First: stability in the Middle East is something we want to destroy, not perpetuate. The status quo of Saddam, Arafat, the theocracies of Iran and Saudi Arabia are neither to our advantage, nor to their own people's advantage. Indeed, from the opposite perspective, Israel's nuclear capability hasn't destabilized anything, since this grim status quo has developed with Israel in possession of nukes. Israel can be trusted to be responsible with its weapons: Saddam most certainly cannot.
Next, Martin has taken the NY Times statements - what a shocker - completely out of context. Martin's quote is this:
- Israeli leaders speak of 'squashing' human beings and proving their own 'omnipotence.'
- Another constraint is political. Mr. Sharon's coalition would not survive without the Labor Party, whose leaders include Defense Minister Benjamin Ben-Eliezer and Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, and both have declared themselves opposed to a policy of that relies on force alone.
"Today there are two schools of thought in the government," Mr. Ben-Eliezer said in an interview published today in Yediot Ahronot. "One is to squash them and to conquer them completely, and the other realizes that this is the time to hold out a hand and to walk side by side."
Yet throughout the current conflict, Mr. Sharon has demonstrated his political skill in pushing ahead with his agenda whenever he felt public opinion behind him, usually after suicide attacks. In the end, both the Americans and the Labor Party have fallen in line.
Behind that approach, said Yossi Alpher, an Israeli analyst, was a conviction that peace could be achieved only when the Palestinians lost all doubt about Israeli resolve and omnipotence.






Article comments
1 - Paul
"He has traveled through the Middle East [I caught a connecting flight in Cairo]. His foreign experience includes Europe, Iran and Asia."
Hey, I've done that as well. Well, I've actually done more than just travel through it. Does that make me a "respected voice in America's intelligence community"? Granted, I haven't set up any vanity orginazations, but I'm sure I can spin up the Generic Organization Word Generator and spit something out that sounds official and important. I'll even print it on my business cards and include it in my bio.
2 - Eric Olsen
I think you have about summed him up, Paul. Anyone can claim about anything if it's vague enough, or if not concerned about getting caught in a lie.