Iran Is Not Only Israel’s Problem

Secretary of State Clinton (echoed by Rahm Emmanuel) told Congress, “For Israel to get the kind of strong support it’s looking for vis-a-vis Iran it can’t stay on the sideline with respect to the Palestinian and the peace efforts, that they go hand-in-hand.” She added Arab officials want “very much to support the strongest possible policy toward Iran.” But, “they believe that Israel’s willingness to reenter into discussions with the Palestinian Authority strengthens them in being able to deal with Iran.”

Secretary of State Clinton (echoed by Rahm Emmanuel) told Congress, “For Israel to get the kind of strong support it’s looking for vis-a-vis Iran it can’t stay on the sideline with respect to the Palestinian and the peace efforts, that they go hand-in-hand.” She added Arab officials want “very much to support the strongest possible policy toward Iran.” But, “they believe that Israel’s willingness to reenter into discussions with the Palestinian Authority strengthens them in being able to deal with Iran.”

First, the ridiculous. The regional anti-Iran axis includes Saudi Arabia, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait, Bahrain, Morocco and parts of Lebanon. All acknowledge the threat posed by Iran (and the coincidence of interest with Israel) and none is able to deal with Iran. They are friends of the United States who previously looked to Washington for leadership. Now, Saudi Arabia and some of the Gulf States, worried that the administration’s overtures to Teheran will strengthen the mullahs, are accommodating themselves to increased Persian influence.

Egypt, perhaps less so. David Schenker in The Weekly Standard notes, “Egypt may finally be taking steps to reestablish itself as a counterweight to a resurgent Tehran… Egyptian authorities announced the arrest last November of dozens of Hezbollah operatives in the Sinai… accompanied by unprecedented Egyptian condemnations of the Iranian-Syrian backed organization and its popular leader, Hassan Nasrallah. The arrest and subsequent war of words suggest an effort may be underway by moderate Arab states to roll back the increasingly pernicious Persian influence in the Levant.” Secretary Gates’ comments in Cairo yesterday were clearly designed to allay Egypt’s fears.

Then, the incomprehensible. There are daily Israeli “discussions” with the Palestinian Authority on security and economics, and the Netanyahu government pledged to continue and increase them. On the larger “final status” issues, Mrs. Clinton has been pushing desperately and unsuccessfully for a Hamas-Fatah unity government. Khaled Abu Toameh writes in The Jerusalem Post, “Talks… failed after it became evident that the Islamist movement remained unwilling to make the slightest concession. According to Fatah representatives, the Hamas negotiators made it clear… they would never recognize Israel’s right to exist or the Oslo Accords and other agreements between the Israelis and Palestinians. Moreover, the Hamas team emphasized their movement’s ‘right’ to continue ‘resistance operations’ (including rocket attacks and suicide bombings, of course) against Israel. Mahmoud Abbas and Hosni Mubarak are reported to be extremely angry.”

They should be angry with Mrs. Clinton for trying to force a deal that would undermine Abbas at home and Mubarak in the region by courting Hamas. Toameh quotes a senior aide to Abbas, “Hamas should be weakened, not strengthened. Hamas is not going to relinquish its radical policies as long as it feels that the Americans and Europeans are prepared to deal with it without demanding anything in return.”

Finally, the obvious. Iran should not be framed by the United States as Israel’s problem. President Obama has been quite clear that Iran’s advancing nuclear capability is a threat to the United States and to our regional friends and allies. Mrs. Clinton should be looking for additional support for stopping Iran – not throwing Israel, Egypt and Abu Mazen overboard while she chases Hamas and the ephemeral two-state solution.