This phase of the Israeli-Arab conflict, like the military campaign against the terror networks, is likely to take a long time, and go through different phases. Tactical propaganda victories will be short- lived, and the outcome will be determined by the implementation of an effective and consistent strategy.
In the first round, as the US State Department organized the coalition following the September 11 attacks, the Arabs jumped to a quick advantage. Following the script from the 1991 war against Iraq, Egypt and Saudi Arabia demanded payment in the form of pressure on Israel in exchange for lukewarm support.
As a result, the Bush administration, which initially avoided repeating president Bill Clinton´s failures and embrace of Arafat, returned to the old formulas. Despite the fiasco of the Peres-Arafat meeting, President George W. Bush endorsed a Palestinian State, there are plans for a meeting with Arafat and the declaration of yet another grandiose peace plan.
In addition, while declaring war on global terror, Washington failed to include Hamas, Islamic Jihad and Hizbullah on the list of terror groups. From Jerusalem, it seemed that Arafat had gained the upper hand in Washington.
Throughout this period, concern in Israel grew, and Sharon was pressed to issue a strong response. The "Czechoslovakia" speech departed from diplomatic protocol, and like all historical analogies was not entirely appropriate, but the concerns were very real.
In order to avoid more ruffled feathers in Washington, Sharon did not raise the bitter lessons of the 1990/1 coalition (of which Secretary of State Colin Powell was a major architect, and the then commander of the US military). In that round, Israel paid the price for holding the coalition together by acting with restraint in the face of Palestinian terror and Iraqi Scud missile attacks. American promises were not or could not be fulfilled, including the pledge to destroy Iraqi President Saddam Hussein´s regime and his ability to threaten Israel.
Later, Israel was forced into the Madrid Peace Conference, which led to the failed Oslo "peace process." Now, a decade later, Sharon´s message is that Israel is not prepared to be the punching bag again for Arab coalition members.
While this speech was "unacceptable" to the White House spokesman, a brief "cloudburst" by Powell, and an awkward situation for some American Jewish leaders (concerned that Bush would mistakenly take the criticism personally), it got their attention. After a number of attacks and murders, the Israeli military moved against Palestinian positions in Hebron and Gaza, demonstrating that Sharon was serious about fighting terror
As a result, Powell and the European Union greatly increased pressure on the Palestinians, and for the first time in five years, Arafat´s forces acted to prevent terror attacks. Palestinian militias also killed a number of Palestinians demonstrating in Gaza in favor of bin Laden, and even asked for Israeli tear-gas and other materials to deal with these riots. This violent response was triggered by the perception that these demonstrations, like the apparently unauthorized terror attack on the Elei Sinai settlement on the edge of Gaza, were unacceptable challenges to Arafat´s leadership.
The strategy of confrontation, while earning quick praise from Washington and Europe, will only succeed if Arafat and the Palestinian Authority can keep the lid on terror attacks. Pressures generated by protests against the American attacks in Afghanistan and against Arafat´s own policies will make this increasingly difficult.
After a long period of incitement and support for anti-American and anti-Israeli terror, the sudden shift may lead to more civil conflict. Arafat´s position was already quite precarious following a year of violence with no tangible results, as well as a legacy of corruption and authoritarianism.
At the same time, the old Arab myths and propaganda focusing on "the crimes of Israeli occupation," and attempts to justify terrorism in the name of Palestinian "liberation" do not sell well in the US. In addition, despite the initial flirtation, key Arab states, including Syria, Iran, and Iraq will come under increasing pressure for their own role in terrorism.
In the list of 22 most-wanted terrorists, the US included three prominent members of Hizbullah, which is supported and trained by Iran and Syria
In contrast, the importance of Israel´s tangible assets and contributions to the war against terror will increase as the war intensifies. The similarities between the Israeli and American situations - democracies facing threats and attacks from radical Islamic groups - are too strong to be covered up by political expediency.
In developing policies to respond to suicide bombers, airline hijacking, chemical and biological weapons, and other forms of terror, Israel has many years of valuable experience. Israeli intelligence has been following the activities of Islamic terror groups and their supporters for years, and this information is vital to the US-led effort.
As a result, while Arafat and his Arab allies may win a few tactical victories in Washington, these are likely to be short-lived. Israel remains the strongest and only reliable ally in the region, and during a long anti-terror campaign, the level of cooperation, and the close bonds linking the two countries, will grow. Despite the occasional cloudburst, the relationship remains secure.
(© 1995-2001, The Jerusalem Post 10/12/01)