Terrorists Escaping Justice Begets More Terrorism

This week, Libyans celebrated the return to Libyan soil of the only person convicted in the Pan Am 103 Lockerbie bombing after Scotland set the ailing man free on "compassionate" grounds. He reportedly spent a mere 11 days in jail for each of his 270 victims killed in the attack and had been sentenced to at least a 27-year jail term.

Also this week, Ahmadinejad in Iran announced he'd appointed as Defense Minister a man wanted in connection with bombings of Israeli and Jewish targets in Argentina in 1992 and 1994.

The most important outcome of these developments -- aside from the terrible grief that victims' families will have to endure -- is that terrorists and future recruits the world over see that there is no price to be paid for engaging in terrorist activity. In the end, they and their deeds are celebrated and rewarded.

One of the reasons the Scottish Justice Minister decided to free the Libyan is because he deemed the man no longer a public threat. Perhaps the man himself will not further engage in terrorist activity, but his celebrated release will serve to encourage terrorists and surely result in more deaths of innocent Westerners and Muslims alike.

State Dept Hypocrisy

For years, the U.S. State Department has refused to identify "Jerusalem, Israel" on the passports of Americans (mostly Jewish Americans) born there and who specifically request the designation. (Meanwhile, upon request, it has omitted or removed "Israel" from the passports of Arab-Americans born in Haifa or Tel Aviv.) State has done this because it could not stomach the thought of even tacitly acknowledging Jerusalem as Israel's capital.

A 2002 U.S. law required that State begin to identify "Jerusalem, Israel" on passports if asked to do so, but State has refused to comply. The US Court of Appeals recently refused to intervene in the matter, calling it a non-justiciable political question, according to an article in the July 19 Jerusalem Post online.

So, why do we write about this now?

Because for individuals traveling to the Palestinian Authority-administered areas only, Israel will now stamp passports with a "Palestinian Authority only" entry stamp. It's doing so for security reasons, to prevent individuals who are deemed security risks from wandering about Israel without business being there.

State, however, has deemed the new practice "unfair" to Palestinian and Arab-Americans and "not acceptable." State has told Israel it "expects all American citizens to be treated equally, regardless of their national origin or other citizenship."

It is hypocritical of State to refuse to apply this standard to its own practices, continuing to distinguish between Americans born in Jerusalem from those born in other parts of Israel and making special exceptions for Americans of Arab descent.

The Associated Press had more on the story here.

The Importance of Alternative Analysis

One of the reasons that the Middle East Contrarian exists is because we believe in the importance of alternative analysis. We recall, from our government service days, seeing the intoxicating effect of "group think" leading to intellectual paralysis and a genuine fear of sharing an opinion different from your colleagues. (Essentially, the U.S. taxpayer is paying the CIA to hire, employ, and train Israel political analysts who all think exactly alike.) That has, and will continue to, lead to disasters in American foreign policy -- most notably, the incessant push to create a Palestinian state while the Palestinians have repeatedly shown their unpreparedness for the responsibilities of statehood.

In an editorial today, the Israeli daily Ma'ariv reminds us of the important lessons drawn by a committee investigating Israel's actions leading up to the Yom Kippur war in 1973, when Israel was caught by surprise by an Arab attack:

'Do not block or prevent different thinking and the presentation of alternative positions,' and 'Encourage pluralism; encourage more than one element to voice assessments and propose policy.'

Neglecting Egyptian Political Reform

In an op-ed in today's Washington Post, Michele Dunne of the Carnegie Endowment for International Peace does a great job reminding us -- and, more importantly, Obama's White House -- of the need to resuscitate the push for more democracy and human rights in Egypt. She says Obama is mistaken to have set aside these concerns in the hope that doing so will win Egyptian support for other U.S. priorities -- namely, the peace process and Iranian nukes:

But Obama can have Mubarak's help without having to pay for it with his silence. Mubarak shares Washington's interests in preventing the emergence of a permanent Hamas state in Gaza, in promoting a peace agreement between Palestinians and Israel, and in containing Iranian nuclear ambitions. He will work toward those ends for his own reasons and cooperate with the United States accordingly -- as he did even at the height of the Bush administration's democracy promotion rhetoric in 2004 and 2005.

Making the Case Against Obama's Middle East Policy

President Obama couldn't be all that bad for Israel and the Jews. After all, some 80 percent of Jews, if not more, voted for him, a good percentage of his campaign funds came from Jews, and his Chief of Staff, for heaven's sake, is a Jew. So, he couldn't possibly harbor any hostility toward Jews or Israel, right?

Wrong!

Bush Administration State Department adviser on anti-Semitism Gregg Rickman, does an outstanding job explaining most of Obama's missteps on Israel and the Middle East, and offenses against American Jews, thus far as President in this opinion article. All should read it.

It would appear that the Obama White House lacks some serious quality control. After all, how could someone like former UN official Mary Robinson, who ignored anti-Jewish attacks at the Durban Conference, be awarded by Obama a Presidential Metal of Freedom? Don't expect American Jewish organizations to protest. According to an account in the Forward, their leaders are too afraid to burn bridges with the new Administration.

Update: Defending Nadav Tamir

Well, recalled Israeli Consul to Boston Nadav Tamir had his proverbial day in court today with the Director-General of Israel's Foreign Minister, Yossi Gal.

Gal reportedly told Tamir essentially what we argued yesterday -- that Tamir's criticisms, even if warranted, should have been passed to Jerusalem through proper channels.

Tamir will keep his job. Israeli Foreign Minister Avigdor Lieberman will keep whatever goodwill he may have had with the Foreign Ministry's staff. Imagine the internal backlash he would have had to endure had he fired Tamir.

Tamir's apology for his lapse in judgment and his impending return to Boston will, effectively, close this matter, but the underlying public debate Tamir raised about whether it is Israeli Prime Minister Netanyahu's, and not US President Obama's, policies that are causing friction in US-Israel relations will continue to fester.

Obviously, we see Obama's hasty and ill-advised shift of attention to Israeli settlements and general misunderstanding of the intransigence and deep-seeded hostility of Israel's enemies as the cause of the downward spiral in US-Israel relations. Israel -- and, in particular, Netanyahu, who delivered a speech embracing qualified Palestinian statehood and continues to negotiate in good faith with US envoy George Mitchell over settlements -- ought to bear no responsibility for the tensions.

Defending Nadav Tamir

In an opinion article, former Israeli diplomat Alon Liel defends colleague Nadav Tamir, the Israeli Consul-General in Boston who recently criticized the Netanyahu government's handling of relations with the United States.

Liel, though, focuses on what Tamir said rather than how he said it.

Obviously, if an Israeli diplomat has opinions to share about US-Israel relations, he should share them -- through proper channels. If Tamir purposely publicly distributed his opinions, as has been reported, then he is wrong for doing so.

Liel says: "So what did Nadav Tamir say that warranted such fierce responses from the Israeli government?"

It's not WHAT he said that is at issue -- though, I strongly disagree with his opinions -- it's HOW he chose to say it.

Fatah Disappoints Again

The Palestinian Fatah movement (we won't call them a "political party" because many, if not all, of its members happen to rhetorically or materially support the al-Aqsa Martyrs Brigades, Fatah's terrorist offshoot) held a leadership and policy conference in Ramallah, West Bank, last week.

In this opinion article, Jerusalem Post reporter Khaled Abu Toameh predicts that younger Fatah members, who've been angling for greater leadership responsibility in Fatah, aren't necessarily going to be more pro-reform or less violent.

Sadly, the failures of Arafat and Abbas to bring peace to the Palestinian people, coupled with Fatah's humiliating defeat in Gaza to Hamas, haven't turned Fatah into a more respectable, effective movement with which Israel might deal.