Doubts Grow Over Bush's Syria Policy

[bemildred]

Coming in the wake of the month-long war between Israel and Lebanon's Hezbollah, during which Washington provided virtually unconditional support and encouragement to Tel Aviv, the debate has focused initially on the wisdom of Bush's efforts to isolate, rather than engage Syria, the indispensable link in the military supply chain between Iran and the Shia militia.

But the debate over the Syria policy may mark the launch of a broader challenge among Israel's supporters here to the administration's reliance on unilateralism, military power, and ‘'regime change'' in the Middle East -- whose most fervent champions have been neo-conservatives and the right-wing leadership of the so-called ‘'Israel lobby''.

‘'Bush has been convinced by self-appointed spokesmen for Israel and the Jewish community that endless war is in Israel's interest,'' asserted the lead editorial in the U.S.' most important Jewish newspaper, ‘Forward', immediately after the cease-fire took effect.

‘'(Bush) needs to hear in no uncertain terms that Israel is ready for dialogue, that the alternative -- endless jihad -- is unthinkable,'' declared the paper, which argued for Israel's participation in a regional dialogue with its Arab neighbours, including Syria, for a comprehensive peace settlement. ‘'Now is time to change the tune,'' the Forward concluded.

IPSNA

[geek tragedy]

1. Unbelievable that it's taken this long.

Yes Syria is a dictatorship with a long, sordid past of repression and human rights violation.

But, we befriend that type of regime all the time. You don't conclude peace agreements by talking only with your friends.

Cut a deal now, and let the Syrians change the face of their own society over the next few decades.

[bemildred]

2. Well, it's refreshing, I don't know that I'd bet on it just yet.

I agree with your argument, one has a far better chance of reforming authoritarian states with engagement and soft words than with threats and militarism, which mostly provide an excuse for continued dicatatorial powers.

[KoKo]

3. Is "Forward" a moderate Jewish publication?

They seem to have had some very good articles lately that don't sound at all NeoCon. Many of us who aren't Jewish don't know the shades of nuance in the publications that focus on Jewish issues here in the US.

[geek tragedy]

4. Why would you expect a Jewish magazine to have

Neocon articles?

[KoKo]

5. huh?

[Phx_Dem]

6. The vast majority of US jews are liberals. nt