Posted on 04/28/2002 11:06:53 AM PDT by xvb
Anti-Europe rhetoric over Mideast clouds EU-US summit
Reuters
By Jennifer Knoll
WASHINGTON (Reuters) - As President Bush prepares to host European Union leaders at an annual U.S.-EU summit this week, anger is growing in Washington over what some see as excessive European sympathy for Palestinians in their struggle with Israel.
Some Republican and Democratic members of Congress say European countries are undermining efforts by the United States, which has taken a more pro-Israeli line, to end the violence in the Middle East and work toward a lasting peace.
The dispute, along with trade battles and European unease with Bush's goal of ousting Iraqi President Saddam Hussein, risked straining vital U.S.-European ties, analysts say.
"The rift emerging between the U.S. and EU is real," said Simon Serfaty, director of the Europe Program at the Center for Strategic and International Studies. "The Europeans don't seem eager to follow us, whether on Iraq or Israel," he said, adding it had led to "a very bitter dialogue."
Europeans respond that Bush's pro-Israeli stance has cost the trust not only of the Palestinians but of Arab states as well, a point made by Saudi Arabia's Crown Prince Abdullah when he met Bush at the president's Texas ranch last week.
The rhetoric has heated up in the run-up to Thursday's summit, where Bush will meet with European Commission President Romano Prodi and Spanish Prime Minister Jose Maria Aznar, whose country currently holds the rotating presidency of the 15-nation EU.
Sen. John McCain of Arizona, who challenged Bush for the Republican presidential nomination in 2000, said last week: "Our European allies are dismissing Israel's legitimate security concerns." Noting recent attacks against Jews in Europe, McCain added: "In some quarters, Jews are once again threatened with attacks on their institutions."
Richard Perle, who served in President Reagan's Defense Department and now advises the Bush administration, said: "The Europeans are anti-Israel."
Saying European states had given Palestinian President Yasser Arafat $2 billion to $3 billion in recent years, Perle said: "Can you imagine the U.S. giving aid without any strings attached to a government that is convincing teen-agers to strap bombs to themselves to kill other people?"
Many Europeans were also deeply concerned about Bush's characterization of Iraq, Iran and North Korea as members of an "axis of evil," developing weapons of mass destruction and supporting international terrorism.
Europe has also been skeptical about Washington's apparent determination to oust Saddam by force.
Serfaty said European governments' Middle East policies were motivated by their proximity to the region, dependence on Gulf oil and their domestic constituencies. Between 16 and 18 million Muslims live in Europe.
He said it was just that vulnerability that would ultimately require the Europeans to get more firmly behind the U.S. war on terrorism and action against Iraq.
"The next wave of terror will be in Europe, not here. They have all sorts of soft targets," he said.
A joint U.S.-European approach to the war on terrorism and the Arab-Israeli conflict offered the only chance for success, some experts said.
Ronald Asmus, a European expert at the Council on Foreign Relations, said Secretary of State Colin Powell went to Spain to meet European leaders before heading to the Middle East on his recent peace mission in order "to gauge how we could work together and how much common ground there is."
Serfaty said Bush appeared increasingly determined, however, to set the global agenda on the Middle East, adopting a position that "if you cannot follow us, please stand aside."
Could you explain how the American invasion of Iraq, crushing of Palestinians and weakening of Arab states is going to help Europe?
Is stomping out militant Islam "weakening" Arab states? Only an Islamist would think so.
Could you explain how can Europe finance Palestinian Authority which sponsors and condones terrorist raids into Israel and expect to achieve peace? Can you explain the immorality of the European position that Israel's has no right to defend itself, and its exercize of that right is a war crime?
Finally, how does it help Europe to maintain corrupt tyrannical and failed Arab states that aside from oil either produce terrorism or waves of immigrants looking to colonize Europe?
Despite his appearance, he's a loyal Brit and has no truck with the Muslims or their sympathizers.
I was not aware of Boy George's political views, though I strongly doubt that he is a Torie. I am curious to know what his view is of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.
Destroying secular Arab regimes like in Bagdad and Damascus will make militant Islam stronger, not weaker. The same was as helping Taleban to take power in Afghanistan or KLA to spread in Balkans or Wahhabi agents to destabilise Caucasus region.
I do not believe that Saddam Hussein has bomb or will be able to have the bomb in near future (in the long run anyone can have bomb, Hussein will be dead and ANY country with the bomb can go nuts and use it in a war).
Could you explain how can Europe finance Palestinian Authority which sponsors and condones terrorist raids into Israel and expect to achieve peace? Can you explain the immorality of the European position that Israel's has no right to defend itself, and its exercize of that right is a war crime?
PAY ATTENTION, PLEASE, I am not supporter of Palestinians and I am not supporter of Israel. FYI - in matter of my preferences I prefer Israelis over Muslim Palestinians and Christian Palestinians over Israelis.
But my objective is to be objective and to understand the situation without falling for the propaganda from either side. Do you have any propblem with that? I do not think that Europeans finance terorist activities and their help to Palestinians is much, much smaller than the one Israel get from United States.
I have strong doubts if Muslims like his appearance.
So according to your analysis, militant Islam will be stronger if we topple the regimes that make them stronger? I guess that makes sense to those whose rag is wrapped too tight on their heads.
What other consequences could come from my point of view?
Will the militant Islamist want to destroy the West?
Oh, they already have that view.
Will the militant Islamist vow to kill each and every American and Jew?
Oh, they already want to do that as well.
Will the "Arab Street" have contempt for America and the West?
Again, nothing has changed.
So what else do we have to loose by killing or pursuading each and every militant Islamist and regime?
Nothing! But we have everything to lose if we don't.
There is a new doctrine now. Those who harbor terrorist, are themselves terrorist. The Afghanistan and Balkans analogy is passe now. This will no longer be tolerated until another Klinton comes along.
There are many of us who would have executed this war in a far more deadly and quicker way, i.e., nukes.
Please pay some attention. Secular or rather secularist regimes are opposed to the militant Islam. Don't you get it, really?
Where Christians have more freedom and equality in Syria, Iraq or in Saudi Arabia? Why?
There are no Christian citizens of Saudi Arabia, they were all expelled together with the Jews following Mohammed's death.
In Syria and Iraq Christians are dhimmis, who live at the sufferance of the Muslim rulers.
You do not know and you are making it up or someone misled you. Saudi Arabia is a new creature made by the British by imposing crazed Wahhabi sect of Saudies over the mainline Muslim population. Wahhabi sect is only couple centuries old and was put into power in Arabia not so long ago. Christian in Saudi occupied Arabia are severly persecuted and even the Saudi allies like Americancs found their religious freedom very curtailed.
In Iraq and Syria Christians are in the government and there are many churches and Syria ruling group is not exactly of Muslim background. In those two secular regimes the Sharia is not the supreme law.
I repeat, Jews and Christians were expelled from the "hijaz" (what is today Saudi Arabia) soon after Mohammed's death, and they have never been allowed to settle there since.
Christians in Syria and Iraq suffer from the same oppression under dictatorship as their fellow Muslim citizens but on top of that they are second-class citizens and persecution of them continues to this day.
Actually I do.
Answer me this oh great one.
Is the Bathe party in Iraq a secular or religious regime?
I think you and I would agree that they are more or less secular right?
Is it not true that Saddam Hussien is supplying money, arms and other resources to the Palestinian animals who are blowing up innocent men, women and children in Israel?
In case you have not been paying attention, there is no such thing as a "moderate" Arab nation. The Saudis, Egyptians, Syrians and other so called secular regimes are whole heartedly supporting terrorism throughout the world.
So who is paying attention now?
My point is that individual regimes in Middle East differ a lot one from another and that Syria, Iraq and Turkey are secularist. Overthrow one of those secular regimes will help militant Islam, contrary to what some claim. In addition I claim that Christians in Iraq and Syria are treated much better than in Saudi Arabia (which is not a regime to be overthrown). So the proposed policy is not in the interest of Christians.
I would not dare to consider any man Arab, Jew, Muslim, Christian, American or a Pole an animal. It would be a serious sin.
I presume (I am not privy to the real intelligence information) that Saddam Hussein provides various help to the militant Palestinians. At the present situation it makes perfect sense, because it makes United States and Israel very occupied and the eventual attack on Iraq might be postponed or ever abandoned. In the long term the Baath pan-arabist ideology imposes an obligation of helping fellow Arabs and working on their unification. (This particular obligation is quite typical to other nationalist movements like the one which unified Italy from the time of Garibaldi.) So I would bet 10 to 1 that indeed Baghdad is helping Palestinian militants.
Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.