Blind-date diplomacy

The US’s blind-date diplomacy with rebel groups in rioting Arab countries does not go deeper than the initial flirtatious stage and does not ask if these groups really seek democratic advancement.

By ELWOOD MCQUAID
Rebels step on poster of Muammar Gaddafi (photo credit: REUTERS)
Rebels step on poster of Muammar Gaddafi
(photo credit: REUTERS)
The comment was made during a television news interview about ongoing military assaults to oust Libyan leader Muammar Gaddafi. US and European NATO forces had cast their lot with the insurgents, training them and pouring money and weapons into pulverizing the dictator’s forces in support of the rebels.
RELATED:Egypt’s Brotherhood
The foreign policy expert being interviewed finally admitted that two of the unknowns in the conflict are (1) what is it, beyond their freedom, that the insurgents really want to achieve and (2) who is actually calling the shots for them. He said no one knows if a new regime will be friendly to the West or if it will be inclined toward democratic principles or else fashioned in the Islamist mold.
One would expect that a country’s policy would be washed by common sense and reliable intelligence and that the leadership would grasp the identity of those it is helping before assuring victory for forces that may turn out to be its worst nightmare. The spin that the rebels were a small, kaffiyeh-clad band of fed-up zealots rising up to vanquish a mad “Goliath” in Tripoli was hardly worth putting on the air. The US and Europe provided the means and military power to pummel the Libyan despot with all the West could throw at him until there was little left for his forces to defend.
Whether or not a regime change in Libya is a positive objective is not the point. At issue is America’s ongoing blind-date diplomacy that sees nothing past first flirtations, and continues to romance the illusion that the future will be a long walk into a garden of peace, prosperity, and civility. US Foreign Policy Advisor Lawrence Eagleburger, who died in June, solemnly observed that current foreign policy is being conducted like “amateur hour.”
High expectations based on insufficient evidence may be commendable in the world of “hope so” and “good intentions” that appeal to the better nature in all parties. But the rub comes in when assumptions are made that all parties do actually possess a better nature and that their expectations and intentions mesh with those of their benefactors.
For example, how can we assume that Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad, despite his genocidal ranting, can be wooed into becoming a contributing member of civil society? Or worse, that Israel and the world can live with a nuclear Iran?
After Ahmadinejad declared his intent to bomb Israel into a cloud of gray dust, how can we possibly have the audacity to infer that he “doesn’t really mean it?” Such thinking is beyond absurd – it's insane. Iranian fingerprints are reportedly on every infamous plan, plot, and operation designed to win Iranian hegemony over the region, destroy Israel, and bring down the West.
Consider the fact that, since the fall of Hosni Mubarak and his government in Egypt, things have heated up on Egypt’s border with Israel. Hamas has been emboldened to attempt to pick a fight with Israel or cause Israel and Egypt to go at each other.
And as the West softens, Islamic Sharia law, astonishingly, is being accepted as okay for Muslims who are opposed to living under the legal systems of non-Muslim countries.
Furthermore, the Muslim Brotherhood, along with Hamas and Hezbollah, is being increasingly regarded as having both a political and military wing. The military wing is said to be used for self-defense, while only the political wing is involved in rational negotiations with other governments. And increasingly, both are touted as being quite benign, well-intentioned, and ready to join hands in the international circle of civil camaraderie.
Seriously?
In this climate, Israel is number one on the hit list for radical Muslims; and incitement against the Jewish state and Jewish people is approaching a fever pitch in many quarters.
Furthermore, the Arab Spring has ushered with it a winter-like chill over Christians who have not yet joined the exodus from the lands “liberated” by the new wave of insurgencies.
The future is very much up for grabs, and, as is frequently the case, the guys with the most guns, the most organization, and the most ideologically driven political machines win out—at least in the short run.
Blind-date diplomacy isn’t the way to go. To ensure survival in the international jungle we inhabit, it is imperative to know your enemies, support your friends, and be strong enough to say – both by word and muscle, “Don’t even try it!” The writer is executive editor for The Friends of Israel.