An obvious miscalculation

(Sorry - No internet connection for a week or so. But, the problem is now solved and it shouldn't happen again.)

It seems clear, at this point, that Israel's invasion of southern Lebanon was a clear miscalculation. The stated goal of quickly neutralizing Hezbollah power in the area has failed and now the situation is growing more and more dangerous. Several developments in the last few days have shifted this "war" in dramatic ways.

First, Israel bombed a town called Qana, killing 55 innocent civilians, including numerous children. This was not the first incident of indiscriminate bombing by the IDF, but, to date, has garnered the greatest protests and inflamatory rhetoric. The images of rescue workers shifting through the rubble of smashed apartment buildings and finding little more than body parts of babies and children has seriously turned the usually pro-Israel world against this latest offensive and could have repercussions in the long run in terms of diplomatic or financial support (specifically from the EU).

Second, and perhaps more importantly, the Lebanese Prime Minister is, for what I believe is the first time, siding with the Hezbollah. This is particularly troublesome news because traditionally, the weak Lebanese government has been relatively neutral about Israel. Lebanon is a multi-ethnic and multi-religous country. This means that the government has had to walk a tightrope between placating both the Christian and the Muslim factions, as well as dealing with the continous inability to do anything substantive about the Hezbollah in the south. (It's not good when a non-state terrorist organization is stronger than the state military.)

Looking at this from a historical perspective, it's clear that the Middle East has been unraveling since Bush took office in January 2001. The last days of the Clinton administration brought the world as close to a final settlement to the conflict between the Palestinians and Israel as has been seen, but ultimately didn't conclude for a confluence of reasons (including an intransitory and probably dishonest Yasser Arafat). Since that highpoint, the Bush administration has paid little, if any, meaningful attention to the problem.

This is all very interesting to me, because it's very clear that the Palestinian problem is the root of much of the terrorism and violence in the region and the world (well, that whole Iraq thing doesn't help much either...). But, instead of actively addressing the root of the problem, the Bush Doctrine has been one of intervention and aggressively seeking to find and kill "the terrorists". Much like a doctor treating a gunshot wound with a bandage, treating the symptoms hasn't garnered much success. Terrorism is up, violence is widespread, and the Middle East has unraveled into a series of deadly and potentially escalating conflicts.

Even more troubling is that it appears there are some in the Bush administration (ahem Mr. Vice President) that actually welcome a widening of this conflict to Syria. This likely stems from the same philosophy that lead the US into the now obvious mistake that is Iraq. Shockingly, the Bush administration still believes that it's possible to blow up a country and rebuild it in your image. It's no surprise that Syria is a target on the list, just as it is no surprise that the US is now reluctant to expand it's own little war.

None of this is to suggest that hammering out a final peace deal in the West Bank would have completely eradicated terrorism. The world is more complicated than that. But, it clearly would have helped reduce terrorism, in addition to being a net good idea in itself. Radical regimes like the one found in Iran generate a great deal of support from their opposition to Israel and the West. Removing the linchpin of their inflamatory rhetoric, Israel's indignant occupation of the West Bank, would certainly have served to further isolate Iran and, to a lesser extent, Syria. But little, indiscriminate wars like the one currently underway in Lebanon, only give credence to the harshest of rhetoric spilling forth from Tehran.

In the big picture, it's clear that most of the world's violence originates in the Middle East. In the last 6 years of the Bush administration, an aggressive policy of intervention and "state-building" have caused an escalation of that violence and thus, made the world significantly more dangerous. Regardless of whatever minor successes might have occured in the last 6 years, it's clear that in any measure, the Bush Doctrine has been a total, abject failure that will go down in history as one of the darkest times in US foreign policy.

I shudder to think what might have happened if these guys had been in power during the Cold War.

What's really frustrating to me is that there is no easy solution to this problem when, and if, the Democrats regain control of the Presidency in 2008. Bush has dealt a serious blow to US foreign policy that won't easily be repaired. A doctrine of constructive engagement (like that of the Clinton administration vis-a-vis China) has proven effective in the past, but there are no cases similar to the problems embroiling the Middle East. I've been thinking about the long view and I have no more answers than anyone else. But, I do have an idea that is worth thinking about, at least.

I believe that it is time to seriously reconsider the US relationship with Israel. Every year, we give Isreal over $1 billion in financial and military aid. Not only has that assistance given Israel a huge military edge over it's neighbors, but also paints the US as "complicit" with Israeli aggression in the eyes of the world's terrorists. I'm not suggesting we slash the aid and abandon Israel. But, I am suggesting that the US should have inordinate influence over Israel and should be able to force them back to the negotiating table. It is inconscionable that our government consistently gives Israel a blank check to do whatever it wants in the Middle East when we pay the consequences of those actions. It is equally inconscionable that we have leverage that we are not using. The next administration must effectively leverage our aid and support to force Isreal back into peace talks and hammer out a final settlement.

I fully expect the next two years to be more of the same. Violence, war, terrorism. None of it is going to abate. It will only get worse. But in January 2009, we'll have a new President. That person will have the chance to alter the course of the Middle East in a profoundly different direction. I can only hope that they know it.