| Submit your comments on this article |
| India-Pakistan |
| Pakistan is a bigger threat than Hezbollah: Shlomo Ben Ami |
| 2006-08-24 |
| In a candid admission of churning that is taking place inside Israel, Dr Shlomo Ben Ami, foreign minister in Prime Minister Ehud Barak cabinet in 2000-2001, said Israel should not take on the burden of global war on terror waged by the United States and the West. Speaking at a meeting organised by a local think-tank he advised his country's leadership to separate its war against militant organisations Hamas and the Hezbollah and the global war on terror, headed by the United States and the West. Ben Ami was in India to apprise the Indian government and to take stock of bilateral issues. He advised Indian government to "understand the ground realties." He was of the opinion that the Indian parliament resolution condemning Israel's war against Lebanon will not affect bilateral issues. Israel is the second largest exporter of weapons and military equipment to India. Talking on 'Israel's two-front war: The current conflict with Hamas and Hezbollah' organized by the Observer Research Foundation, the former foreign minister said Israel should focus on fighting its two major challenges �Hamas and the Hezbollah. Even this is not an easy task, he said. Ben Ami, who was also Israel's chief negotiator at the Camp David Summit in 2000, said Israel should not be seen in the world as a US partner in the war against terror, as "it is beyond its capacity". "Nowadays, there is hardly any war between states. But wars between militant organisations and states are increasing," he pointed out. In what could be termed as a reality-check in post-Lebanon war Israel thinking, Ben Ami also disagreed with the policy of the Bush Administration in promoting democracies across the world. Preferring secular dictatorship to unstable Islamic democracy, he said democracy itself need not be the solution for problems. Instead, in many places, it created more problems. "Iraq is the best example of this. The former government was any day better than the so-called Shiite Republic," he said. He also mentioned, as a case in point, how the democratically-elected Hamas was working against peace in West Asia. He said Hamas was elected not because Palestinians did not want peace but as a protest against the corruption and inefficiency of the Yasser Arafat regime. Ben Ami, however, claimed that Israel achieved its purpose after the war in Lebanon -- deployment of an international force and application of the UN Resolution 1559 of 2004. But he felt that Lebanon would not be able to disarm the Hezbollah. Expectedly, he accused Iran of sponsoring, financing and training both Hamas and the Hezbollah. He said the threat of Hamas and the Hezbollah was smaller compared to the challenges posed by the "world-wide export of terrorism" by Pakistan. |
| Posted by:john |
| #6 "Iraq is the best example of this. The former government was any day better than the so-called Shiite Republic," he said. For someone who should be keenly aware of the Holocaust, I'd like to see this nit say this over any of the hundreds of mass graves being dug up in Iraq. Yes, the midnight knock on the door is now transformed into a roadside IED. Believe it or not, this is better. Instead of a brutal tyrant silently eliminating scores of dubious opponents on a whim, instead, we now have the more instructive spectacle of Muslim on Muslim violence being exposed for this world to see. If this planet's population cannot absorb the critical lesson of how fiercly Muslims are willing to slaughter each other, there is no hope for us learning what will come next (i.e., Global Cultural Genocide™). A quick glance at the dog's breakfast called the Palestinian Terrortories shows the net result of democracy being perverted by theocracy, namely, mayhem. This is no fault of democray, neither in Gaza and the West Bank, nor in Iraq. This is what happens when leadership marches under the false flag of democracy in pursuit of an undemocratic ulterior agenda. |
| Posted by: Zenster 2006-08-24 18:19 |
| #5 1. I think Pakistan is not as imminent a threat as Iran, despite its current nuclear arsenal, for obvious political reasons. If I was an Israeli visiting India, I might well want to emphasize the threat to Israel from Pakistan. 2. the CURRENT situation may well be better than the Saddamite regime - the current regime is NOT a Shiite republic, per se. Yet. Its not clear to me if Ben Ami was claiming it was. Whether a Sadrist Republic would be better or worse than a Saddamite tyranny, from the Israeli POV, is debatable. Even if Ben Ami is wrong on this (and for now I lean to the view he is - but thats cause i retain some optimism aboutthe outcome in Iraq) hes not off in lululand - his view is not unreasonable. 3. The real debate on arab democracy for Israel now, is wrt to Syria. Is Israel better off losing Baby Assad, and getting a regime with at minimum a strong Muslim brotherhood element? Debatable. 4. It was hardly Ben Ami's fault that when Israel made a reasonable offer at Camp David, Arafat rejected it. Even some of Arafats own aides were apparently shocked at the flat out rejection - you can hardly expect the Israelis to have judged Arafat better than his own people did. And I would suggest that while the generous offer didnt help nearly as much as it should have in garnering euro support for Israel in the conflict that then ensued, it certainly helped in solidifying US support. |
| Posted by: liberalhawk 2006-08-24 10:21 |
| #4 Ben Ami, who was also Israel's chief negotiator at the Camp David Summit in 2000 Game, set, match. |
| Posted by: Choluque Gluns1303 2006-08-24 10:00 |
| #3 Dork |
| Posted by: gromgoru 2006-08-24 09:36 |
| #2 Preferring secular dictatorship to unstable Islamic democracy, he said democracy itself need not be the solution for problems. Instead, in many places, it created more problems. "Iraq is the best example of this. The former government was any day better than the so-called Shiite Republic," he said. Such thinking is why the gentleman is not in the current government, nor likely ever to be. From Israel's perspective, the current situation in Iraq is infinitely preferable to Saddam Hussein. The jostling for power and the fight against Baathist, Al Qaeda, relfious and tribal irregulars keep the Iraqi government far from the financing and training of Palestinian terrorist and suicide bombers aimed at Israel. Stable Arab despots have the energy and funds to finance anti-Israel terror groups, and to educate their own people in anti-Jew hatred as a distraction from their own powerlessness in daily life. Unlike Lebanon, which is a special case as a more-or-less province of Syria, Iraq is much too busy with its internal concerns to spare more than token words for Israel. |
| Posted by: trailing wife 2006-08-24 09:19 |
| #1 Sunni terrorism is run in Pakistan funded by Saudi Shiite terrorim is run by the Hezbollah funded by Syria and Iran. Countries that need sorting imo in order- 1.Iran 2.Pakistan. 3.Saudi 4.Syria |
| Posted by: Cheregum Crelet7867 2006-08-24 07:12 |