#Hagel got Eisenhower very, very wrong

January 31, 2013

In an earlier post, I noted Chuck Hagel’s admiration for the 34th President of the United States, Dwight Eisenhower, specifically for Eisenhower’s handling of what’s known in Israel as the Sinai campaign (the 1956 war between Israel, Britain and France on one side and Egypt on the other). I also reported that Hagel had it all wrong, because Eisenhower later believed that making Israel withdraw from Sinai was the biggest mistake of his Presidency.
Lee Smith has a lot more details about Eisenhower’s regrets over the Sinai campaign.


In fact, Eisenhower came to believe that Suez had been the “biggest foreign-policy blunder of his administration.” In hindsight, it’s not hard to see why. He ruined the position of two longtime allies, effectively driving Britain out of the Middle East once and for all, and without any benefit to American interests. If Eisenhower expected Nasser to be grateful, he was sorely mistaken.

“From Nasser’s perspective, he played the superpowers against each other and came out the winner,” says Michael Doran, a senior fellow at the Brookings Institution’s Saban Center for Middle East Policy. “What Ike thought he was doing was laying the groundwork for a new order in the Middle East, a third course between the re-imposition of European colonialism and the Soviet Union. But all Eisenhower did was strengthen Nasser and destabilize the region.”

Doran, a former George W. Bush Administration National Security Council staffer in charge of the Middle East, is finishing a book about Eisenhower and the Middle East that looks at how Eisenhower’s understanding of the region changed over time. “Eisenhower slammed his allies and aided his enemies at Suez,” Doran explains, “because his policy was based on certain key assumptions of how the Arab world worked. The most important of these was the notion of Arab unity. He believed they would respond as a bloc to certain stimuli.”


Chief among them, Eisenhower and his Secretary of State John Foster Dulles believed, was the Arab-Israeli conflict. They saw the role of the United States then as playing the honest broker, mediating between Israel on one side and the Arab world on the other. If this conceit is still popular today with American policymakers, says Doran, “it’s partly because some Arab officials continue to talk this way. The idea is, to win over the Arabs we have to stop being so sympathetic to Israel.”

But in the wake of Suez, Eisenhower came to see the region through a different lens. He paid more attention to what Arab leaders actually did, rather than what they said. “Between March 1957 and July 1958, Eisenhower got the equivalent of the Arab spring,” says Doran. “It was a revolutionary wave around the region and for Ike a tutorial on Arab politics. There was upheaval after upheaval, in Syria, Lebanon, Jordan, Saudi Arabia, and then the Iraqi revolution of 1958 that toppled an American ally. All of them were internal conflicts, tantamount to Arab civil wars, and had nothing to do with Israel. With this, Eisenhower recognized that the image he had of the Arab world had nothing to do with the political realities of the Middle East.”

Read the whole thing.
The more things change, the more they stay the same. Obama has the same mistaken conception of the Middle East that Eisenhower had in 1956. Today’s it’s known as linkage. By 1958, Eisenhower had dismissed it as a policy strategy. Don’t bet on Obama doing the same.


Eisenhower threatened to use the Treasury to destroy the British Pound.

November 13, 2011

On 26 July 1956, in retaliation for the loss of funding and to help pay for the Aswan project, Nasser gave a speech in Alexandria where he denounced Western influence in the Arab world and announced the nationalization of the Suez Canal Company.

The British tried to stage a phony crisis in order to send in peacekeeping troops that was aborted when Eisenhower threatened to use the Treasury to destroy the British Pound. Eisenhower would later go on to regret it, but the deed was done.

(SULTAN KNISH) Eisenhower’s intervention on behalf of Nasser’s seizure of the Suez Canal, and against England, (despite Nasser being a Soviet ally) demonstrated that America would rather turn on its allies, than risk alienating Arab and Muslim states. When the Saudis nationalized ARAMCO, they were confident that America would do nothing. And they were only partially wrong. America did something, it used taxpayer money to compensate shareholders for the nationalized by our “Saudi” friends.

Authentic jihad could conquer non-Muslim superpowers such as the Soviet Union and the United States by creating an alliance of Muslim fighters around the globe.

July 24, 2011

Ayman al-Zawahiri, left, sitting next to Osama bin Laden, praises those who attacked the United States on September 11, 2001 (YouTube video, April 15, 2002).
Left: The front cover of Laura Mansfield’s book, containing the translations of the first edition of al-Zawahiri’s book and various public messages he issued. Right: The front cover of a book by Montasser al-Zayat, an Egyptian lawyer, about Ayman al-Zawahiri

Al-Zawahiri’s response to the threat [infidels] centered on waging a jihad around the globe. He concluded that there had to be a global jihad because the local jihad campaign had failed. He gave as an example the Islamic movement in Algeria led by the Islamic Salvation Front (FIS). He said it had failed because it had not been sufficiently prepared to fight the authorities and did not receive enough support from jihad fighters (mujahideen) beyond its borders, while France helped the Algerian regime suppress it. More via Profile of Dr. Ayman al-Zawahiri, Osama bin Laden’s Heir as Leader of Al-Qaeda | Crethi Plethi……..

The young jihad fighters had to be imbued exclusively with Islamic spirit, rejecting national-territorial Arab ideology. This meant that Al-Zawahiri was not interested in borders, and in a world where one can travel so easily… I see exactly why any governing entity that was aggressive, never mind terrorists, would work in this fashion.


The West’s proxy war against the Jews

March 1, 2011
boat people.jpg
It was a stunning moment of moral clarity. As the South Vietnamese refugees clambered onto rickety boats in the South China Sea to escape the victorious Communists, the American Left that orchestrated the US defeat through a sustained campaign of propaganda and fake calls for peace stood silent.
As Pol Pot, the “progressive” dictator tortured and murdered a third of his people in Cambodia, the leftists “peace” activists in the US and Europe who never saw a US military operation that was justified, turned a blind eye.
The silence of the likes of Susan Sontag, Jane Fonda, Noam Chomsky and their fellow travelers came to mind last week when the Western media and intellectual elites averted their gaze as Sheikh Yusuf Qaradawi, the long exiled spiritual guide of the Muslim Brotherhood spoke before a crowd of millions at Cairo’s Tahrir Square.
Qaradawi, who had been living in exile in Qatar during Hosni Mubarak’s reign, became an international jihadist superstar thanks to Qatar’s unelected potentate Hamad bin Khalifa Al-Thani who gave him his jihad indoctrination show on Al Jazeera. From his internationally televised soapbox, Qaradawi regularly preaches international jihad and genocide of Jewry to millions of fans worldwide.
Two important things happened during Qaradawi’s appearance in Cairo. First, his handlers refused to allow Google’s Egyptian Internet revolutionary Wael Ghonim to join the cleric on the dais. For anyone willing to notice, Qaradawi’s message in spurning Ghonim was indisputable. As far as the jihadists are concerned, Ghonim and his fellow Internet activists are the present day equivalent of Lenin’s useful idiots.
They did their job of convincing credulous Western liberals that the overthrow of Mubarak was all about sweetness and light. 
And now they are no longer needed.
The second message was Qaradawi’s call to destroy Israel. With millions of adoring fans crying out “Amen,” and “Allahu Akhbar,” Qaradawi called for a Muslim conquest of Jerusalem – that is, for the destruction of Israel. As a first step, he demanded that the Egyptian military open the Egyptian border with Gaza.
In the dismal tradition of its Vietnam-era teachers, today’s international Left had nothing to say about Qaradawi’s genocidal speech. In the New York Times‘ write-up of Qaradawi’s triumphant return to Egypt for instance, the murder-inciting cleric was referred to as a champion of democracy and pluralism.
Leftist writers like Peter Beinart have spent the better part of the past month whitewashing and belittling the significance of the Muslim Brotherhood.
The same Muslim Brotherhood that was founded in 1928 and got its first boost from the Nazis who funded their anti-Jewish pogroms in Cairo and Alexandria in 1939 is seen as nothing to worry about. US President Barack Obama’s Director of National Intelligence James Clapper assured Congress that the Muslim Brotherhood is largely secular. This is the same Muslim Brotherhood whose motto is, “Allah is our objective; the prophet is our leader; the Koran is our law; Jihad is our way; Dying in the path of Allah is our goal.”
THE SAME Left who champions Qaradawi as a liberal is absolutely adamant that the revolutions now raging throughout the Muslim world are a mere sideshow to the region’s chief drama. The revolutions in Tunisia, Egypt, Libya, Bahrain, Yemen, Jordan, Oman, Morocco and Saudi Arabia are nothing. And the anti-regime protests in Iran have no strategic significance whatsoever to the West, which is mortally threatened by the mullocracy.
Who cares if the Arabs are ruled by tyrants, democrats, jihadists, or fascists? The only thing that matters is that “Palestine” is free of Israeli “occupation.”
How can anyone get excited about the future of the oil-dependent global economy when Jews still reside in Jewish communities in Judea and Samaria and Jewish neighborhoods in Jerusalem? 
The Left’s essential indifference to the plight of hundreds of millions of Arabs and its significance for the West was exposed in a news analysis by Brendan O’Neill in The Australian on February 16. O’Neill noted that whereas the demonstrators in Cairo were fairly silent on the issue of the Palestinians, anti-Mubarak demonstrations throughout the West prominently featured anti-Israel slogans and chants of “Free, free Palestine!” 
O’Neill concluded that the contrasting messages, “reveals something important about the Palestine issue…. [It] has become less important for Arabs and of the utmost symbolic importance for Western radicals at exactly the same time.”
Actually, it is important to Western leftists and jihadists, which is why the Palestinians only became a salient issue in Egypt after the Muslim Brotherhood began taking control over the opposition movement with Qaradawi’s sermon on February 18.
IN A groundbreaking study of the propaganda war against Israel entitled “The Big Lie and the Media War against Israel: From Inversion of Truth to Inversion of Reality,” published in Jewish Political Studies Review in March 2007, Joel Fishman showed that the Muslim Brotherhood’s propaganda war against Israel, like the Left’s propaganda war against Israel, relied heavily on Nazi propaganda against Jews. 
The early partnership between the Brotherhood and the Nazis, brought together by Palestinian Arab leader and Nazi agent Haj Amin el Husseini imported European anti-Semitism to the Muslim world. Beginning in the early 1950s, Nazi war criminals immigrated to Egypt. There they recreated much of Josef Goebbels’ anti-Semitic propaganda operation for Gamal Abdel Nasser.
Fishman also documented how in the aftermath of World War II, and particularly after Israel’s victory in the Six Day War, the Soviets adapted Nazi anti-Jewish propaganda to demonize Israel as the new, collective Jew and in turn demonize the collective Jew as the new Nazi Germany.
Two sources fed the Soviet anti-Jewish/anti-Zionist propaganda machine: former Nazi propagandists in Egypt; and former Nazi propagandists employed by the East German Communist regime. According to Fishman, the messages developed by these ex-Nazi propagandists were the basis for the Soviet campaign to delegitimize Israel which began in earnest after 1967. The call to arms was published first in a Pravda editorial in October 1967. There, Zionism, the Jewish national liberation movement was reviled as dedicated to “genocide, racism, treachery, aggression, and annexation…all characteristic attributes of fascists.”
With both the Soviets and the Arabs spewing the same inverted message, it didn’t take long for it to become the rage in Europe. Europe’s adoption of the Nazi-inspired propaganda in which reality was inverted and Israel – the victim of Arab imperialist, genocidal aggression – became the imperialist, genocidal aggressor was facilitated by France’s embrace of the Arab camp after its withdrawal from Algeria and effective withdrawal from NATO.
By 1975, with the UN General Assembly’s adoption of the Soviet-Arab sponsored resolution 3379 defining Zionism as racism, most European governments had fallen in line with the Soviet-Arab propaganda war.
They in turn spent the next generation bringing their message to America.
TODAY, THAT message has become the sum total of Europe’s Middle East policy. From their massive global funding of anti-Israel NGOs, to their financing of anti-Zionist films, plays, art exhibitions and educational curricula throughout the world and their bankrolling of the Palestinian Authority, the Europeans have put their money where their mouths and well-washed brains are.
As Norway’s plan to run the Israeli embassy out of Oslo because its security measures annoy its neighbors; to European authorities’ refusal to provide police protection for their threatened Jewish communities; to initiatives like the Dutch Parliament’s current bid to outlaw Jewish ritual slaughter all make clear, hatred of Israel runs seamlessly into outright governmental aggression against Jews.
So too, as The Guardian‘s recent onslaught against the PA for its leaders’ willingness to make minor compromises with Israel in the framework of a peace treaty demonstrates, mainstream forces in Britain and throughout Europe now side openly with Hamas and the Muslim Brotherhood in their annihilationist war against the Jewish state.
It is this obsessive campaign against Israel that explains the so-called Middle East Quartet’s insistence that the most urgent item on the international agenda is coercing Israel to surrender land and rights to the PA.
Whereas the EU cannot figure out a coherent policy regarding Libya even as Muammar Gaddafi massacres his own citizens and sets fire to his oil fields, Europe’s leaders are unified in their firm conviction that the so-called “peace process” must be reinvigorated.
So too, the Obama administration remains incapable of lifting a finger to prevent an Iranian proxy from taking over Bahrain or a consortium of al-Qaida terrorists from taking over Yemen. Obama refuses to take any action to help the Libyan people overthrow Gaddafi. As for Iran, Obama maintains his steadfast refusal to take any action to help the Iranian people overthrow their nuclear-proliferating, terror-supporting regime. 
But at the same time, the president and his advisors are absolutely committed to coercing Israel to block Jews from building homes in Judea, Samaria and Jerusalem and ensuring that everyone is clear that Jews have no legitimate right to our capital city and historic heartland.
As for the Left itself, as Ron Radosh reported in Pajamas Media this week, attendees at J Street’s annual post-Zionist confab could barely muster polite applause for the mildly Zionist MKs from Kadima that spoke at the conference. But they broke into raucous applause when Arab and Jewish anti-Zionist speakers proclaimed that all progress in the region is tied to Israel ending its so-called “occupation.”
AND THIS brings us back to 1975, to the boat people in the South China Sea, the killing fields in Cambodia, and the Left that couldn’t care less about them. 
It could be argued that the Bill Ayres, Howard Zinns and Jean Paul Sartes of the world can be forgiven for their decision to side with the Soviets and their Third World proxies against the US and the Western alliance. 
After all, they had nothing personal at stake. The Soviets were not threatening their freedom.
And what did they owe to “unprogressive,” “reactionary” people from Southeast Asia who agreed with America that Communism was evil and wished to be free? 
But the situation is different today. By waging its war against Israel through Palestinian proxies, the West threatens itself. The Nazi propaganda recycled by the Soviets which has enslaved the peoples of Europe and much of America’s intellectual elite has not only turned them into willing participants in the new war against the Jews. It has turned them into instruments for their own destruction.
By focusing their attention entirely on Israel and its imaginary crimes, the Europeans and their American admirers ignore the fact that the Islamic war against Israel is itself a proxy war for global jihad.
That war, informed by the same Nazi propaganda, but refined through the prism of Islamic Jew hatred and totalitarian imperialism, does not see Israel’s destruction as its ultimate aim. The jihadists, whom the West so happily ignores and whitewashes, have made it absolutely clear that destroying Israel is but the first skirmish in their great war. Their ultimate aim is the conquest of what remains of Western civilization.
Originally published in The Jerusalem Post.
Posted via email from noahdavidsimon’s posterous


 

Al-Qaradawi has often made anti-Semitic remarks. For example, his “Life and Islamic Law” program broadcast on March 15, 2009, discussed the topic of righteous Muslims in Islam. One of the viewers called in and asked about the role of the righteous (al-salkhoun) in the Qur’an in the liberation of the [Islamic] holy places and the victory of the [Muslim] nation.

Al-Qaradawi used the opportunity to attack the Jews, basing his answer on a known hadith [oral tradition] calling for the murder of Jews. On the program he said that righteous Muslims were “the salt of the earth” who were always instrumental in liberating lands. He called them a source of hope and that he hoped that through them Jerusalem would be “liberated,” as would “Palestine,” the Gaza Strip, and all the lands ruled by the enemies of the Muslims. He said that the war against the Jews was not only the war of the Palestinians but of all Muslims. Al-Qaradawi based his answer on a well-known hadith about the war on Judgment Day between Muslims and Jews. He said that the prophet Muhammad said that “…therefore you will continue to fight the Jews and they will fight you until the Muslims kill them. The Jew hides behind rock and tree. The rock and the tree say, oh, slave of Allah, oh, Muslim, here is the Jew behind me, come and kill him.”[5] He interpreted that to mean that those who fight to “liberate” the holy places are the Muslim slaves of Allah, and not Jordanians or Palestinians or Egyptians or Iraqis.



Sheikh Dr. Yusuf Abdallah al-Qaradawi, senior Sunni Muslim cleric, affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood.

Portrait of Sheikh Dr. Yusuf Abdallah al-Qaradawi: A “Moderate” Islamist?

Overview

Sheikh Dr. Yusuf Abdallah al-Qaradawi is a central figure affiliated with the Muslim Brotherhood. He was expelled from Egypt and found refuge in Qatar, and operates from there throughout the Muslim world.
After President Hosni Mubarak was ousted al-Qaradawi returned to Egypt and delivered the Friday sermon at a mass rally held in Al-Tahrir Square in Cairo. Many consider him the supreme religious and ideological authority for the Muslim Brotherhood, although he is not officially its leader (in the past refused to accept the title of the Muslim Brotherhood’s General Guide). He is influential in Egypt and considered one of the most important Sunni Muslim clerics of our generation and a spiritual authority for millions of Muslims around the world, including the Hamas movement.
Al-Qaradawi’s popularity among the Sunnis has grown because of the massive use he makes of electronic media, mainly television and the Internet. One of his most important tools is the Al-Jazeera TV channel, which broadcasts his popular program “Life and Islamic Law,” (Al-Shariaa wa Al-Haya) viewed by tens of millions of Muslims.
Al-Qaradawi has often exploited the program for blatant anti-Semitic propaganda and incitement (see below). He was also one of the founders of the IslamOnline website in 1997, which often quotes him.
Al-Qaradawi refers to his religious views as “moderate Islam,” which seeks to balance intellect and emotion. He has positive attitudes toward reforms in Islam, which he calls “correcting perceptions which were corrupted.” He is considered one of the foremost propounders of the doctrine of the “the law of the Muslim minorities,” which provides the Muslim minorities around the globe with space in which to maneuver and compromise between their daily lives and Islamic law. The aim of implementing his doctrine is to unite and unify Muslim minorities to make it possible for them to live under non-Muslim regimes, until the final stage of spreading Islam to the entire world.
At the same time, building a bridge between the exigencies of Muslim emigrants’ daily lives and Islamic religious law also includes regarding taking over Europe as Islam’s next target. In 2003 al-Qaradawi issued a fatwa declaring that “Islam will return to Europe as a victorious conqueror after having been expelled twice. This time it will not be conquest by the sword, but by preaching and spreading [Islamic] ideology…The future belongs to Islam…The spread of Islam until it conquers the entire world and includes the both East and West marks the beginning of the return of the Islamic Caliphate…”

photo
image via aSMawi

Although al-Qaradawi opposes Al-Qaeda and its methods, he enthusiastically supports Palestinian terrorism, including suicide bombing attacks targeting the civilian Israeli population. In the past he also supported “resistance” (i.e., terrorism) to the occupation of Iraq, including, by implication – although he denied it – abducting and murdering American civilians in Iraq. He issued fatwas calling for jihad against Israel and the Jews, and authorizing suicide bombing attacks even if the victims were women and children. He regards all of “Palestine” as Muslim territory (according to Muslim Brotherhood and Hamas ideology), strongly opposes the existence of the State of Israel and rejects the peace treaties signed with it, and opposes the Palestinian Authority (and in the past called for the stoning of Mahmoud Abbas).