Apparently, last night (finally!), those who matter, struck a deal (among them, the wife of Yasser Arafat, his wife, the Jews, The "Formal Palestinian Authority (Government), various Palestinian "gangsterrrorist", the Americans, the Jordanians, the Egyptians, the British, the French, the Germans, the Chinese, and everyone else standing to lose or gain from the exit of the only completely recognizable, authoritative voice the Palestinian people ever knew. Arafat died last night. It is hard to believe the void. Who and what fills it, effects seriously, the lives of thousands of American soldiers, currently practicing a type of war made famous by W. T. Sherman in 1864 to 1865 in the American Civil War. A scorched earth policy of economic and cultural destruction against a prostrate people. In another twisted irony, in Iraq, a reconstruction period will follow, only after every single city, town, and village is "neutralized", "gangsterrorism" reduced, and innocent citizens, totally dependent upon either unilateral American humanitarian assistance, or (if our government has any brains at all), the international community (NATO and the United Nations) replaces American political and military unilateralism (the fact the British and a host of lesser countries, members of a trumped up "coalition" by the Bush Administration, represent little.). In time, we will welcome an international coalition of stability. This will occur, because Americans will finally demand it. They will tire of watching, every night, their sons and daughters at risk, dying, kidnapped, tortured, and humiliated. Americans will tire of the role of "bad guy", whether they know it now or not. A role eventually infecting their souls, their sense of justice, and a unique, delusional morality, at odds with the wholesale destruction of a country that never existed; not in the "traditional " sense.
Thus, in light of the death of Arafat, and the "tar baby" America created in Iraq, ironically, the conditions necessary for the eventuality of a future Palestinian State exist. Historically, political goals, individual profit, national economic needs, and the concepts of Colonialism and Imperialism, explain (at least to "academics") why the "Middle East" is such a thorn in the side of the world. Terrorism is practiced by those who feel wronged. However, to the West, it is cowardly and immoral. As immoral as the American international crime of invading of a soverign country (do not look for political innocence here, you will not find it). Within the parameters of the present military and political situation in Iraq, is it beyond possibility to contemplate American policy as unworkable, and misguided? Terrorism is the by product of historical ignorance; Americans guiltier than most.
Is societal ignorance by the only empire left upon the planet make Americans intrinsically evil?
No. As much as Americans think themselves different from the rest of the world, they are not.
Any casual reader of history remembers war and its effects in the last two centuries. No Palestinian, Iraqi, or any other "Middle Eastern" country devastated over half the world, or ever launched a nuclear weapon. Western and Far Eastern nations accomplished that.
Why?
For reasons of their own. In some cases (as in World War II) sociopathic behavior begged (and the "hangover of 19th century nationalistic aggrandizement) war to relieve societal madness (How many of you remember Hitler?). However, the overwhelming majority of military conflicts occured over the accumulation of wealth, geopolitical advatage (leading to increased wealth and international influence), and the dictates of national self interest. Millions of men, women and children (especially children) died because of a national or psychoticindividual, "wanting".
The real reasons we invaded Iraq, and why the "West" is interested in the "Middle East" at all, is Western "wantings". In this case, oil, a need to regain a false sense of security (In honesty, when has America ever been truly secure?), and a prepositioning of American power in the region before percieved Chinese expansionism overtakes American military capabilities (unless nuclear weapons become justifiable). The reason unknown geopolitical power planners, the men and women, in American intelligence services, certain universities, think tanks, and Presidential Administrations, exist, is for a future American response to what is around the next bend in history. Planning is not a science or a moral flaw. It is often misguided, and vulnerable to unforeseen events. However, its necessity is inarguable.
The world is full of bullies with the power to halt the advance of civilization.
However, Arafat does not belong in that category. He labored long to deliver an identity to a people Americans normally, historically support (but, in the case of the Palestinians, never gave a damn about); people lacking basic human rights, economic potential, national identity, and the freedom to be their cultural selves. Arafat's legacy is painted in blood, but the Israelis are no less innocent; their expansionist desires no different than Saddam's invasion of Kuwait, or Hitler's invasion of Poland ("Lebensraum"), are straight forward historic facts, not Islamic propaganda.
Arafat did not trust the Jews (who can blame him?). Equally, the Jews, feeling besieged, surrounded by bellicose and hostile sounding Islamic nations, reacted according to the instincts of perceived national survival.
Thus, the cycle of mistrust, aggression and counter aggression lasted over over a century, until this day, and probably beyond, for a multiplicity of political and economic reasons (it is even rumored that water, not petroleum, is the real "prize"). Both Jews and Palestinians, rife with internal political dissension and extremism, must overcome the past, as surely as America must create an international presence in Iraq; to reduce the probability of generational hatred of the West, to allow the reemergence of Islamic cultural contributions to world civilization, to contribute to regional stability, to reduce the proliferation of "gangsterrorism" (have we learned nothing from the fall of the "Towers"?), and to create a equitable system of global economics, where no nation, no peoples (once again, especially the children!), are left behind.
A list of dreams?
Yes.
But does the "Homeland Security Act", forbid dreaming?
For those reasons (dreams), Arafat's death may be more advantageous for the entire region, than his living insistance for a Palestinian homeland.
Moreover, true stability in the "Middle East", a stated American goal, cannot be achieved, until that desire becomes a reality.
Comments