|
|
By Dr. Rand H. Fishbein
January 14, 2004
Originally published by WorldNetDaily.com.
What is it about America's allies in the war on terrorism that some are more equal than others? Take the recent announcement by the Pentagon that it will only award prime contracts for the reconstruction of Iraq to nations that supported the effort to oust Saddam Hussein. Under the formula devised by the Pentagon, a country must have contributed to Saddam's defeat either militarily or financially for its companies to be eligible to bid on post-war reconstruction work.
Fair enough. France, Germany and Russia have opposed the U.S. liberation effort, so their companies are excluded from bidding on any of the 26 contracts tied to the Iraqi Reconstruction and Relief Fund, or IRRF - contracts valued at $18.6 billion. They may, however, sign up as subcontractors.
The situation is a bit more ambiguous for a country like Canada, which opposed the war but is contributing, nonetheless, to the post-war rebuilding effort. The Canadian government recently pledged upwards of $300 million to the effort. Initially, the Pentagon placed Canada on the "no bid" list. It was only after Ottawa cried "Eh!" that the White House backtracked and moved it into the preferred column.
Today, companies from 63 countries may tender bids on IRRF prime contracts. Among them, states like Saudi Arabia, Turkey, Jordan, the United Arab Emirates, Kuwait, Morocco, Oman, Qatar and Egypt, were anything but enthusiastic supporters of the liberation effort in Iraq. Several, such as Turkey, Egypt and Saudi Arabia were outright hostile to the Bush administration and worked to actively obstruct its war aims. All three went so far as to deny coalition forces staging areas, over-flight rights or troops, actions that significantly hampered U.S. logistical operations prior to the conflict.
Noticeably absent from the list of preferred countries is Israel, a nation that contributed significantly to the American-led effort to topple Saddam. In a decision that stunned many observers, the Pentagon made a point of publicly singling out the Jewish state as one of the countries excluded from the Iraqi post-war bidding process. No reason was given.
But in a Pentagon memorandum describing the new policy, Deputy Secretary of Defense Paul Wolfowitz states that restrictions are "necessary for the protection of the essential security interests of the United States" and that "limiting competition for prime contracts will encourage the expansion of international cooperation in Iraq and in the future." He concludes, "Coalition partners (must) share in the U.S. vision of a free and stable Iraq."
Allowing Israel to administer prime contracts in Iraq is of more than just symbolic importance. It goes to the heart of what the Iraq war was about and President Bush's goal of a democratically reconstituted Middle East. If the U.S. is to expect Israel to make sacrifices in the name of peace, then its citizens must know that they will be accepted as full partners in the economic life of the region.
The Pentagon policy pronouncement was more than a little surprising given that the administration considers itself to be a close friend of Israel. Surely there is no country in the world more in sync with the "vision of a free and stable Iraq" than Israel. Not only has Jerusalem borne the brunt of Iraqi hostility for nearly 56 years, but it has given its unconditional support to the U.S. in each of its recent conflicts with Baghdad.
Israeli leaders even went so far as to provide Washington with assurances prior to the war that in the event of a surprise Scud missile attack from Iraq, it would not take pre-emptive action without first coordinating its response with the United States.
Israel is the only country since the end of the first Gulf War that has been systematically targeted by Saddam. His payment of between $10,000 and $25,000 to the families of Palestinian suicide bombers was an attempt to incite violence against the Jewish state. No country in the last decade, not even the U.S., can claim to have lost more lives to Iraqi-backed terrorism than has Israel.
For years, Israel has been a principal source of intelligence for the U.S., providing Washington with copious amounts of information on virtually ever aspect of the Iraqi regime. When the U.S. found it lacked the human assets necessary to understand developments in Iraq, the CIA and others turned to Israel and its community of 300,000 expatriate Iraqis for guidance.
U.S. intelligence agencies have relied heavily on Israel for information on Iraq's clandestine nuclear, biological and chemical weapons programs. In the months leading up to the war, there were reports that Israeli commandos were scouring the hills and deserts of western Iraq alongside their American, British and Australian counterparts identifying hidden military targets and killing Scud missile launchers.
With Coalition forces now bogged down in an ugly guerrilla war throughout much of Iraq, Washington has once again called upon Israeli expertise. For months, reports have been rife in the international press that members of Israel's elite counter-terrorist units have been on the ground in Iraq training U.S. forces in how to fight an urban guerrilla war. Israeli Special Forces may be in Syria as well looking for evidence of Saddam's weapons of mass destruction and eliminating anti-Western mercenaries crossing the border into Iraq.
Many of the tactics and technologies now employed by American forces in the Sunni Triangle derive from Israel's experience in dealing with Palestinian insurgents. These include the use of drones in aerial surveillance, the encirclement of Iraqi towns with barbed wire fences and the deployment of hunter-killer teams against so-called "ticking bombs," terrorist cells active in planning attacks on coalition forces.
Israel also has shared its methods for employing specialized bomb-detection equipment, its strategies for identifying and interdicting suicide bombers, its approach to the manning of checkpoints, its procedures for conducting interrogations of suspects in compliance with human-rights norms, and its knowledge of how to fuse real-time intelligence with field operations.
The Pentagon acknowledges that Israel's 40-month terrorist war has given its military unparalleled tactical experience and an acute understanding of how to cope with a pervasive terrorist threat.
In December, reports surfaced that the U.S. Special Operations Command had invited Israeli experts to Fort Bragg to share their know-how in conducting counter-insurgency operations. Force 121, one of the elite American units responsible for capturing Saddam Hussein, is believed to have benefited significantly from these exchanges. In line with current Israeli practice, the U.S. is now taking a stronger, more pro-active approach to hunting down and neutralizing the Iraqi resistance.
In recent weeks, representatives from the Army's Training and Doctrine Command flew to Tel Aviv for a firsthand look at Israeli units and to receive briefings by senior military commanders on what the country is doing to meet the growing sophistication of the terrorist threat. Still, say Israeli officials, they would like to do more to assist the coalition in stabilizing Iraq.
Treating Israel as a pariah in the Iraqi reconstruction process is at best insulting and at worst a repudiation of a close and loyal American ally. It is a decision that can only hurt Washington's case for regional economic integration and the promotion of shared democratic and free market values.
Moreover, the U.S. action reinforces the worst instincts of the Arab world, instincts that see non-Arabs as unworthy of respect and fair dealing. Barring Israeli companies from overseeing Iraqi contracts sends a political message that Washington's alliance with Israel, though beneficial to both countries, is somehow second rate when compared to those in the Arab world.
Perhaps it is time for U.S. taxpayers to question why countries that are so viscerally anti-American like Egypt and Saudi Arabia are rewarded with contracts, while a pro-American country like Israel is swept aside.
For the good of Iraq and America's war on terrorism this needs to change. It is about time that policymakers in Washington grew up and acknowledged what always has been the case - that the U.S. has no more consistent or more reliable ally in the Middle East than Israel.
Views expressed by the author do not
necessarily reflect those of israelinsider.
 
|
|
|
|
Click on the blue headline to read a Talkback comment and respond to it. Click on the  icon to send a private email to the talkback writer. The icon appears only if the writer has decided to be contacted. If no popup window appears, please make sure your popup blocker allows israelinsider.com.
|
|
| |
|
|
