It appears to me, and to many others, that Israel's attack on Lebanon has a marginal justification at best, and in any case is disproportionate to the provocation. But I know there are people who make a good case that Israel's actions are justified. And that's the problem. The roots of Middle East conflicts are old and complicated. No matter where one turns, there's a group of people victimized by another - who are themselves victims of some past or present injustice. No side in any conflict is blameless, and everyone's cause - from the Israeli to the Palestinian to the Kurd to the pan-Arab nationalist - appears on some level to be just.
Who are we to believe we have the answers? Is America always right?
Justin Raimondo recently pointed out that America's interests in the Middle East are to see to it that politics and war "don't obstruct the free flow of commerce - and oil," and to "neutralize the Osama bin Ladens of the Middle East ideologically." The latter goal reminded of Cecil B. Currey's biography Edward Lansdale: the Unquiet American.
Lansdale made his mark in the early days of the Cold War. As a CIA operative in the Philippines, his strategy and tactics successfully defeated the communist insurgency there. The question was, will the people side with the insurgents, or with the government? Lansdale persuaded the Filipino government to neutralize the insurgents ideologically. If the Communists were siding with the people and their legitimate grievances, they would be supported by the people, and the government would be finished. But if the government addressed the just complaints, then the people, preferring peace to war, would abandon the Communists. This is exactly what happened. Lansdale was later brought to Viet Nam, but his recommendations were ignored and South Viet Nam fell.
Our Middle Eastern enemies today are not communists. But though the tactics may be different, the principle remains the same. The greatest strength of our enemies is not their numbers, or their weapons, or their tactics (such as terrorism). Their greatest strength is their legitimate grievances against us. For it is those grievances that create the Iraqi insurgent and the Islamic terrorist. It is those grievances that sway world opinion against the USA.
When America is in the wrong, it is in its own best interest to correct that. This is not "caving in" to the enemy. Demonstrating "strength" through a show of military force is actually a sign of weakness, and just perpetuates the conflict. For every massacre of civilians in Iraq, for every American-funded Israeli bomb dropped in Lebanon, we stir up even greater resentment in the Middle East.
What are these grievances? American aid to Israel - $3 billion a year - helps fund her military domination of her neighboring countries. American pressure to prevent any other Middle Eastern country from acquiring nuclear weapons makes it appear that it believes Israel has the right to self-defense and deterrence , but no one else in the region does. America's military presence in Saudi Arabia and subsequent war in Iraq were unnecessary and humiliating to the Arab people. American aid and cozy relationships with monarchs and dictators of the region make it appear that Americans call the shots, and are thus to blame for poverty and oppression in the region. In short, the USA behaves like an imperial power; it should realize that resistance to it is to be expected.
Some people call our enemies "Islamo-fascists." Maybe they are that. Maybe they "hate us for our freedom" and resent the glamor and sex our culture sells. But we don't know this for sure, because the USA has played the bad guy in the Middle East for too long.. If the USA cuts funding for Israel and other Middle Eastern countries, if it stops browbeating countries for wanting the same weapons the USA itself has, if it pulls out of Iraq, and declares neutrality in all conflicts in the region, we can see how effective "Islamo-fascist" terrorists are. We'll see how much support they'll have among their own people and in the international community. It won't be much. We'll instead find that people over the world will actually start liking us again.
Saying that we ought to end aid to Israel shouldn't be taken as a criticism of that country. Maybe Israel is justified in its attacks on Lebanon, and maybe their actions in previous Palestinian conflicts are likewise justified. But that doesn't mean Israel - or any country - is entitled to American aid. If dispensational evangelicals, American Jews, liberal idealists, and neoconservatives want to support Israel so much, they should raise the money themselves and send it to Israel. But forcing taxpayers to support Israel is an assault on the freedom of conscience of Americans who do not agree with Israel's policies.
America doesn't have the power, wealth, or wisdom to solve the world's problems. Just as we believe that society works best when it is free, that is, when it leaves individuals alone to solve their own problems and pursue their own ambitions, so should it be with foreign policy. America can and should maintain a strong border and coastal defense. Otherwise, it should follow the wisdom of the founders of the Republic. Pursue peaceful commerce and friendship with all nations, but form entangling alliances with none. We should leave other countries alone, neither aiding them nor attacking them. The world will not resent an American policy of non-intervention, it will praise us for it. And only with this policy of neutrality in foreign conflicts can America rightly reclaim her place as the greatest and most moral nation on earth.