Britain's Prime Minister Tony Blair
Photo: AFP
Mideast's chicken and egg
Blair seems to have accepted idea that West will only win war on terror once there is peace in region
Blair's Guildhall Speech, this week, calling for peace in the Middle East, instead of cheering me up amidst the seemingly endless exchange of fire between Israel and the Palestinians along the Gaza Strip, caused me to ponder whether this was yet another ploy to gain the sympathy of the Arabs and Iranians at Israel's expense.
Not surprisingly, Eden's proposals was received with satisfaction in the Arab world, but totally rejected by Israel. This plan, which was supported also by US Secretary of State, John Foster Dulles, came to nothing because of Israel's opposition to it and the Arabs' total refusal to accept a Jewish state among them.
It reminded me of another speech at the same place - the Guildhall - in November 1955, by the then British Prime Minister, Sir Anthony Eden, who stated that Israel should appease the Arab countries by agreeing to modify its borders in their favor and repatriating some of the Arab refugees.
The Speech
During speech in London, British PM Tony Blair indicates Israeli-Palestinian conflict as 'core' of problems in Middle East, advocates rethinking Middle East policy. Bush: World needs to unite to isolate Iran
Misinterpretation of Islam
Blair, in his Guildhall speech last week, warned against a new and unconventional enemy - global terrorism, based on a misinterpretation of Islam, which was fanatical and deadly, which had been present for years but little noticed by the West before 9/11, terrorism dedicated to one end: to stop democracy flourishing in Arab and Muslim countries; to foster sectarian division; and to drive out the possibility of reconciliation between people of different faiths.
According to Blair, the ideology and methods that were fuelling the violence in Iraq and Afghanistan were the same that had seen thousands die in acts of terrorism across the world.
Blair maintained that a major part of the answer to Iraq lay not in Iraq itself but outside it, in the whole of the region where the same forces are at work, where the roots of this global terrorism were to be found, where the extremism flourished, with a propaganda that was totally false but nonetheless, attractive to much of the Arab street.
In order to deal with the core of the problem, Blair insisted that the West should invest great efforts in resolving the Israel-Palestine conflict, and then make progress in Lebanon. In the process, it should unite all moderate Arab and Moslem voices behind a push for peace in those countries and in Iraq, and empower those with a moderate and modern view of the faith of Islam everywhere.
Blair offered Iran a new partnership based on its support for the Middle East Peace Process, refraining from supporting terrorism in Lebanon or Iraq, and abiding by their international obligations. He also called for a close alliance between Britain, America and Europe.
All this sounds fair and reasonable. Yet, many were alarmed in Israel and among its supporters lest this strategy would require great sacrifices on Israel's part which could endanger its vital interests, including its fundamental security.
Blair seems to have accepted the idea that the West will only win the war on terror once there is peace in Israel. But the skeptics argue that there will only be peace in Israel once we have won the war on terror.
Dr. Chanan Reich is the head of the Department of Political Science in The Yizre'el Valley Academic College
