|
LOS ANGELES
--- Sometimes the vital struggle for peace and stability is too
important to be left to civilian "experts," especially
when there are exceptional generals to help save nations from disaster.
That was patently the case after Japan's crushing World War II defeat:
The Japanese certainly benefited from Gen. Douglas MacArthur as
their transition governor. Later, a triumphant America derived a
sense of sensible-shoes steadiness from the Asian-like serenity
of Dwight Eisenhower, the brains behind the allied victory, who
as president took a very dim view indeed of military adventurism.
Indeed, when
genius generals take off their uniforms and rejoin the secular world,
good things often happen. That was certainly the nostalgic story
line Sunday night (Oct. 27) in New York City when a huge dinner
crowd feted the memory of Yitzhak Rabin -- a moving annual event
aided and abetted by former President Bill Clinton and CNN's Larry
King, America's new toastmaster general (and both were at the top
of their form).
In 1967, Rabin
was the brilliant Israeli chief of staff who sensed the gathering
clouds of war and masterminded the preemptive strike that smashed
Israel's enemies before they ever knew what hit them. Yet, just
one year later -- rewarded with the ambassadorship to Washington
-- the once-hawk was arguing that Israel should withdraw from all
the Arab territories it won during the war in return for peace.
That, alas,
never happened. The Middle East remains a basket case, and now Israel
is headed by a former general who is little more than a "naked
power" militarist in civilian clothing. Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon is no Yitzhak Rabin, the latter tragically assassinated in
1995. By Arabs, right? No, by Israeli extremists frightened by Rabin's
passion for peace. These are exactly the kind of people now behind
Sharon.
In his keynote
address at the Waldorf Astoria charity dinner, Clinton ineffably
managed to toast Rabin in a way that careened beyond the hotel's
satin walls and across the globe to the blood-soaked beaches of
Bali, to the bombed buses of the Middle East and, of course, to
the ghost-town of New York's Twin Towers just a few miles away.
It is so much
easy to wage war, Clinton wryly suggested, than when you are able
to look at "them" (the enemy) as subhuman. To be sure,
the terrorists who attack tourists and innocent workers are subhuman.
But they are hardly remotely representative of the rest of the great
Islamic world. John F. Kennedy said: "Let us never negotiate
out of fear. But let us never fear to negotiate." Too many
armchair generals in Washington want to neutron-bomb every potential
extremists site, whether in Indonesia, Pakistan or Iraq, and get
those subhumans "dead or alive."
There is a subtler
perspective, and it's the Asian one, though perhaps to over-generalize.
Drawing on their own recent experience, they find it difficult to
recall any powerful examples of beneficial wars. "The use of
military means has never achieved anything worthwhile and long-lasting
in Asia," flatly claims Serge Berthier, the publisher of Asian
Affairs, in the current issue of the well-connected Hong Kong-based
political quarterly. "That is probably why Asian politicians
are today more inclined to diplomacy coupled with confidence-building
measures as a means to achieve peace and development than to use
brute force."
But in America
now, diplomacy is too often equated with appeasement and a negotiated
settlement dubbed the suspicious symptom of flaccid manhood. The
chemistry of U.S. diplomacy these days is all testosterone and Viagra.
America, get a grip: For all the horrible carnage of 9/11, in a
sense, the biggest victims of the extremist terrorism have been
Islam and the Muslim world itself. "We need global powers with
global vision and with global interests at heart," warns Malaysian
Deputy Prime Minister Abdullah A. Badawi. "Powerful states
that pursue very narrow interests do not attain global leadership.
They forfeit it." Badawi, who is to succeed long-time Prime
Minister Mahathir Mohamad next year, understands why history's greatest
(and often most restrained) military superpower would revert to
a call to arms when wounded. "But when terrorism springs from
massive discontent and mass perception of manifest and blatant injustices,
punitive action alone will not work. It will only intensify the
anger and the rage and swell the ranks of potential terrorists."
Let's face it:
Ugly racist attitudes exist on both sides of the Islamic/Western
divide. Some people just never get it, whether extremist Palestinians,
extremist Israelis, hate-filled Muslims or well-meaning but not-all-there
American triumphalists. Their poisons wash over the reality of our
common humanity, with all its flaws and virtues: The truth is, we
all inhabit this same tiny globe, and we are all in desperate need
of each other.
Rabin got it;
and so they got him.
Is there an
answer? Yes. For starters, the greatest military power in history
needs to invest a lot less on weaponry and more on defending the
Rabins of the world. For no missile defense system can save more
lives than leaders like Rabin with the vision to see beyond their
noses, not to mention their rifles. The Rabins get it.
|