Realism calls for the US to see to it that American interests are beings taken care of. Continuing the negotiations between Israel and the Arabs on the old lines of land for peace may interfere with these interests. “Unfortunately, the point has been reached at which land for peace entails dangers to American strategic interests far greater than its benefits. Israel's perceived weakness is now an American problem, and the aggressive euphoria being expressed by the Arabic-speaking masses poses a direct threat to the United States. Were the excitement of the Arab "street"(FN*) and its fury at Israel actually to lead to war, the United States would experience enormously harmful repercussions. War could cause the oil market to gyrate out of control and do real damage to the world economy (as it did following the Arab-Israeli fighting of 1973); it could rupture American relations with Muslim-majority states; and it could inspire a campaign of terrorism against American institutions and individuals, abroad and at home”(Pipes).
US backing of Israel’s security is a sure sign that realism is guiding foreign policy. ‘The United States said it had exercised its veto for the first time in five years on a matter of principle, when on 7 November 1989, it had rejected a draft, strongly deploring Israeli policies and practices violating the human rights of the Palestinians in the occupied territories” (Draft on East Jerusalem not adopted by Security Council: United States vetoes text). The US should attempt to maintain Israel’s military edge in order to help it deter attacks that may be costly to both parties. Israel must be able to feel confidant in its relations with the US, and the land for peace program should be tossed to help restore the confident and secure presence that Israel used to be able to present in the Middle East prior to Oslo. “Israel's acute demoralization thus places upon the United States an urgent and unusual burden: the need to firm up a democratic ally's will to resist. One can only hope, for the sake of both countries, that the challenge is met, and soon”(Pipes).
The promise of international cooperation and harmony has not yet been fulfilled; governments still need to spend resources on arms they hope not to use in order to deter attacks from other governments. The fact that power is not yet in the hands of NGOs keeps this dream at a distance. Giving the UN or any other international interest organization the authority to implement its resolutions may prove to be the way to fulfilling the promise, if conducted carefully. The diffusion of borders, and unity of people to try and solve the ills of the world, instead of unity of mistrust and suspicion is a goal subscribed by idealism, but the pitfalls on the way to actualizing that dream are best avoided by knowing when we are ready for such a dream. An interesting aspect of that dream to note is that we might have to make several sacrifices to pay for global cooperation. The tendency of humans to differentiate themselves from others is what caused the formation of boarders in the first place. We might need to give up something as natural to us as national identity, something as sacred to us as patriotism. Until we reach that day we must stay on the right track using realism as a watchdog; we don’t have to constantly keep looking for enemies, we just as well may look for allies.
References
Accords welcomed, rapid progress urged. (No Author). (1994). UN Chronicle. 31, 61.
Draft on East Jerusalem not adopted by Security Council: United States vetoes text. (No Author). (1995). UN Chronicle. 32, 44-45
Grigsby, E. (2001). Analyzing Politics: An Introduction to Political Science. Belmont: Wadsworth/Thomson Learning. 2nd Ed.
Hedges, C. (2001). The new Palestinian revolt. Foreign Affairs. 80, 124-138.
Hiro, D. (1997). Clinton misses the target. New Statesman. 126, 25.
Pipes, D. (2000). Intifada II: what the U.S. should do. Commentary. 110, 39-43.
Podhoretz, N. (2001). Oslo: the peacemongers return. Commentary. 112, 21-33.
Time for Israel to back down. (No Author). (2000). New Statesman. 129, 5.
Walker, H. B. The United Nations: peacekeeping and the Middle East. Asian Affairs. 27, 13-19.
Walker, M. (1997). Present at the solution: Madeleine Albright's ambitious foreign policy. World Policy Journal. 14, 1-10.
Washington Declaration welcomed as prelude to final treaty. (No Author). (1994). UN Chronicle. 31, 38-39.
Welcome to the Untied Nation. (No Author). (2001). Online. Available: www.un.org (Dec 2, 2001).
