Lebanon: Bush’s
Moment of Truth
By Prof John L. Esposito
Georgetown University
Washington, DC
President Bush finds himself
today looking at a potential legacy that includes
a world in which anti-Americanism will have increased
exponentially among America’s friends and
foes alike, terrorism will have grown rather than
receded, and America will be enmeshed in Iraq
and Afghanistan. Gaza and now Lebanon provide
the Bush administration with a major opportunity
to demonstrate its global leadership and its stated
commitment to the spread of democracy and promote
the Middle East Peace process, policies used by
the Bush administration to legitimate the US led
invasion and occupation of Iraq. Tragically, the
administration has thus far chosen to be part
of the problem not of the solution.
From North Africa to Southeast Asia as a recent
Gallup World Poll indicates overwhelming majorities
(91-95%) said that they did not believe the US
is trustworthy, friendly, or treats other countries
respectfully nor that it cares about human rights
in other countries (80%). Outside of Iraq, there
is over 90% agreement among Muslims that the invasion
of Iraq has done more harm than good. How has
the administration responded? In a world in which
the war on global terrorism has come to be equated
in the minds of many Muslims (and others) with
a war against Islam and the Muslim world, the
administration reemphasized the importance of
public diplomacy, appointing a talented senior
Bush confidante, Karen Hughes, and spoke of a
war of ideas.
However, the administration’s responses
in Gaza and in Lebanon undercut both the President’s
credibility and the war on terrorism. The US has
turned a blind eye to Israel’s launching
of two wars whose primary victims are civilians.
It failed to support UN mediation in the face
of clear violations of international law and Israel’s
use of collective punishment, policies in Gaza
that Amnesty International labeled war crimes.
It refused to heed calls for a ceasefire and UN
intervention and continued to provide military
assistance to Israel.
America, with its unconditional support of Israel,
has become a partner not simply in a military
action against HAMAS or Hizbollah militants but
in a war against democratically elected governments
in Gaza and Lebanon, a long time US ally. The
"disproportionate response" to Hizbollah's
July 12 seizure of two soldiers and killing of
three others has resulted in the death of more
than 350, the displacement of more than 700,000
and the destruction of Lebanon’s infrastructure;
its primary victims are hundreds of thousands
of innocent civilians not terrorists.
UN Secretary-General Kofi Annan criticism of the
Israeli bombardment of Lebanon as "excessive
use of force" was countered the next day
by the New York Times headline “US speeds
up bomb delivery for the Israelis.” Is it
any wonder that news reporters in the Arab world
speak of the Israeli-US war, a Western Christian
religious leader and long-time resident of Lebanon
speaks of “the rape of Lebanon,” or
that in Southeast Asia, as one observer put it,
“Malaysians are telling Bush, forget the
war on terrorism. He is inflaming terrorism!”
There are no easy answers but as John Voll has
argued, the Israeli invasion of Lebanon some twenty
years ago demonstrated that a massive military
response is not the solution (See John O. Voll,
Massive Military Response is not the Solution”).
The administration needs to respond in concert
with the international community and international
organizations like the United Nations. America
must lead in the call for an immediate and unconditional
ceasefire and a negotiated settlement as well
as be a major donor in the restoration of the
infrastructures of Gaza and Lebanon. While nothing
should compromise America’s commitment to
the existence and security of the state of Israel,
America’s national interests and credibility
not only in the Arab/Muslim world but internationally
will depend on our ability to “walk the
way we talk.” US policy should make no exceptions,
for the Arabs or Israelis, when it comes to the
disproportionate use of force, indiscriminate
warfare whose primary victims (those killed, injured
or displaced) are majorities of innocent civilians
not terrorists, collective punishment and the
massive violation of human rights.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
