[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]
.Accordingly, in hisfirst few months in office, Bush, true to his base, was not interested in pres-suring Israel to make concessions that it did not deem conducive to itsinterests.128 In many ways, during those few months of the president s honeymoon, Israel s interests virtually became America s interests.Inessence, the US supported the Jewish state militarily and economically, whileconveniently taking a political hands off approach when it mattered to thesecurity of the region.The global war on terrorism9/11September 11th ferociously altered the hands off approach.The UnitedStates was attacked by al Qa eda, which claimed the Palestinian problem asone of its main grievances against the West.129 Even though it was neverpublicly articulated, the White House through its actions understood that thewar on terrorism involved defusing or at least giving the perception ofdoing so the Israeli Palestinian conflict, regardless of the al Qa eda lea-dership s motives for clinging to the issue.130 On March 12, 2002, at therequest of President Bush, the Security Council issued Resolution 1397.Through it, the international community as represented by the UnitedNations demanded the solution that President Clinton could neverexplicitly call for during his stewardship of the peace process, affirming avision of a region where two States, Israel and Palestine, live side by sidewithin secure and recognized borders. 131 This pronouncement solidifiedwhat public opinion and pro-Arab pressure groups had hoped for sincethe beginning of the peace process, namely a call for the two-state 48 Public opinion, foreign policy perceptionsolution to the Israeli Palestinian conflict based upon UNSC resolutions242 and 338.132 Months later, the Bush administration would unveil itsroadmap outlining steps for implementing Palestinian statehood.133Aside from the profound impacts that it had on US Middle Eastpolicy, the events of 9/11 affected public opinion as well.While the sitesof the World Trade Center, the Pentagon, and the plane crash inPennsylvania smoldered, Americans were asked about military and eco-nomic aid to Israel.A minority said that military aid should be increasedbut an overwhelming majority responded that economic aid to the Jewishstate should either be decreased or cut off.134 Meanwhile, Americans didnot change their historical opinions about Israel.On sympathies, whetherthe US should choose a side, and general support for the Jewish state, theyresponded within historically ordinary levels.135 There was, however,renewed hopelessness perhaps reflecting the prevailing mood of catastrophein the country after 9/11.Asked whether Arabs and Israelis will be ableto settle their differences and live in peace, 58.58 percent of Americans saidno.136 Still, most believed that peace ought to be the chief foreign policygoal.137Needless to say, the events of September 11 dramatically increasedattention to the region.In April of 2002, most followed the situation inthe Middle East either very closely, 34.06 percent, or somewhat clo-sely, 45.32 percent.138 This was an expected outcome since the terroristattacks were linked to political strife in the Arab/Muslim states, whichproduced all of the 9/11 hijackers.Regardless of why Americans weretaking notice, policymakers understood that they had to act in the publicspotlight.It seemed that the more attention Americans paid to theMiddle East, the more cynical they became about prospects for peace.Atotal of 60.96 percent believed that Arabs and Israelis would not be ableto compromise on a solution to the conflict.139 Be that as it may, mostAmericans did have a sense of what needed to be done in order toimprove the situation between Israelis and Palestinians.A near unanimousmajority (91.75 percent) agreed with President Bush s demand that thePalestinian Authority stop encouraging suicide bombing against the Israelis. Equally as important, when asked if they approved or disapproved ofPresident Bush s request that Israel withdraw from the Palestinian terri-tories it has occupied in the West Bank, Americans approved by 71.10percent.140 While supportive of moves by both sides to increase theikelihood of peace, most saw violence by the Palestinians as terrorism but viewed the same by Israel as legitimate acts of war against theiropponents, and accordingly understood the latter as justified and theformer as unjustified. This may be attributed to fact that the US pur-sued its enemies after 9/11 in a manner similar to that of Israel s war onthe Palestinians.Pro-Israel advocates worked tirelessly to make that link.Nonetheless, a majority of Americans believed that fighting should halton both sides.141 Public opinion, foreign policy perception 49Regime changeAlthough violence did not stop, three months after UNSC resolution 1397called for the two-state solution, Americans favored a Palestinian state by asubstantial majority (74.38 percent).142 However, after this poll, US policyefforts toward the Middle East were dedicated to removing Saddam Husseinfrom power.Bush administration officials believed that after the fall of theTaliban and the establishment of a pro-US government in Afghanistan, suchaction was the next step in the global war on terrorism.143 Yet public opinionpolling showed that Americans did not agree with that move.Well before thesecond Iraq War, more of them thought that the higher priority for USpolicy should be working to establish peace in the Middle East between thePalestinians and Israelis (52.10 percent) than working to overthrowSaddam Hussein in Iraq (42.45 percent)
[ Pobierz całość w formacie PDF ]