ISRAEL - IRAN - SYRIA - HAMAS - HEZBOLLAH - WWWIII?

The 'New Middle East' Bush Is Resisting

By Saad Eddin Ibrahim

08/23/06 "Washington Post" -- -- President Bush and Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice may be quite right about a new Middle East being born. In fact, their policies in support of the actions of their closest regional ally, Israel, have helped midwife the newborn. But it will not be exactly the baby they have longed for. For one thing, it will be neither secular nor friendly to the United States. For another, it is going to be a rough birth.

What is happening in the broader Middle East and North Africa can be seen as a boomerang effect that has been playing out slowly since the horrific events of Sept. 11, 2001. In the immediate aftermath of those attacks, there was worldwide sympathy for the United States and support for its declared "war on terrorism," including the invasion of Afghanistan. Then the cynical exploitation of this universal goodwill by so-called neoconservatives to advance hegemonic designs was confirmed by the war in Iraq. The Bush administration's dishonest statements about "weapons of mass destruction" diminished whatever credibility the United States might have had as liberator, while disastrous mismanagement of Iraqi affairs after the invasion led to the squandering of a conventional military victory. The country slid into bloody sectarian violence, while official Washington stonewalled and refused to admit mistakes. No wonder the world has progressively turned against America.

Against this declining moral standing, President Bush made something of a comeback in the first year of his second term. He shifted his foreign policy rhetoric from a "war on terrorism" to a war of ideas and a struggle for liberty and democracy. Through much of 2005 it looked as if the Middle East might finally have its long-overdue spring of freedom. Lebanon forged a Cedar Revolution, triggered by the assassination of its popular former prime minister, Rafiq Hariri. Egypt held its first multi-candidate presidential election in 50 years. So did Palestine and Iraq, despite harsh conditions of occupation. Qatar and Bahrain in the Arabian Gulf continued their steady evolution into constitutional monarchies. Even Saudi Arabia held its first municipal elections.

But there was more. Hamas mobilized candidates and popular campaigns to win a plurality in Palestinian legislative elections and form a new government. Hezbollah in Lebanon and the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt achieved similar electoral successes. And with these developments, a sudden chill fell over Washington and other Western capitals.

Instead of welcoming these particular elected officials into the newly emerging democratic fold, Washington began a cold war on Muslim democrats. Even the tepid pressure on autocratic allies of the United States to democratize in 2005 had all but disappeared by 2006. In fact, tottering Arab autocrats felt they had a new lease on life with the West conveniently cowed by an emerging Islamist political force.

Now the cold war on Islamists has escalated into a shooting war, first against Hamas in Gaza and then against Hezbollah in Lebanon. Israel is perceived in the region, rightly or wrongly, to be an agent acting on behalf of U.S. interests. Some will admit that there was provocation for Israel to strike at Hamas and Hezbollah following the abduction of three soldiers and attacks on military and civilian targets. But destroying Lebanon with an overkill approach born of a desire for vengeance cannot be morally tolerated or politically justified -- and it will not work.

On July 30 Arab, Muslim and world outrage reached an unprecedented level with the Israeli bombing of a residential building in the Lebanese village of Qana, which killed dozens and wounded hundreds of civilians, most of them children. A similar massacre in Qana in 1996, which Arabs remember painfully well, proved to be the political undoing of then-Prime Minister Shimon Peres. It is too early to predict whether Prime Minister Ehud Olmert will survive Qana II and the recent war. But Hezbollah will survive, just as it has already outlasted five Israeli prime ministers and three American presidents.

Born in the thick of an earlier Israeli invasion, in 1982, Hezbollah is at once a resistance movement against foreign occupation, a social service provider for the needy of the rural south and the slum-dwellers of Beirut, and a model actor in Lebanese and Middle Eastern politics. Despite access to millions of dollars in resources from within and from regional allies Syria and Iran, its three successive leaders have projected an image of clean governance and a pious personal lifestyle.

In more than four weeks of fighting against the strongest military machine in the region, Hezbollah held its own and won the admiration of millions of Arabs and Muslims. People in the region have compared its steadfastness with the swift defeat of three large Arab armies in the Six-Day War of 1967. Hasan Nasrallah, its current leader, spoke several times to a wide regional audience through his own al-Manar network as well as the more popular al-Jazeera. Nasrallah has become a household name in my own country, Egypt.

According to the preliminary results of a recent public opinion survey of 1,700 Egyptians by the Cairo-based Ibn Khaldun Center, Hezbollah's action garnered 75 percent approval, and Nasrallah led a list of 30 regional public figures ranked by perceived importance. He appears on 82 percent of responses, followed by Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad (73 percent), Khaled Meshal of Hamas (60 percent), Osama bin Laden (52 percent) and Mohammed Mahdi Akef of Egypt's Muslim Brotherhood (45 percent).

The pattern here is clear, and it is Islamic. And among the few secular public figures who made it into the top 10 are Palestinian Marwan Barghouti (31 percent) and Egypt's Ayman Nour (29 percent), both of whom are prisoners of conscience in Israeli and Egyptian jails, respectively.

None of the current heads of Arab states made the list of the 10 most popular public figures. While subject to future fluctuations, these Egyptian findings suggest the direction in which the region is moving. The Arab people do not respect the ruling regimes, perceiving them to be autocratic, corrupt and inept. They are, at best, ambivalent about the fanatical Islamists of the bin Laden variety. More mainstream Islamists with broad support, developed civic dispositions and services to provide are the most likely actors in building a new Middle East. In fact, they are already doing so through the Justice and Development Party in Turkey, the similarly named PJD in Morocco, the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, Hamas in Palestine and, yes, Hezbollah in Lebanon.

These groups, parties and movements are not inimical to democracy. They have accepted electoral systems and practiced electoral politics, probably too well for Washington's taste. Whether we like it or not, these are the facts. The rest of the Western world must come to grips with the new reality, even if the U.S. president and his secretary of state continue to reject the new offspring of their own policies.

The writer is an Egyptian democracy activist, professor of political sociology at the American University in Cairo, and chairman of the Ibn Khaldun Center for Development Studies.

© 2006 The Washington Post Company

There were even sharper attacks. Mona Fayed, a prominent Shiite academic in Beirut, wrote an article also published by An-Nahar last week. She asks: Who is a Shiite in Lebanon today? She provides a sarcastic answer: A Shiite is he who takes his instructions from Iran, terrorizes fellow believers into silence, and leads the nation into catastrophe without consulting anyone. Another academic, Zubair Abboud, writing in Elaph, a popular Arabic-language online newspaper, attacks Hezbollah as "one of the worst things to happen to Arabs in a long time." He accuses Mr. Nasrallah of risking Lebanon's existence in the service of Iran's regional ambitions.

x, please explain why you think Israel lost the war.

Considering all the damage that Israel did to Lebanon, do you really think that the country will allow Hez to again invade Israel, bringing on another devastating attack on the country.

I think that the Arab world got a good look at the damage Israel will wreak if it is again attacked. Israel gave up land for peace to no avail. Israel has almost no land left to give up, so it will defend its borders with massive retaliation.

Hizbollah boss tops Egyptian popularity poll
Saturday Aug 19 07:33 AEST

Hizbollah leader Sayyed Hassan Nasrallah has been named the most popular figure in the Middle East in an Egyptian poll.

Hamas leader Khaled Meshaal took second place and Iran President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad third, said Saadeddin Ibrahim of the Ibn Khaldoun Centre for Development Studies.

Researchers asked about 1,200 people from a range of backgrounds in 15 of Egypt's 26 governorates to rank a list of 30 prominent people in the Middle East including writers, politicians, judges, statesmen and religious scholars.

Ibrahim said the poll results were preliminary and the full results would be released in about a week

Israel set out to do two things; free the kidnapped soldiers and disarm Hezbollah. It accomplished neither. Hezbollah is stronger now than before the war.....

News flash for Xingu: Radical Islamofacist Muslims hated us and were doing violence to us long before George Bush ever got into politics at any level. And those are the only ones who are doing violence now. You can't lay that at his feet no matter how much you want to.

Foxfyre wrote:

News flash for Xingu: Radical Islamofacist Muslims hated us and were doing violence to us long before George Bush ever got into politics at any level. And those are the only ones who are doing violence now. You can't lay that at his feet no matter how much you want to.

News flash for Fox; Did I say they didn't?

News flash for Xingu: The Islamofacist Muslims hated us and were doing violence to us long before George Bush ever got into politics at any level.

"Any who doubt the appeal of freedom in the Middle East can look to Lebanon," President Bush said in March 2005, as anti-Syrian protesters crowded Beirut's streets and squares in what became known as the Cedar Revolution, after Lebanon's national symbol.

xingu wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

News flash for Xingu: Radical Islamofacist Muslims hated us and were doing violence to us long before George Bush ever got into politics at any level. And those are the only ones who are doing violence now. You can't lay that at his feet no matter how much you want to.

News flash for Fox; Did I say they didn't?

No, but your implication was that they would hate us less if it were not for George Bush. Frankly, given the long history of Islamofacist terrorism, that's really a stretch just to condemn a president that you hate.

More importantly, to reduce terrorists' motive for attacking the United States in the first place, the administration should quietly withdraw the unneeded land forces from Persian Gulf countries and its support for their authoritarian, venal rulers.

KEY FINDINGS

* The most intractable terrorist safe havens sit astride international borders or where government is ineffective. Examples include Afghanistan, the triborder region of Argentina, Brazil and Paraguay, the Celebes Sea in South-East Asia and Somalia.

* Terrorists exploit corruption, poverty, lack of civic institutions and social services.

* The perception that policing and legal systems are biased or brutal also generates a permissive environment.

Sorry, that dog won't hunt. Any withdrawal on our part before victory is achieved will be interpreted as victory by the terrorists who will be emboldened to step up their activities and achieve more victories. They know they don't have to beat us. They only have to hold on long enough for the anti-victory forces within the United States to force retreat and thus self-imposed defeat. They know we have a track record of cutting and running whenever anybody really puts up any kind of fight. They count on it.

And failure to act at all will only reinforce their opinion that we are impotent wimps ripe for the picking. By them.

Foxfyre wrote:

News flash for Xingu: The Islamofacist Muslims hated us and were doing violence to us long before George Bush ever got into politics at any level.

Correction foxfrye, some Militant Muslim Extremist had it against the west long before Bush came to office......

revel wrote:

Foxfyre wrote:

News flash for Xingu: The Islamofacist Muslims hated us and were doing violence to us long before George Bush ever got into politics at any level.

Correction foxfrye, some Militant Muslim Extremist had it against the west long before Bush came to office......

As I see it, slammites have had it against the entire rest of the world, not just the West, since about 632 AD.