HERE WE GO AGAIN IN THE MIDDLE EAST

Notes of Concern…
…Jack Blair


HERE WE GO AGAIN

Recent news reports tell about President Obama’s “invitation” to the Israeli Prime Minister and the Palestinian leader to come visit him in Washington, DC so that they could work out a peace in the Middle East.

As Yogi Berra once said: “déjà vu all over again.”

No one could blame anyone in middle age or older for simply ignoring this story and going right to the sports page. Or perhaps straight to the comics. Some might even see a reasonable similarity between this news and the comics.

I admit up front to being jaded in my view of these presidential interventions. Every American president in recent memory has “invited” leaders from the Middle East to Washington for “talks.”

If you read biography or history you know that these “invitations” are not really invitations. They are command performances. With our influence in that region and our key role in maintaining a balance of power there, no one would dare refuse an American President’s importuning.

The histories and biographies also make very clear that every agreement that is reached and announced with great fanfare, usually at The White House or at Camp David, eventually falls apart.

Sometimes the appearance of an agreement brings great press to the American president. It has even been an important part of Nobel Peace Prize determinations in some cases.

The repercussions for non-American attendees have not been as pleasant. After Anwar Sadat shook hands with Menachem Begin with The White House as a backdrop he was shot to death during a military parade in his own country.

Israeli leader Yitzhak Rabin who wanted peace suffered the same fate, although not during a parade!

Other Israeli leaders have suffered at the hands of their own voters. Arab leaders have experienced rapid falls from influence and position.

The President of The United States cannot force peace in the Middle East. This is a definitive statement backed by history.

Every president since Harry Truman has had his hand in this sort of activity and all have experienced various levels of immediate satisfaction but all have equally seen their efforts fall apart.

The problems that exist in the Middle East are complex. Perhaps more importantly they are tied up in strong emotions. Add to that they relate to strongly held religious beliefs. None of these factors lend easily to political solutions and none of them suggest any sort of forced agreement can hold long.

One does not see evidence of the old Soviet Union attempting to insert itself in these types of discussion. Even the United Kingdom, France, Canada and other nations more like our own have not sought such influence or meddled as often or as unsuccessfully.

Many will fault my position on this issue by saying failure at such an important task should not cause us to cease trying to find a way to peace. That is a strong argument.

However, quiet, behind the scenes diplomacy rather than grandstanding press oriented meetings in Washington would have, in my view, a better chance of success. Because I do read history I know that we have twisted arms, threatened trade, and even “reminded” Middle East leaders what might happen if we withdrew our military support. These threats provide quick agreement, a good photo opportunity for our president, but never lasting agreement among those whose arms are twisted.

While I do not question the sincerity of our presidents who have hoped to bring peace to that part of the world, I do question their level of understanding the complexity of the task and the individual risk any meeting or agreement brings to many of the participants.

More importantly, I question whether any of our presidents, who clearly are adept at being politicians, have seriously weighed the history of such attempts. Being the “Leader of the Free World,” having everyone stand up every time you enter a room, and getting used to hearing “Hail to the Chief” every day seems to lead men to believe they can accomplish anything they want. History suggests otherwise.

You might fairly ask me what then is the way forward in the Middle East.

If any of us could successfully answer that question we would be important players in the history of the world.

My best guess is that any peace that should ultimately be found in the Middle East will have to come from the players who live there. They will have to find the way forward by negotiating with one another, by finding death and destruction on a daily basis to be no longer tolerable, and by finding ways to accept, even honor, the differences in their history and their beliefs.

Everyone would need to take a mighty step toward tolerance and acceptance of their differences. Their impetus for doing this would be the safety it would bring to their own people and the chance to live in peace for the first time since the State of Israel was created in the midst of their natural religious enemies.

History suggests this is not likely to happen. History suggests that this may well be settled in a military, and totally unsatisfactory, way. That is often the way these seemingly difficult questions get settled.

And by the way, where is the United Nations?

While I can hope that President Obama will be successful long term where so many other American presidents have not been, I am a realist.

It would be difficult for me to tell you how much I hope I am wrong.