Obama And Mubarak Bet On The Wrong Horse

While the reports on the meeting between Hosni Mubarak and President Obama are skimpy in the details department, one thing (other than the hyperbolic mutual congratulations) is apparent. Both men are wedded to the notion that a joint Hamas-Fatah run Palestinian Authority will be dominated by the older, larger group, Fatah. In this they are as wrong as a soup sandwich.

As laid out in a previous post, the most Islamist jihadist elements of both groups, particularly Hamas, are driving the political direction of the Palestinian movement generally and the PA in particular. The dynamic is well understood historically, and if not inevitable in the current situation, it is the next thing to that.

Further, there can be no doubt that Hamas, like Hezbollah, is a subsidiary of Iran. Neither the Iranians nor Hezbollah have made any bones about this. Nor, have either said that Hamas in independent of Tehran. Quite the contrary, Tehran has taken some credit for the success of Hamas. Thus the inference that Hamas is a tail being wagged by the Iranian dog is not the creation of Israeli paranoia or self-serving.

Egypt has much riding on the accomplishment of a Hamas-PA rapprochement, considering the time and political capital the Mubarak government has expended on the effort. While Egypt may benefit in some way by bringing the shotgun marriage of two unequal, unsuited for each other parties into existence, this does not mean the search for a comprehensive Mideast peace will benefit as well.

Even without the odious influence of the mullahocracy, the climate of loathing and religious justification for both the feeling and violent expressions based upon it do not bode well for any sort of peace. In a real sense too much blood has flowed over the dam during the past half century and more for hatred and the desire for revenge to be put on some faraway shelf in a back closet.

The Islamist jihadists within the Palestinian population as well as their similarly minded supporters elsewhere in the Mideast have shown the capacity to pile demand on top of demand until the Israelis have no choice beyond the stark one of rejection or accepting an existential risk. No government willingly has or will place its population at risk of attack, fear, and death (with the exception of Hamas which has a splendid record of doing just this.)

The road to peace, if there is any, does not run through Cairo. Nor does it run through Gaza. It doesn't even travel through the territories currently governed by the PA.

The route toward peace requires removing the outside support currently backing the Islamist jihadists of both Gaza and the West Bank. The Islamist jihadists must be isolated, marginalised, made trivial. This means their outside supporters--headed by Syria--have to be brought to the table.

As has been written here numerous times, Syria has the most to gain by making peace with Israel. Syria wants the Golan Heights. Period.

The US, the Obama administration, should immediately proceed to offer a deal to Syria: Drop your connections to Iran, Hezbollah, and Hamas, and we will put the Godzilla on Israel to hand back the Golan.

Then the Obama-ites have to do just that. Sure, the Israelis will scream like bloody murder as they want to keep the water and other resources of the Golan Heights. But, they have a lot to gain by giving up this particular segment of the Great Land Grab War of 1967--severing Syria from both Hezbollah and Hamas.

Without Syria the aid given by Iran to both terrorist groups will be rendered unimportant. The situation on the Lebanon front would be stabilized. (And, would be even more stable if US objections to Syrian "meddling" in Lebanon would be lowered.)

Without Syria the task of supplying and guiding Hamas would be made much more difficult for the mullahs of Iran. If Egypt were to get really, really serious about policing their side of the border with Hamastan, the flow of weapons and other deadly materials as well as much of Hamas' economic base would be reduced--greatly.

A further benefit could accrue to the US by brokering a deal with Syria and normalizing our relations with the country. Syria would respond by upping their efforts to control their side of the Syria-Iraq border which would put something of a crimp in the recent wave of (probable) Sunni executed bombing attacks in Baghdad and elsewhere.

Not bad, eh, bucko?

The fundamental problem of President Obama's current tactics in the Mideast is his propensity for putting pressure on Israel over the wrong "settlements"--and his willingness to back the wrong main man in the Arab states.

Hosni Mubarak is not the correct man right now. In a real sense his day is past.

Bashir al-Assad is the right man, right now. His day is on us. We need only to realize and act upon this fact. His role in the securing of Mideast peace is critical.

Of course, it is legitimate to wonder if the Obama administration has the wit to recognize this.