Where I stand—Brian Greenspun: Back to the future?

Friday, April 20, 2001 | 3:24 a.m.

Brian Greenspun is editor of the Las Vegas Sun.

IT IS BEGINNING to sound like "like father like son." That can't be good news for Israeli Prime Minister Ariel Sharon.

When President George Herbert Walker Bush put the screws to Israel's prime minister, Yitzhak Shamir, 12 years ago it became abundantly clear that whatever "special" relationship existed between the two democracies was beginning to fray, at least around the edges.

That was in the middle of the Arab intifadah and was unwelcome news while Israel was trying to keep the school bus and marketplace bombings down to a minimum. Having to fight the suicide bombers and public opinion led by the White House at the same time was more than we should have expected our only real friend in that part of the world to endure. Yet that was the direction Bush the Elder allowed his secretary of state, James Baker, to take.

The result of then-President Bush's heavy hand was an increase in tensions between the two allies which, rather than promote peace through understanding and trust, did just the opposite. Most poll watchers in 1992 credited that attitude by the Bush administration as one reason, after the economy, of course, why Bill Clinton marched so easily into the White House.

Fast forward to this past week when Israel, once again, finds herself trying to cope with indiscriminate mortar attacks and sniper fire from the Gaza Strip. How to respond to the bloodshed -- given the ease with which the news media seems to find fault with only one side -- is a constant challenge for any Israeli leader.

Sharon's reaction to the continued and unrelenting murder of innocent people, if not at the hand then with the permission of Yasser Arafat, was to send some tanks and troops into the offending area in a show of strength, the only thing Arafat's bullies seem to want to understand these days and the only thing, quite frankly, that has stood the test of time as a deterrent to more violence.

No sooner had Israel started its retaliatory effort than U.S. Secretary of State Colin Powell sent a nasty message calling for the beleaguered Jewish state to stop its excessive and disproportionate response to the shelling attacks. His words, not mine.

One might ask the United States at this point, "What business is it of yours how we defend innocent women and children from these homicidal murderers?" And I think the administration would have a difficult time answering, especially since President George W. Bush has backed away from an active role in the Middle East peace efforts.

It seems inconsistent to me to tell the parties that the United States is retreating from active involvement in efforts to forge a peace plan -- which may be the right tactical and political plan for our president -- and then to step in the middle of Israel's efforts to defend herself because the lack of progress has created a more hostile environment!

And why did Secretary Powell issue the rebuke when he knew the tanks and troops were already being withdrawn? What was the public relations strategy in that move?

The reaction we witnessed doesn't sound like one Colin Powell would come up with on his own, which leads me to believe that George II may be following in his father's footsteps.

I hope that is not the case, however, because life is tough enough and all too short in the Middle East. They don't need a casual observer lobbing shots along with the mortar shells into the middle of Israeli life.

The right answer, of course, is that our country needs to stay actively involved in the peace process, whatever the political risks to the president may be. At least that way we will continue to earn the right to play armchair quarterback with people's lives in that part of the world.

Bush the father made a mistake that cost America and Israel more than either country should have had to pay. Now is not the time, after so much progress has been made and a light, however weak, shines at the end of the tunnel to peace, for President Bush the son to follow in his father's footsteps.