.
Lantos: "We'll be rid of
the bastard soon enough. And in his place we'll install a pro-Western
dictator"
After America gets rid of all the regimes of evil, it
will go straight to Syria, "and tell young Assad that's what will
happen to him.
By Akiva Eldar
"My dear Colette, don't
worry," said Tom Lantos, the California congressman, as he tried to
calm MK Colette Avital of the Labor Party, who was visiting Capitol Hill
last week as part of a delegation of the Peace Coalition. "You
won't have any problem with Saddam," the Jewish congressman
continued. "We'll be rid of the bastard soon enough. And in his
place we'll install a pro-Western dictator, who will be good for us and
for you."
Lantos explained to his guest from Israel that there's no lack of Iraqi
opposition figures in exile, but until they learn how to run a state,
"we'll be there." According to Lantos that interim period,
with an American-sponsored dictator in power, should last between five
to six years.
Avital says she asked how one can talk about a dictator in Iraq and at
the same time demand "democratic reforms" in the territories
as a precondition for renewing the peace process. Lantos said that
democratization in the territories is just a general "road
map." He reminded her that "the U.S. didn't turn into a
democracy overnight." In any case, he promised her that after
America gets rid of all the regimes of evil, it will go straight to
Syria, "and tell young Assad that's what will happen to him if he
doesn't stop supporting terrorism."
It's important to emphasize that Lantos is not a Bush administration
spokesman, and not even part of the Republican leadership. The 11-term
congressman is the leader of the Democratic Party caucus in the House of
Representatives' International Affairs Committee. His approach, which
says an agreement with the Palestinians can wait, like his party's
support for semi-lunatic anti-Palestinian legislation, eases the work of
the Middle East experts in the State Department.
The expectation that as soon as Bush gets rid of Saddam Hussein he'll
show the same determination to advance a peace agreement between Israel
and the Palestinians - as his people are constantly whispering to Bush's
Arab friends - has as much chance of fulfillment as the hope that Sharon
will withdraw from the territories after getting rid of Arafat. As
Lantos says, in the best case, which means the war ends with a "new
order" in Iraq, there's a long line of terrorists after Saddam. In
the worst case, meaning the war destabilizes Iraq, and perhaps the
entire region, the U.S. will be bogged down for the coming years in a
Vietnam-like morass.
Unfortunately, Palestinian suicide bombers will presumably continue to
keep Israelis atop the list of terror victims around the world, thereby
keeping the issue of the occupation and the settlements, let alone tens
of thousands of hungry Palestinian children, off the international
agenda. All those issues will have to wait at least until Bush finishes
his "war on terror."
Then, sometime in the first part of the second half of his first term in
office, like all presidents, he'll begin thinking about the coming
elections and Jewish donors. Bush has memories from his father's
experience, about how a conflict between the president and a right-wing
government in Israel can affect an American president's career.
Apparently, the administration doesn't have a clue what will happen the
morning after Saddam is gone. Defense Secretary Donald Rumsfeld, asked
over the weekend if he can guarantee the next government in Iraq will be
preferable to Saddam's said frankly, "there aren't many guarantees
in life." In other words, the deluge is ahead of us and we're
jumping in head first. That's precisely how Sharon behaves, as well.
First we'll get rid of Arafat and break up the Palestinian Authority and
then, well, God is great.
There's nothing new with Sharon, other than the fact that while as
housing minster he greeted every American peace envoy visiting the
region with new settlements, and now he greets every Palestinian
initiative for a cease-fire with an attack on the heart of Gaza, and
puts a siege on the Muqata just as the closest thing to a coup d'etat
starts against Arafat. As far as he's concerned, and for that matter,
Chief of Staff Moshe Ya'alon is concerned, "the democratic
reforms" are just a euphemism for erasing any trace of Oslo and
getting rid of all those who represent it.
It is very difficult to understand how Oslo architect Shimon Peres, and
Benjamin Ben-Eliezer, who formally adopted the Saudi peace plan, lend
their support to this policy. Now the leaders of Colette Avital's party,
she of the the Peace Coalition, will pat themselves on the back and
explain that because they stayed in the government, a crisis in
relations with the U.S. was avoided. It's hard to believe they aren't
aware of the fear that keeps some of the highest ranking security
officers awake at night: that on the morning after the last remnants of
the central authority in the territories has been erased - and they are
active participants in its erasure - we can expect a flood of terrorism.
And we won't even have anyone left to besiege
See Also: New
Republican Congress retains a pro-Israel bent © Copyright
2003 Haaretz

Join our
Daily News Headlines Email Digest
|
|
Information
Clearing House
Daily
News Headlines Digest |
HOME
COPYRIGHT
NOTICE
|