Column for October 17, 2005

Morris J. Amitay

Some People Say the Dumbest Things

Prominent people often make what can only truly be called “stupid” statements. But with so much media and internet overload too many inane utterances are lost in the clutter. In the interests of preserving some of these for posterity, we offer a number of recent examples – while letting the reader decide which one ranks as the most stupid.

Last month, UN Secretary General Kofi Annan can be credited for two rather remarkable statements. He told a receptive BBC interviewer that the war in Iraq was the source of Muslim anger in the world, that Muslims “feel victimized in the West, and they feel this profiling against them”. What a relief to know whose fault it is the jihadists want to kill us infidels! And three weeks later Annan told Israeli PM Sharon that the Israeli-held Shaba Farms were “a thorn in need of extraction” in the region. We note that this very same area was delineated by the UN as being part of Syria, not Lebanon, as Hizbullah maintains and uses as a pretext for continuing its armed struggle against Israel. Shaba Farms was described by Annan as being in Syria in his own report, but we have a pretty good guess as to who would suffer from Annan’s “extraction”.

Much in the same vein of blaming the victim, we had billionaire financier George Soros telling a gathering here in Washington that “we are not going to win the war on terror by killing people abroad even if they are terrorists”. He added that “by using military force we run the risk of doing the same thing as terrorists”. All Soros seems to be saying is “give peace a chance” – by permitting terrorists to kill and maim innocents without fear of any reprisal. This only proves again that you don’t have to be that smart to make lots of money and have recipients of your largesse agree with you.

Not to be outdone in expounding on how to bring about peace we had His Royal Highness Prince Saud Al Faisal, the Saudi Foreign Minister, telling a Council on Foreign Relations meeting here in Washington that “once the conflict between Israelis and the Palestinian Arabs is resolved by Israel’s total withdrawal, the other conflicts in the region would vanish and fade”. Sure they would – presto! And if you can believe this, there was also his declaration to the same audience that the Saudi monarchy functions “by constantly heeding the voice of the people”. I’m certain the CFR crowd was much too polite to snicker out loud at this ode to Saudi democracy.

But highly touted American foreign policy mavens have also contributed their share of dubious commentary. Former NATO Commander General Wesley Clark, who still has presidential aspirations recently wrote an op-ed in the Washington Post outlining his plan for Iraq. He stated that as “a must the U.S. should form a standing conference of Iraq’s neighbors, complete with committees dealing with all the regional economic and political issues, including trade, travel, cross-border infrastructure projects and, of course, cutting off the infiltration of the jihadists”. The obvious question here to the general is whether he is aware of who Iraq’s neighbors are (e.g. Iran, Syria), and given their current activities, what short of regime change would elicit this kind of cooperation and good neighborliness? No matter the validity of some of Clark’s other recommendations, this gathering of neighbors is such a non-starter, it qualifies for our list.

Not to be outdone, two former Clinton NSC staffers a few days later did Clark one better by expounding on how to solve all our problems in the Muslim world. Writing in the Los Angeles Times they called upon the U.S. to “apply the full range of our diplomatic capabilities to win allies among moderates in the Muslim world and lead non-Muslim countries to resolve their disputes in Kashmir, Indonesia, Chechnya, Palestine and Thailand to name the most famous that fuel militancy. It would put our financial might to work with assistance on a scale that would make it far more difficult for regimes to evade real political and economic reform”. What this seems like is a plan to buy off all the bad guys with kind words and big bucks and thereby bring about peace on Earth.

Another rather curious statement reported twice in the media (and also made within earshot of this writer) was by the newly appointed U.S. Ambassador to Israel, Richard Jones. A career Foreign Service Officer who has served in a number of Arab countries, Jones has declared that as a result of his own experience there, he sees one of his major attributes as the U.S. envoy to the Jewish State is his ability to give the Israelis “the Arab perspective”. One would expect that it’s an American perspective his Israeli interlocutors would be more interested in, already knowing all about “the Arab perspective.”

In a spirit of “even-handedness” it is incumbent to point out that some of our Israeli friends are also prone to sometimes engaging their mouths before their brains. In the euphoria following his meeting with Pakistan’s Foreign Minister (and after President Musharraf’s speech to a Jewish audience), Israeli Foreign Minister Silvan Shalom gushed over “President Musharraf for his courage in promoting peace and moderation in our region and in general”. Without getting into all the messy details of the Pakistani government’s role in nuclear proliferation, support of the Taliban by its intelligence service, and the fact that Musharraf’s guiding principle is his own survival – I recommend that Mr. Shalom read Steven Coll’s “Ghost Wars” to get a true picture of Pakistani policies. And, in general, I wish Israeli leaders weren’t so eager for the crumbs of legitimacy occasionally thrown to them by Muslim despots.

No listing of curious statements would be complete without citing “former everything”, Shimon Peres, who recently predicted a Nobel peace prize some day for Palestinian President Mahmoud Abbas. If there is a leader today who has shown less inclination to fight terror, combat corruption, or move toward genuine peace, it is Abu Mazen who could win the booby prize. But, then again if Yasser Arafat could get a Nobel, anything is possible, and we might forgive Peres for his latest flight of fancy.

On a much more positive note – if you are looking for something truly perceptive and right on point with regard to the nature of the terrorist threat we face, President Bush’s Oct. 6 address to the National Endowment for Democracy here in Washington is well worth reading. For the first time he named our real enemy – Islamo-fascism. Now it is a question of how to deal with it.

Morrie Amitay, a Washington attorney, is a former Executive Director of AIPAC and founder of the pro-Israel Washington PAC (www.washingtonpac.com).