Misunderstood Verdict Philadelphia iv as America listening when Israel spoke Jan. 28? Ariel Sharon's second consecutive election vic- tory was noted and then brushed aside by most of the mainstream media in this country. On the day following the vote, most of the media's attention focused on President Bush's State of the Union address and its eloquent restating of the case for action against Iraq. A few days later, it was completely forgotten as both the United States and Israel were joined in shocked mourning over the tragic loss of the space shuttle Columbia, with its crew of six Americans and one Israeli. But to the extent that America's chat- tering classes thought about the verdict of Israeli democracy, their conclusion was that the results meant nothing. According to the wise men and women who write editorials for daily American newspapers, Israel's voters can't be trusted to do what is in their best interests. And their only advice Jonathan S. Tobin is executive editor of the Jewish Exponent in Philadelphia. His e-mail address is jtobin@jewishexponent.com for the victor was to forget what he has promised Israel's people and do as they demand. On the day following his re-election, the New York Times insisted Sharon reward the terrorists for their 29 months of bloodshed by agreeing to negotiate concessions to them before they stop their campaign of terrorism. In a similar piece on the same day, the Washington Post even blamed Sharon for the breakdown of a peace process that had actually collapsed due to the Palestinian decision to choose war over peace months before he was first elected two years ago. Following the lemming-like lead of Americans for Peace Now, the Post demanded that any additional aid to Israel be linked to concessions. The Chicago Tribune chimed in, say- ing it understood why Israelis opted for Sharon, but lamented that this state of affairs will make it difficult for Bush to press the prime minister. One reason for this spin is the repeti- tion of ambiguous poll results that purport to show the majority of Israelis oppose settlements and want peace negotiations. This leads the wise men and women of the press So what else should here to conclude that even American observers glean from the recent voting? First, though Likud has won again, the Israeli people don't sup- it is time to forget the mis- port them. leading labels by which Americans misunderstand Does that make sense? Not really. Israeli politics. Polls do say the Israeli peo- It is no longer possible to ple would trade some settle- JONA THAN pretend, as almost every American newspaper and ments for real peace. S. TO BIN But the same polls will also broadcast outlet has long pre- Spe cial tell you that they no longer sup- Comm entary tended, that Labor was the port making any concessions, moderate party of Israel's cen- ter, and that the words Likud let alone permanent territorial surrender, in the absence of a complete and Sharon could not be uttered or printed without the phrase "right- cessation of terror and a change in the Palestinian culture of hatred that fuels it. wing" or "hard-line" attached to it. Israelis know Oslo was a failure and Having been re-elected on a sensible refuse to trade land for terror again. combination of tough security policies How do we know that? Because in and centrist sensibilities on possible peace plans, it is more than obvious the last two years, the people of Israel have gone to the polls twice, and each that Sharon's Likud is the party that best represents Israel's political center. time they handed the parties of the left a historic shellacking. In the sec- At the same time, Labor, having run under a leader, Amram Mitzna, who ond vote, Jan. 28, Israeli voters gave Labor its worst-ever showing. pledged fidelity to the failed vision of the Oslo process, is not only not cen- Why? Because though most Israelis aren't hard-core right-wingers, they are, trist, it is today supported only by a unlike the leaders of the defeated left, minority of bitter-end ideologues. . Indeed, for all of the talk in the realists about the Palestinians. But it seems as if two consecutive landslides American media about the Israeli peo- ple's rejection of settlements, in the still aren't enough for most of the American media to get this message. TOBIN on page 36 Writing in the liberal-leaning Foreign Affairs, he comments scathingly about the reigning political culture in the Arab countries: "the belliger- =ence and self-pity in Arab life, its retreat from modernist culture and its embrace of conspiracy theories." He sees in the vigorous exercise of American power the best chance for improvement: "No great apologies ought to be made for America's 'uni- lateralism'. The region can live with and use that unilateralism." Ajami wants American will and prestige to tip the scales "in favor of modernity and change" and calls on Washington to aim high. "Above and beyond toppling the regime of Saddam Hussein and dismantling its deadly weapons, the driving motiva- tion of a new American endeavor in Iraq and in neighboring Arab lands should be modernizing the Arab world." Only a successful U.S. military campaign in Iraq will embolden those Arabs who seek "deliverance much as it does self-govern- from retrogression and polit- ment and the rule of law — ical decay," so he hopes the and they decline the pack- war will be fought "with the age. promise that the United • Efforts to inculcate dem- States is now on the side of ocratic values will find few reform." allies from within Arab soci- Over in the cautious cor- eties, where "advocates for ner stands strategist Andrew liberal values constitute at J. Bacevich, a retired Army DAN IEL best a small minority." colonel and now professor at PI PES • Advocates for an ambi- Boston University. His arti- Sp ecial tious program point to cle, evocatively titled "Don't Com mentary Germany and Japan as mod- Be Greedy!" appeared in the els, forgetting the "protract- conservative National Review. ed, ugly, and unpopular" U.S. fail- Bacevich admonishes the Bush ures in the Philippines, Mexico, administration to confine its atten- Haiti, the Dominican Republic and tion to Iraq itself and not make South Vietnam. The Arab countries grand plans to bring democracy to will more likely fit the latter pattern the Arabs. than the former. He dismisses these as "utterly pre- Instead of trying to bring the posterous" on four grounds: Arabs into ideological sympathy • "Arabs have little affinity for with the United' States, Bacevich democracy" due to historical, cultur- argues, the goal should be to al and religious factors. improve their governments, behav- • Arabs understand that freedom ior. "Concepts like parliaments or implies disposable marriages, sexual license, and abortion on demand as PIPES on page 36 Defining Israeli Moderation Just Iraq? Philadelphia 0 utsiders wonder if the U.N. Security Council will endorse Washington's goal of toppling Saddam Hussein. But policy insiders assume an American war and an American victory, followed by Iraq's rehabilita- tion. For insiders, the main issue is the extent of U.S. ambition in the Arabic-speaking countries after that's all done. This foreshadows the debate likely to dominate foreign policy circles for decades to come: What should be America's role in the world? Let's eavesdrop. In the ambitious corner stands Middle East specialist Fouad Ajami, a Lebanese immigrant and professor at Johns Hopkins University. Daniel Pipes is director of the Middle East Forum and author of the book 'Militant Islam Reaches America.'' His e-mail is Pipes@MEForum.org 2/14 2003 35