Search
Close this search box.

US Foreign and Defense Policy

Opponents of the war in Iraq falsely predicted that that the removal of Saddam Hussein would have two consequences: a radical religious Shiite regime, and increased Iranian influence over the country. While the struggle is not yet over and these dangers exist, the likelihood of Iraq becoming radically religious or Iranian-dominated seems considerably lower than it did in 2003.
The creation a new state in Kosovo awards part of a nation’s territory to a violent ethno-religious minority; futilely hopes to curry favor with the Islamic world through appeasement; gives a fresh impetus to the ongoing growth of Islamic influence in Europe; and denies the fact that the state's leaders are tainted by terrorism, criminality, and links with global jihad. Most importantly, it betrays a post-modern contempt for claims based on the historical rights of a land to a nation. American support for the independence of Kosovo is thus detrimental to Israeli interests.
Bush's new plan for Middle East peace is inadequate and rests on several faulty assumptions, including the beliefs that outside influences can change Palestinian society, Abu Mazen is the leader to bring about change, and the Palestinians will be "good" neighbors towards Israel. However, the realities of Palestinian society reflect a different picture. Israel's best bet is to wait for a better opportunity to attain stability.
The Bush Administration is under enormous pressure to dramatically alter US strategy in the Middle East during its remaining two years. This pressure stems from the repeated failures to achieve US goals in Iraq; the role that Iraq played in the Democratic victory in recent Congressional elections; the overwhelming public criticism and opposition to the war; and the party politics related to the 2008 Presidential and Congressional elections. A drastic shift in policy will be difficult, as it would contradict Bush's concern for his place in history.

Accessibility Toolbar