|
Iran Against the Arabs
July 19, 2006
The Wall Street Journal
Michael Rubin
After Hamas kidnapped
19-year-old Cpl. Gilad Shalit on June 25, Israeli forces launched an
assault on Gaza to win his release. Arab condemnation was swift. Saudi
Arabia's pro-government al-Jazira daily called Israel "a society of
terrorists." Egypt's state-controlled al-Gumhuriyah condemned Israel's
"heinous crimes" in Gaza. Following a July 8 meeting in Tehran, foreign
ministers from countries neighboring Iraq denounced the "brutal Israeli
attacks."
The crisis escalated four days later when Hezbollah terrorists infiltrated
Israel's northern border and kidnapped two soldiers. Prime Minister Ehud
Olmert called the raid "an act of war," and directed the military to
launch an all-out assault on Hezbollah and targets throughout Lebanon.
Neither Lebanese nor regional reaction to the opening of a second front
was what Hezbollah expected. On July 14, Hezbollah's al-Manar called upon
"all Lebanese people to rally behind the Islamic resistance" and to fight
Israel's "flagrant aggression."
They didn't. No longer subject to Syrian occupation, Lebanese officials
spoke freely. The Middle East Media Research Institute translated many
reactions. "Lebanon . . . is not willing to be the spearhead of the
Arab-Israeli conflict," former President Amin Gemayel said. "Hezbollah
will have to explain itself to the Lebanese," Druze leader Walid Jumblatt
told Le Figaro. The independent Beirut daily Al-Mustaqbal quoted Lebanese
Communications Minister Marwan Hamada saying, "Syrian Vice President Faruq
al-Shara gives the commands, Hezbollah carries them out, and Lebanon is
the hostage."
Nor did the wider Arab world rally in unanimity toward Hezbollah. "A
distinction must be made between legitimate resistance and uncalculated
adventures undertaken by elements [without] . . . consulting and
coordinating with Arab nations," the official Saudi Press Agency opined.
Egyptian Foreign Minister Ahmed Abul Gheit included Hezbollah rocket
attacks in his condemnation of terrorism. Even the Arab League, which
seldom misses an opportunity to denounce Israel, offered only muted
criticism. True, League Secretary General Amr Moussa condemned Israel's
"disproportionate attack," after the July 15 meeting, but rather than just
slam the Jewish state, Saud al-Faisal, the Saudi foreign minister, chided
Hezbollah's "unexpected, inappropriate and irresponsible acts." Delegates
from Bahrain, Egypt, Jordan, Kuwait and the UAE backed Mr. al-Faisal.
Ahmed al-Jarallah, editor of Kuwait's Arab Times, condemned both Hezbollah
and Hamas in an editorial that same day, writing, "Unfortunately we must
admit that in such a war the only way to get rid of 'these irregular
phenomena' is what Israel is doing."
* * *
It may be tempting to think that acceptance of Israel is in the air. But
such optimism is unfounded. There is no change of heart in Riyadh, Cairo
or Kuwait. Saudi princes still finance Palestinian terror. Rather, the
recent Arab tolerance toward Israel's predicament and condemnation of
Hezbollah signal recognition of a greater threat on the horizon. Wadi
Batti Hanna, a columnist in Iraq's Arab nationalist al-Ittijah al-Akhar
daily, put it bluntly when, on July 15, he asked, "How long will the Arabs
continue to fight on behalf of Iran?"
The Iranian menace is rising. Condoleezza Rice's May 31 announcement that
the Bush administration would engage Iran signaled U.S. weakness across
the Middle East. "Why don't you admit that you are weak and your razor is
blunt?" Iranian Supreme Leader asked rhetorically four days later, as
assembled crowds in Tehran called for America's death. An Iranian
Revolutionary Guards boat recently unveiled a banner reading, "U.S. cannot
do a damn thing," as it sailed past a U.S. navy ship in the Persian Gulf.
Tehran's confidence is high.
Even as Arab states routinely condemn U.S. foreign policy, they embrace
the American umbrella. John Mearsheimer and Steven Walt, respectively of
the University of Chicago and Harvard, may argue that "the Israel Lobby"
perverts U.S. interests; but Arab leaders understand that the only
countries the U.S. military has fought to protect in the Middle East were
Kuwait and Saudi Arabia. The tiny Gulf emirates are defenseless without
U.S. protection. There is hardly a state on the Arabian Peninsula that
does not train with the U.S. military or welcome a small U.S. presence.
But with U.S. congressmen proclaiming the defeat and vulnerability of U.S.
troops in Iraq, and the Islamic Republic drawing closer to its nuclear
goals, Tehran's stock is rising at U.S. expense.
The signs of Arab unease have been growing over the last 18 months.
Jordan's King Abdullah II first raised alarm. In a Dec. 12, 2004 interview
with Chris Matthews, he warned that the rise of Iranian-backed Shiite
parties in Iraq could give rise to a Shiite "crescent" stretching from
Iran to Lebanon. Abdulaziz Hakim, the leader of the Supreme Council for
Islamic Revolution in Iraq, called Abdullah's comments "ridiculous," but
the remarks resonated in Arab countries. True, the Shiites might account
for only 10% of the world's Muslims, but in the volatile region stretching
from the eastern Mediterranean to Iran, the Sunnis and Shiites are near
parity. That Shiites predominate in the oil-producing regions not only of
Iran and Iraq but also in Saudi Arabia accelerates the fears. Satellite
stations throw fuel on the fire. A July 12 political cartoon in the Iraqi
daily al-Mutamar depicted a man pouring gasoline labeled sectarianism into
a satellite dish.
The power of satellite stations to inflame sectarian passion is
extraordinary. I was in Sweileh, Jordan, as news broke last November that
Iraqi Shiite militias had tortured Sunni prisoners in detention.
Al-Jazeera replayed the footage in gory detail. Cafes hushed and men
shouted abuse at the TV screens. More recently, al-Jazeera amplified Osama
bin Laden's July 1 Internet message blaming "the people of the [Shiite]
south" for violating Sunni cities like Ramadi, Fallujah and Mosul. The
situation worsened when Iranian-backed Shiite militiamen rampaged through
the mixed Hay al-Jihad neighborhood on July 9, demanding identity cards
and killing anyone with a Sunni name.
Most Arabs perceive Israel as small. Egypt--home to one of every three
Arabs--has enjoyed a cold peace with Israel for more than a
quarter-century. Gulf states, on the whole, would rather make money than
directly fight Israel. While they do not like Israel's existence,
Jerusalem presents no threat. Not so Tehran. A giant with 70 million
people, Iran is no status quo power. Its ideological commitment to export
revolution is real. Across Lebanon and the region, Arab leaders see
Hezbollah for what it is: An arm of Iranian influence waging a sectarian
battle in the heart of the Middle East.
An old Arab proverb goes, "Me against my brother; me and my brother
against our cousin; and me, my brother and my cousin against the
stranger." Forced to make a choice, Sunni Arabs are deciding: The Jews are
cousins; the Shiites, strangers. U.S. diplomats may applaud the new
pragmatism, but the reason behind it is nothing to celebrate.
Michael Rubin is a resident scholar at AEI.
|