Flight 103 to the bombing of the American Embassy in Beirut, to the savage attack on a church in Pakistan, to the murder of U.S. sailors on the U.S.S. Cole, the same methods and tactics applied before were merely test runs for the evil being carried out today. There is a pattern here; and yet, they remain our "allies?"
Is Israel the Arabs' version of Hitler's Spain? Is it the proving ground for the new Arab war against the West? The open question for President Bush, his War on Terrorism, and a potentially wider war is whether the Arab world, joined by a craven European consortium, will successfully fool the United States into betraying its dear ally and remove Israel with street mobs in Arab capitals, suicide bombers and slick public relations campaigns directed as a major step in their march of hate.
Where are the "moderate" Arab leaders? Does the Saudi Prince feel so threatened that he cannot "level" with his own people that the root of Salaam and Shalom are the same - peace? The moderate Arabs must make themselves heard. From al-Jazeera hate TV programming to the speeches of foreign ministers, the Muslim world consists of a disturbingly distorted spectrum of radicals to zealots.
So what are Israel, America, and the West to do? It remains unclear whether the United States will call the Beirut bluff and not proceed with their plan to attack Iraq. President Bush has vainly beseeched Arab nations to denounce terror, something they still refuse to do. Instead, he called for Israel to "withdraw its tanks without delay." This conditional coupling that would allow some terror, if it just kills some Israelis, and which would repay Arafat's terrorism with a place at the bargaining table will most assuredly boomerang against America and undercut our wider war on these killers.
What is more dangerous to U.S. foreign policy interests, Israel's success in the ugly business of its own war on terrorism for its survival or risking further alienation of Arab masses who have and are further demonstrating their irrational abhorrence of the United States and West? Bush must decide this carefully.
Around the Islamic world there are mass demonstrations, some even in Western nations like Australia. The populace is revving itself up for war. Soon, the one result that Arab leaders fear most will happen and the conflict will spill into neighboring countries, triggering riots and revolution. For as long as they can dress themselves up with dynamite sticks in the morning in preparation for their ghastly work, then the entire world is in danger.
President Bush can free the West from its hostage state. Inevitably, the President's declared war on terror will find its way into countries that nominally ascribe to being in our coalition because those same nations, including Saudi Arabia and Iran, aid and abet terrorists. By recognizing the unavoidable outcome of appeasement and breaking ranks with the Arab world, Bush may very well avert World War III. The President has already said it: America will not deal with terrorists.
Just as purging Nazism was necessary for the world's freedom, overcoming radical Islam bent on destruction and violent Jihad from the Middle East is essential to the survival of Western Culture. Israel is the modern day England, an outpost of freedom in a sea of terror and oppression thousands of miles from the protected American shores. September 11 may be the Pearl Harbor of a new war. How long will it take for us to realize this? The sooner we do, the sooner we can continue onto victory in the war against terror and live in peace once again.
Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The News-Letter.