Gen. David Petraeus caused quite a stir last week with his written statement (pdf) to the Senate Armed Services Committee, in which he included "insufficient progress toward a comprehensive Middle East peace" as the first among "a number of cross-cutting issues that serve as major drivers of instability, inter-state tensions, and conflict" that "can serve as root causes of instability or as obstacles to security."
While none of this is really surprising to anyone who has spent much time studying the Middle East, it does run afoul of one of the most treasured articles of faith of the neocons, which is the idea that the U.S.-Israel relationship exists is a sort of hermetically sealed bubble, separated from the U.S.'s other challenges in the region, generating no negative externalities for U.S. interests. For many Israel hawks, the idea that there is "linkage" between the Israeli-Palestinian conflict to other problems in the region is not only a myth, but espousing such ideas is quite enough to qualify one as "anti-Israel."
In New Hampshire yesterday, Philip Klein of the American Spectator asked Gen. Petraeus to clarify his views. While Petraeus disapproved of the way that some of "the blogs" had presented his written statement, he ended up strongly re-affirming the substance of the linkage argument.
Saying that the written statement "describes the various factors that affect the strategic context in which we [CENTCOM] operate," Petraeus told Klein that "the Middle East peace process -- and whether there's progress or is not progress -- has a great deal to do with" that context. The lack of progress, Petraeus said, "is something that influences our area."
Notably, Petraeus said that he thought that Secretary of State Clinton's recent speech to AIPAC -- in which Clinton strongly reiterated American support for Israel, but said that "new construction in East Jerusalem or the West Bank... undermines America's unique ability to play a role in the peace process" -- "articulately and clearly conveyed our policy."
While denying both that he had requested, as Mark Perry originally reported, to have Israel-Palestine transferred into CENTCOM's area of responsibility, and that he had made any specific reference to the stalled peace process endangering American lives, Petraeus affirmed that the lack of progress toward a resolution "does make situations more challenging, particularly for moderate leaders" in the Middle East:
If you go to moderate leaders in the Arab world, they will tell you that the lack of progress in the Middle East peace process causes them problems, because their concern is that those who promote violence in Gaza and the West Bank will claim that because there's no progress diplomatically that the only way to get progress is through violence. And that's their concern. And that was really what we were trying to convey.
That's why we support Senator Mitchell so much
. We have invited Senator Mitchell to every single conference that I have hosted -- for ambassadors, for chiefs of defense staff, what have you, which we do about three times a year -- because everyone is so keenly riveted on that issue even though, again, it is not in our area. And we keep an eye on it, because we need to know the atmospherics there because they do -- there is a certain spillover effect.
"There is a certain spillover effect." Ladies and gentlemen, the reality of linkage.
Petraeus also cited a blog post from Commentary's Max Boot defending him from the charge of being "anti-Israel." The irony, of course, is that the people who relentlessly caricature the linkage argument as "anti-Israel" are mainly the type of people who read and write for Commentary.
Follow Matthew Duss on Twitter: www.twitter.com/mattduss
Petraeus clearly says that the arab conflict with Israel is only one of many reasons for trouble in the middle east.
He pointedly says in his comments that Iran is a big problem and cause of problems in the middle east.
And..Petraeus unequivocally denies all the false statement attributed to him linking American soldiers lives to the arab war on Israel.
Here is the video of the statements which contradict what this article, which is all anti-Israel spin, says.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=eJzXvAK36OI
Israel is not special and they deserve to be criticized like any other country that deserves to be criticized.
When the lives of American troops are on the line as a result of Israeli policies then this needs to be discussed openly and honestly without the canard of anti-semitism.
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver
Osama bin Laden's anti-American doctrine stems initially from the presence of US troops ("infidel troops") in Dar-al-Islam (Saudi Arabia during Gulf War I).
A the top of that list is the existence of any peoples who do not follow the Islamic religion.
Islam has been at war with the non muslim world since the 7th century.
When food is about to spoil one has to put plenty pepper on it to disguise the taste !
This may explain why apologist for the criminal regime in Tel- Av iv lies so indiscriminately.
http://www.huffingtonpost.com/jennifer-donahue/gen-patraeus-in-nh-i-real_b_512855.html
The rest of the Middle East is very stable except for Lebanon, which has been a victim of religious bigotry by the Muslims and Syrian imperialism, this has nothing to do with Israel.
Jordan has had the same regime since 1920, Saudi Arabia 1922, and so on and so forth. American troops are dying in Afghanistan because Pakistan decided to play a double game and support the Taliban as well as the coalition, much to it's detrement.
BTW, as of March the 1st a grand total of NINE (9) troops have been killed in Iraq. Seven of which were killed by the enemy.
Please do not comment on what you obviously do not know. Have you not heard of the major Al Qaeda plot to destroy Saudi arabia & the breeding ground that is Somalia & Iran and its nuclear ambition ...stable?
Please do some homework.
The only truly instable government in the region is Somalia.
General BeTrayUS. Now he is held up as a paradigm of virtuer and wisdom... I get it.. when he was making decisions for Bush he was a traitor... when he makes decisions for Obama he suddenly becomes a sage!
It has nothing to do with being anti Israel. Sadly it is being spun that way.
The situation is like a parent who is trying to reign in the self destructive behavior of an adolescent, who screams back to her parent, "why do you hate me!"
And the parent thinks, when you grow up and stop thinking only about yourself, distorted reality, and your narrow immediate gratification you might understand.
There is always hope......
www.guardian.co.uk/world/2002/nov/24/theobserver
Your analysis is a distortion - of Petraeus’s recent testimony to the Senate Armed Services Committee, malicious claiming linkage of slain American troops to alleged Israeli intransigence. Iranian interference in Afghanistan and Iraq is invariably ignored by the “Israel Lobby” theorists, simply because it doesn’t fit their twisted narrative. Thankfully, General Petraus is paying attention.
C. Cross-cutting Challenges to Security and Stability
While this statement will describe in greater detail the dynamics and challenges in the sub-regions of the AOR, there are a number of cross-cutting issues that serve as major drivers of instability, inter-state tensions, and conflict. These factors can serve as root causes of instability or as obstacles to security.
• Insufficient progress toward a comprehensive Middle East peace. The enduring hostilities between Israel and some of its neighbors present distinct challenges to our ability to advance our interests in the AOR. Israeli-Palestinian tensions often flare into violence and large-scale armed confrontations. The conflict foments anti-American sentiment, due to a perception of U.S. favoritism for Israel. Arab anger over the Palestinian question limits the strength and depth of U.S. partnerships with governments and peoples in the AOR and weakens the legitimacy of moderate regimes in the Arab world. Meanwhile, al-Qaeda and other militant groups exploit that anger to mobilize support. The conflict also gives Iran influence in the Arab world through its clients, Lebanese Hizballah and Hamas.
Forgive me if I am wrong, but it does say that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict foments anti-American sentiment due to the perception of US favoritism, doesn't it? You know, makes people angry because the US favors Israel? And people who are angry get violent to those they are angry at, right? Violent towards Americans in this case, right?
"They hate us for our freedom" so we should just go ahead and attack them because they're going to hate us no matter what we do. Which, of course, is what we wanted to do in the first place.
How convenient.
Sometimes i think i am a real idiot for thinking the logic of peace must prevail....