Sayeret
02-15-2005, 11:01 AM
Europe and Hizbullah
On Wednesday, the European Union is expected to consider whether to add Hizbullah to its list of terrorist organizations. If it does not, it will plainly be a slap in the face to Israel. It will also be a slap in the face to newly-elected Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.
Last week, a top PA security official told The Jerusalem Post that "Hizbullah and Iran are not happy with Abbas's efforts to achieve a cease-fire with Israel and resume negotiations. That's why we don't rule out the possibility that they might try to kill him if he continues with his policy."
What is remarkable about this is not the news that Iran and its subsidiary, Hizbullah, are opposed to any peace process. It is well known that much of the Palestinian terrorism today is directly organized and supported by Teheran or Damascus. The last round of Kassam attacks in the Gaza Strip was reportedly ordered by Syria.
What is new is that this external intervention has reached such a level that even the PA leadership is sounding the alarm and begging the world to help it cut off those throwing oil on flames that it is trying to douse.
French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier was noncommittal when pressed to help change his nation's opposition to branding Hizbullah as terrorists during a visit to Jerusalem last week. President Jacques Chirac was more direct in his meeting with Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom on Monday. He said no.
France's argument for its position, that Hizbullah is a political faction in Lebanon, is ludicrous to the point of insult. This "political faction" has thousands of missiles pointed at Israel, is committed to Israel's destruction and is actively supporting Palestinian terrorism and undermining the PA.
Does this mean that if al-Qaida started a political party somewhere that it would no longer be a terrorist organization, no matter how deeply it is engaged in terrorism? How can France ban Hizbullah's television arm, Al-Manar, presumably for fomenting radicalism in France, and turn a blind eye to its doing much more than inciting terrorism against Israel?
But even if France stops blocking a correct EU decision on Hizbullah, there is a wider aspect of this problem that should be addressed.
If the EU cares about supporting the prospects for peace, it must make the Iranian terrorist threat – not just its nuclear program – a top priority.
On her swing through Europe and this region, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was careful to bring up three problems whenever Iran was mentioned: nuclear weapons, terrorism and human rights. The E-3 – Britain, France and Germany – by contrast, seems concerned only about blocking Iran's nuclear program, and its willingness to take effective measures even to this end is suspect.
Indeed, if Europe cannot recognize that Hizbullah is a terrorist organization, it is hard to take its diplomacy in the nuclear arena seriously either. Europe has been pressing the US to join in this process, but what reason would the US have to join such a feckless policy? Why, for that matter, is Europe not joining in the US approach?
It should be recognized that Iran's pursuit of nukes, support for terror and crushing of dissidents are part and parcel of the same strategy of regime protection through violence and intimidation. It is a failed regime that long ago lost the support of its people and believes it can survive only by flailing about in all directions.
The Western response to Iranian aggression and threats to international security must be concerted and comprehensive. It cannot say that terror and oppression are acceptable but nukes are not. It is the opposite message that should be sent: Rogue states that threaten their regions should not take the survival of their regime for granted.
In any case, a policy of support for Israeli-Palestinian peace and for the new PA government cannot be taken seriously when there is a refusal to even recognize, let alone confront, a terrorist group that is openly committed to destroying both.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1108353358535&apage=2
Explain why you think the EU should or why you think they shouldn't.
On Wednesday, the European Union is expected to consider whether to add Hizbullah to its list of terrorist organizations. If it does not, it will plainly be a slap in the face to Israel. It will also be a slap in the face to newly-elected Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas.
Last week, a top PA security official told The Jerusalem Post that "Hizbullah and Iran are not happy with Abbas's efforts to achieve a cease-fire with Israel and resume negotiations. That's why we don't rule out the possibility that they might try to kill him if he continues with his policy."
What is remarkable about this is not the news that Iran and its subsidiary, Hizbullah, are opposed to any peace process. It is well known that much of the Palestinian terrorism today is directly organized and supported by Teheran or Damascus. The last round of Kassam attacks in the Gaza Strip was reportedly ordered by Syria.
What is new is that this external intervention has reached such a level that even the PA leadership is sounding the alarm and begging the world to help it cut off those throwing oil on flames that it is trying to douse.
French Foreign Minister Michel Barnier was noncommittal when pressed to help change his nation's opposition to branding Hizbullah as terrorists during a visit to Jerusalem last week. President Jacques Chirac was more direct in his meeting with Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom on Monday. He said no.
France's argument for its position, that Hizbullah is a political faction in Lebanon, is ludicrous to the point of insult. This "political faction" has thousands of missiles pointed at Israel, is committed to Israel's destruction and is actively supporting Palestinian terrorism and undermining the PA.
Does this mean that if al-Qaida started a political party somewhere that it would no longer be a terrorist organization, no matter how deeply it is engaged in terrorism? How can France ban Hizbullah's television arm, Al-Manar, presumably for fomenting radicalism in France, and turn a blind eye to its doing much more than inciting terrorism against Israel?
But even if France stops blocking a correct EU decision on Hizbullah, there is a wider aspect of this problem that should be addressed.
If the EU cares about supporting the prospects for peace, it must make the Iranian terrorist threat – not just its nuclear program – a top priority.
On her swing through Europe and this region, US Secretary of State Condoleezza Rice was careful to bring up three problems whenever Iran was mentioned: nuclear weapons, terrorism and human rights. The E-3 – Britain, France and Germany – by contrast, seems concerned only about blocking Iran's nuclear program, and its willingness to take effective measures even to this end is suspect.
Indeed, if Europe cannot recognize that Hizbullah is a terrorist organization, it is hard to take its diplomacy in the nuclear arena seriously either. Europe has been pressing the US to join in this process, but what reason would the US have to join such a feckless policy? Why, for that matter, is Europe not joining in the US approach?
It should be recognized that Iran's pursuit of nukes, support for terror and crushing of dissidents are part and parcel of the same strategy of regime protection through violence and intimidation. It is a failed regime that long ago lost the support of its people and believes it can survive only by flailing about in all directions.
The Western response to Iranian aggression and threats to international security must be concerted and comprehensive. It cannot say that terror and oppression are acceptable but nukes are not. It is the opposite message that should be sent: Rogue states that threaten their regions should not take the survival of their regime for granted.
In any case, a policy of support for Israeli-Palestinian peace and for the new PA government cannot be taken seriously when there is a refusal to even recognize, let alone confront, a terrorist group that is openly committed to destroying both.
http://www.jpost.com/servlet/Satellite?pagename=JPost/JPArticle/ShowFull&cid=1108353358535&apage=2
Explain why you think the EU should or why you think they shouldn't.