Before I started blogging. (OK before there were blogs.) I was a letter writer. When I didn’t like what I read in the newspaper I’d write a letter to the editor.
Well 10 years (and 2 days) ago, I had one of the highlights of my letter writing career. I had a letter published in the NY Times. The topic of my letter was a Thomas Friedman column, With allies like these … in which Friedman complained how different countries were hurting American efforts to contain Saddam. One of those countries he criticized was Israel.
(Israel is another ally that should take stock. Unlike the Europeans, Israel knows exactly who Saddam is. Israel has a fundamental interest in the coalition’s holding firm against him, particularly the Arabs. The ability of Arab leaders to do so will be influenced in part by public opinion, and already Saddam is playing on that, saying the U.S. wants to bully him but won’t lift a finger to pressure Benjamin Netanyahu. Mr. Netanyahu doesn’t have to give the Palestinians a state tomorrow, just to satisfy the Arab street. But he could buy the U.S. a lot more room to maneuver — and therefore improve Israel’s overall strategic situation — by implementing the long-delayed redeployment of Israeli forces from the West Bank in return for Palestinian concessions.)
To which I responded (it was published Nov. 12, 1997)
During the Persian Gulf war, President George Bush made sure that Israel didn’t defend itself lest an Arab state drop support for the anti-Iraq coalition. In the wake of Iraq’s eviction from Kuwait, the Arab world didn’t show much gratitude for American protection. And when President Bush led the effort in the United Nations to rescind the ”Zionism is racism” resolution, not a single Arab state voted to repeal. Even though past behavior may not be predictive of future actions, this record hardly suggests that further concessions to the Palestinian Authority will improve Israel’s strategic position.
I guess that the last sentence has, unfortunately, been confirmed by recent events. And it’s also interesting that supposedly now, part of the impetus for the Annapolis conference is to help the United States contain Iran.
Some things don’t change much, even when they failed the first time.
Crossposted at Soccer Dad.
Wow.They’ve never published anything I sent
And that’s the only thing of mine that they’ve published. The other letters have apparently gone to the recycle bin.
But Thomas Friedman gets published by the Times all the time. Maybe if we were working for the Saudis, the Times would publish us more frequently, too.
I got a letter published slamming them for being so ga-ga over the Japanese emperor’s kid. I loathe royalty, and all it stands for, but I especially loathe the fawning over royals that so many of our democratic elites show.