Stabilizing the Middle East

Iraq isn't the only country in the Middle East that's currently dangerously destabilized. Israel is another.

After 9/11 so much seemed to be going Israel's way. Sharon virtually dictated terms to Bush who quietly went along with his demands. Then Bush brought the weight of the American military down, first on Afghanistan and then on the stridently anti-Israel regime of Saddam Hussein.

Toppling Saddam enhanced Israeli security, at least somewhat. Of more importance was the American effort to control Syria and Iran.

When Olmert succeeded Sharon, he plainly thought he was in an incredibly powerful position. His decision to invade Lebanon to eradicate Hezbollah was taken with a good dose of hubris. There was little likelihood of obliterating Hezbollah - the bar he set for himself - and the great risk to Israel's perceived invincibility with Israelis and Arabs alike.

Olmert's attack was made with strong approval from the White House. The Pentagon wasted no time in airlifting the latest, high-tech weapons to Israel, weapons that killed far more Lebanese civilians than Hezbollah fighters. Washington further blocked demands that it restrain Olmert, saying he deserved time to finish his objectives.

When Olmert's attack petered out it left Hezbollah with renewed credibility in the Muslim world and Israel with its image of invincibility in tatters. The Israeli people saw the campaign as a disastrous failure, a loss that needs to be made good.

Israeli angst can only have been compounded by the Democratic midterm victories and the ouster of staunch neo-con, Donald Rumsfeld. Suddenly there's talk of the need to engage Syria and Iran in order to stabilize Iraq to permit American withdrawal. America negotiating with Israel's mortal enemy, an Islamic theocracy intent on developing a nuclear weapon?

How could these developments help but further destabilize Israel and its people? The first signs appeared in remarks made today by Israel's deputy defence minister warning that Israel might be forced to launch a pre-emptive strike on Iran's nuclear facilities:

"I am not advocating an Israeli pre-emptive military action against Iran and I am aware of its possible repercussions," Deputy Defense Minister Ephraim Sneh, a former general, said in comments published Friday in The Jerusalem Post. "I consider it a last resort. But even the last resort is sometimes the only resort."

An Israeli strike on Iran could be the match that lights the fuse of Arab unrest. American forces in Iraq and NATO forces in Afghanistan can not afford to risk the outbreak of a pan-Islamic reaction.

In toppling Saddam, the Bush administration has given birth to a political and military hydra. Before it can hope to reach any useful accommodation with Iran and Syria it has to recognize Israel as a threat to the Middle East. America must act in a way that assures Israel's security but also acknowledges longstanding grievances of the Arab people, especially their demand for a legitimate settlement of the Palestinian question.

The situation Washington created by launching its war of choice is reaching a critical point, inside Iraq and throughout the region. The Bush administration needs to start recognizing reality and addressing all of these problems promptly and effectively. There's not a lot of time left to dither.