Using these difficult times as a chance for reflection

While listening to Sen. Bill Frist '74 (R-Tenn.) talk in a lecture earlier this month about post-Sept. 11 activities in the United States, I was really struck by how little things have actually changed. The senator talked at length about our evaporating budget surplus, how the revamped Department of Health and Human Services is preparing a response to any future biological attack and how we are dealing with airline security. These are necessary reforms to make in the post-Sept. 11 world, but in my view our leaders are not really realizing the potential of the current political situation to make any real improvements in American policy.

The disaster of Sept. 11 could actually turn out to be a real boon for American policy — but only if Sen. Frist and the rest of our leaders have the initiative to seize the huge opportunity that it has presented. Eventually, our efforts must turn to not only eradicating terrorism but the deep-rooted problems from which terrorism draws its strength, and many of those sources of strength oppose our 'interests' in the Middle East. As unpalatable as it may seem at first, America needs to reassess which of its policies concerning the Middle East are actually in the nation's interest. The current sense of national unity gives us the opportunity to do just that.

The most glaring American mistake in Middle Eastern policy is our continued sanctions against Iraq. The sanctions cause millions of Iraqi children to starve and give the terrorists the chance to frame America as a heartless killer. But even if you ignore all strictly humanitarian concerns, the sanctions should still be lifted. If Saddam Hussein is indeed a "rogue" leader and a megalomaniac, one who values personal power above all other concerns, then the sanctions make no practical sense. Our sanctions are supposedly designed to keep Hussein confined within the borders of his own country by limiting his arsenal, yet they completely ignore the accepted assessment of his nature as a demagogue. It is absolutely immaterial how many weapons Hussein has because he is too afraid to use them. Since we accept that he already possesses weapons of mass destruction, sanctions do not prevent him from developing what he already has. There are ways to track the development and movements of weapons, and we must use them to control Hussein's arsenal. We need to tell Hussein explicitly that he cannot maintain power if he attempts to propagate weapons of mass destruction. If personal power is indeed his main concern, he will well remember how close he came to losing all his power during his last aggressive move and be very sure never to repeat it.

If Hussein does turn out to be illogical enough to try to destabilize the region or spread his weapons, it will provide an excellent reason to seek his removal once and for all. Lifting the sanctions is a small risk but will likely not hurt American interests. However, lifting the sanctions will hopefully bring an end to the suffering of starving Iraqi children. At the same time, America will show it is actively working to end the suffering of civilians and will completely de-legitimize any self-righteous rhetoric of those who claim the United States is killing Iraqis.

Just as we mistreated our enemy during the Gulf War, we have also been unfair to our allies. Safeguarding our oil interests was certainly a legitimate reason for us to intervene in the Gulf War, but mere possession of a strategic resource does not give any government the right to run its society in a way that is otherwise unacceptable. There are so many parallels between Saudi Arabia and Taliban Afghanistan that they should not be ignored. The difference between our treatment of the Saudi government and the Taliban is that we view the Saudi government through blinders that only let us see its oil; we ignore its serious faults. When Americans hear that Saudi Arabian thieves have their hands cut off in public, it is played off as an aspect of their "societal structure" (read: culture), yet when we hear that the Taliban executes its criminals during soccer matches, the Taliban is deemed worthy of eradication. It is no coincidence that many of the terrorists linked to the Sept. 11 attacks were from Saudi Arabia, and just as the Taliban deserves a thorough examination for its role in the attacks, so does the Saudi Arabian government in leading a society that breeds terrorists. I am not saying the Taliban is in any way legitimate, and I am not asserting that we should attack Saudi Arabia. I am instead stating that many of the same policies that breed extremism in Afghanistan also exist in countries that are supposed to be our allies. Saudi Arabia is one example out of many. In accordance with a worldwide war on terrorism, our attitude toward the Saudi Arabian monarchy should also be considered; perhaps it would be persuaded to relax its society with some subtle (or overt) diplomatic "nudging."

Finally, our "unquestionable" support of Israel must be questioned. I fully support the existence of Israel and believe Israel's success is linked to our success in the Middle East, but no country deserves unequivocal support from the United States — no matter how powerful its lobby groups are. The pressure that Israel has put on the Palestinians living in the occupied territories during the intifada has been unbearable, causing millions of people with no prior political agendas to lose their livelihoods and driving them to the brink of starvation. The many real terrorists in the West Bank must be hunted down and killed, but the methods Israel employs to stem the attacks of these relatively few criminals have destroyed far too many lives. When the people preventing you from crossing to your job in the next town are Israelis, and the loss of your job means your family is starving, why wouldn't you, a Palestinian, naturally blame Israel for your woes and not the terrorists who are truly responsible? The desperate conditions created by the intifada force normal people to resort to desperate measures.

A further embarrassment is that Israeli military superiority is the direct result of American aid. American missiles slamming into Palestinian buildings do not create a favorable impression of our presence in the region. The United States must demonstrate to Israel that it no longer has the authority to do anything it wants with the Palestin-ian people, which is not to say that America needs to stop supporting Israel. Rather, the world must understand that the United States truly bases its support of nations on the behavior of the nations themselves.

It is difficult to find a silver lining in such a dark cloud, but the Sept. 11 attacks give the United States the opportunity to ensure our long-term national security through revision of our foreign policy. The current atmosphere of national unity gives American leaders a rare chance to make changes in policy that partisanship have so far made all but impossible. This is a critical moment in American history, as our world leadership has never been so concrete and widely supported, yet it is by no means guaranteed in the long term. We have the choice of both facing our demons and reaffirming that we are the rightful world leader or allowing them to escape under the cover of indecision and bickering. The lumbering giant that is our bureaucracy has been violently stirred into action, and our leaders have the opportunity to turn the terrorists' goals against them, to use our newfound resolve and sense of purpose to really change American policy for the better. David Sillers is from Potomac, Md. He can be reached at dsillers@princeton.edu.