Iraq, Israel elicit different U.S. policies

Darien Hakimian is a third-year history student.

By Darien Hakimian

Hakam Al-Samarrai incorrectly compares U.S. foreign policy with
Iraq to that of the U.S. and Israel (“U.S. foreign policy
unfairly holds Iraq, Israel to different standards,
policies,” Daily Bruin, Viewpoint, April 15).

To say that American policy practices a double standard
regarding these states is absurd. There are clear differences that
make this comparison impossible.

First and foremost Israel is one of the U.S.’s strongest
allies, whereas Iraq has never held that status.

Iraq invaded Kuwait for material gain and not because it was
threatened by any country. Iraq’s borders were not threatened
by Kuwait and its actions were not justifiable by fear. The United
States intervened in the Iraq-Kuwait conflict because it is no
longer acceptable today for one country to invade another for
material gain.

Unfortunately, the scenario given by Al-Samarrai does not
accurately account for what is occurring in Israel. Israel’s
actions are in no way an invasion of the Palestinian territories.
Since Israel was founded as a state in 1948, they have only taken
military action when they have been acted upon by other states or
militant groups.

The state of Israel includes the West Bank and Gaza Strip. To
say that there is a clearly defined border around the Palestinian
territories the crossing of which constitutes an invasion is
incorrect. Israel does not recognize any border between the West
Bank, Gaza Strip and the rest of Israel.

On the contrary, Israel acknowledges the fact that the West Bank
and Gaza Strip are areas that are Palestinian-occupied and has no
interest in maintaining a permanent grip on them. The current
actions are in direct response to terrorists who are targeting
Israeli civilians.

Kuwait posed absolutely no threat to Iraq at the time of
invasion. The opposite is true in the Israeli case today because
they are faced with a constant threat from what the United States
now refers to as “homicide bombers,” a term I will
borrow. These are terrorists who openly target civilians, causing
Israeli citizens to live in fear. Israel, in response, will defend
itself with all its power, as any country would, including the
United States.

Kuwaitis did not strap explosives to their belts and launch
attacks into Iraq. If they had, the United States may have reacted
differently. To put Hussein and Sharon in the same sentence, let
alone to accuse both of them of similar crimes (killing thousands
of innocent civilians) is unjust.

It is acknowledged by the U.S. government that Hussein has
committed genocide against his own people, specifically the Kurds
in the north. Genocide is no longer simply an
“˜allegation’ in Hussein’s case.

Sharon, on the other hand, has only been accused of this heinous
crime and there is no independent evidence to support the claim. If
pro-Palestinian groups are going to throw severe accusations like
that at Sharon, then I must mention the fact that Palestinian
militants have been accused of using Palestinian civilians as human
shields.

Both are speculative accusations with no objective proof to back
them.

Let’s focus on facts. Hussein has been guilty for years
while Sharon is most definitely innocent. Ariel Sharon is the
leader of the only democratic state in the Middle East besides
Turkey, and he has no desire to order the deaths of thousands of
innocent civilians or endangering Israel’s relationship with
its strongest ally, the United States.

Hussein, on the other hand, is a dictator, a fact which adds
further weight to the U.S. reasoning in backing Israel. It was a
mistake for the United States to ever support Iraq in the first
place during the Iran-Iraq war, and that temporary support
doesn’t mean that Iraqi foreign policy should be now be
equated to that of Israel.

Additionally, the reasons behind the Israeli and Iraqi military
campaigns in the past are very important to consider. From the
beginning of the Persian Gulf War, Iraqi surface-to-surface SCUD
missiles were pointed at Israel. The war gave Iraq an excuse to be
hostile toward Kuwait, Israel and the United States.

It would be wrong to compare the United States’ foreign
policy regarding Iraq to that regarding Israel because they are two
different countries, with two different leaders, in the middle of
two very different conflicts.