By Barry Rubin
LOS ANGELES–As we consider the lessons of the dramatic upheavals in Arabic-speaking countries one of the main ones is this: the overriding obsession with the Arab-Israeli conflict, Israel-Palestinian conflict, and Israel as the supposed cause of all regional problems has repeatedly blinded people to the realities of the region.
The “normal” issues of repression, dictatorship, economics, social questions, human rights, corruption, and so on have been neglected as everything has been subsumed to a remarkable extent in the idea that Israel is the issue, the sole issue, the main issue, and the fundamental issue in the Middle East.
But Arabs are actually people! They have other concerns! Arab regimes are not just the representative of the just wrath of the masses against the West and Israel!
Ironically, this event follows the Wikileaks affair that showed the same thing, that the regimes were not obsessed with Israel but had other concerns, namely revolutionary Islamism and Iran.
Not everything is linked to the Arab-Israeli issue. There have been ethnic and internal conflicts all over the place. When Sunnis and Shias fight in Iraq, for example, it is not a resut of Israel’s existence. Yet so powerful is the obsession that one wonders if anything will really change in the Western perception of so many people in influential positions.
I vividly remember how, after Iraqi dictator Saddam Hussein invaded Kuwait in 1990 and then Arab countries cooperated with the United States in forcing him out–that was 20 years ago!–many said that the obsession with Israel and the centrality of the Arab-Israeli conflict would be finished. Then with the September 11 attacks the same point was made, since anyone who actually read al-Qaida’s statements in the years leading up to the attack could easily see that he virtually never mentioned Israel.
But it wasn’t and isn’t. Indeed, when the Washington Post reviewed my book, Anti-American Terrorism in the Middle East the reviewer (a notorious Israel-hater) praised the book for supposedly showing the attacks were motivated by anger at U.S. support for Israel even though the book included a content analysis of the group’s previous statements showing this was far down the list of motives
Yet how many journalists, academics, and policymakers have learned this lesson?
*
U.S. Head of Intelligence James Clapper Should Be Fired
If the Obama Administration would listen more to Secretary of State Hillary Clinton and Secretary of Defense Robert Gates it might salvage its foreign policy. But it has a penchant for picking–and listening to–people who are incompetent, ideologically wacky or totally out of their depth.
James Clapper, head of intelligence, is a remarkable example of their non-ideological problem. Everyone has heard about his calling the Muslim Brotherhood a secular and moderate group. But every time Clapper testifies before Congress he makes a fool of himself. He isn’t doctrinaire, he’s just not very good.
It isn’t only the Brotherhood statement but also his remarks on Russia and China being the biggest current threat to America. I know he explained it by responding that the question was which countries are the largest threat on a national level, but even in an administration obsessed with–at least in its own conception–keeping Muslims happy Clapper could have said the word “Iran.” Even the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff has done so.
And in this amnesiac society no one seems to remember that last December, Clapper made a fool of himself when, in an interview with Diane Sawyer of ABC News, he was obviously unaware of that day’s biggest story: that the British government had arrested a dozen terrorists, something the U.S. intelligence chief might consider to be rather important, right?
It isn’t just a matter of the specific assessments being made either. Clapper clearly has received a briefing, doesn’t understand it, tries to reword it, and gets it wrong. In discussing Libya–and I’m not speaking about his policy positions but his explanation–Clapper shows he has no comprehension of military affairs. The way he speaks in terms of wording shows a politician–I’ve seen this first-hand–parroting a briefing from his staff without grasping it.
Clapper has a resume that looks very impressive on paper but I suspect that the big secret is that he’s always been an administrator rather than an analyst, so he just doesn’t know very much about actual issues and countries.
I’m willing to bet (though admittedly without any evidence) that the word around the CIA is that this guy is a fool and an embarassment and that his staff trembles every time he open his mouth. The administration needs to get rid of this guy fast, not only for the good of America and what should once again be called the “free world” but from the standpoint of the Obama Administration’s own interests.
*
Barry Rubin, now on a speaking tour in Los Angeles, is director of the Global Research in International Affairs (GLORIA) Center and editor of the Middle East Review of International Affairs (MERIA) Journal. GLORIA Center site: http://www.gloria-center.org He may be contacted at barry.rubin@sdjewishworld.com
*