Paradigm Shift?

This may be no ordinary paradigm shift. Today we may have a screaming red-letter, poster-sized, bells and whistles, mega-super-duper paradigm shift.

Regular readers know all about the symbiotic relationship between terrorists and their state sponsors, but the media has tended to focus on the terrorist side of the equation – the damage, the retaliation, the damage of the retaliation become the beloved “cycle of violence.” There has been little if any public discussion about the cycle of outside forces providing the terrorists with training, money, refuge, and political support, until now.

This may be no ordinary paradigm shift. Today we may have a screaming red-letter, poster-sized, bells and whistles, mega-super-duper paradigm shift.

Regular readers know all about the symbiotic relationship between terrorists and their state sponsors, but the media has tended to focus on the terrorist side of the equation – the damage, the retaliation, the damage of the retaliation become the beloved “cycle of violence.” There has been little if any public discussion about the cycle of outside forces providing the terrorists with training, money, refuge, and political support, until now.

Because of Syrian and Iranian support for terrorists in Iraq, the American government has been better than most at understanding the problem. Faced with Israel’s determination not only to attack Hezbollah, but also to hold the Lebanese Government responsible for Hezbollah’s rise in the south by not fulfilling the conditions of the relevant Security Council Resolutions, the Administration has been strongly supportive. Better yet, caught unawares on an open microphone, the President went even farther in his denunciation of Syria and the UN’s call for an immediate cease-fire, which would save Hezbollah.

The other members of the G-8 understand less than the U.S. government, but under the clear influence of the President, blamed Hezbollah and Hamas for the violence and said, “those that support them cannot be allowed to plunge the Middle East into chaos and provoke a wider conflict.”

But the most important change may be in the Arab world. We often complain that the Arabs say one thing to the world and another to their own people, but Saudi Arabia, Jordan, Egypt, Bahrain and others have incontrovertibly woken up to the problem. The (Saudi) Arab Times editor wrote, “The angry response from Saudi Arabia has politically isolated Hezbollah and Hamas besides holding them responsible for their actions … Unfortunately we must admit that in such a war the only way to get rid of ‘these irregular phenomena’ is what Israel is doing. The operations of Israel in Gaza and Lebanon are in the interest of people of Arab countries and the international community.”

Wadi Batti, an Iraqi columnist, wrote, “The Lebanese example confirms the fears of Arabs about the presence of armed militias that threaten our stability and security,” he wrote. “By initiating the confrontation with Israel, Hizbullah has made a mockery of the Lebanese government and leaders, who are now seen as pawns in the hands of Nasrallah. How long will the Arabs continue to fight on behalf of Iran?”

It is a long way from acknowledging that sponsorship of terrorist organizations can come back to haunt the sponsors to halting one’s own support for terrorist organizations (the U.S. military finds that Egyptians and Saudis, not Iraqis, comprise nearly all of the suicide bombers in Iraq), but without such acknowledgement, change is impossible.

Any day we find the media, the American government, the Russians, the Europeans and the most influential members of the Arab world on the same page regarding actions taken by Israel, either Israel is in big, big trouble or we may be watching the paradigm shift.