Beating the War Drum Is No Favor to Israel : Gulf crisis: American Jews shouldn’t let their emotions blind them to the backlash effect of a U.S. war against Iraq.

Like doomed characters in a Shakespearean tragedy, some of Israel’s most vocal American supporters are risking bringing about the very danger to Israel that they ardently want to avoid. Blindly siding with those who advocate an offensive war, or abstaining from the debate about U.S. policy, is a terrible mistake.

As so often happens in discussions about the Middle East, it is important to make clear what the debate on American policy in the Persian Gulf is not about.

First, it is not about whether Saddam Hussein is a tyrant. He may not be the only monster who is a head of state, but he is indeed a monster, and his conduct in Kuwait has rightly been condemned by most of the world. The debate is about how to stop his aggression.

The debate also is not about Adolf Hitler or the ‘30s or the Holocaust. Every Jew and every moral human being wants to avoid any despot’s rise to power comparable to Hitler’s. But we cannot go back in history and correct the Holocaust by creating a false analogy between Nazi Germany and modern Iraq. The international political context half a century ago was very different from today’s. For one thing, there was never a credible effort to impose worldwide sanctions against Hitler. And the debate is not about whether one loves Israel. Those who believe that diplomacy and containment are more rational policy alternatives can hate Hitler and love Israel just as much as those who support an immediate offensive against Iraq.

The debate is about how to deal with Saddam Hussein. On one side of the debate are President Bush, the Republican leadership, the governments of Britain, Saudi Arabia and Kuwait. They appear to want to “take him out” as soon as possible.

On the other side are many leading Democrats, including those with long records of support for Israel, who favor diplomacy, containment and enough time to let the economic and military sanctions work. Their basic position is shared by sober defense-minded private citizens, retired members of the senior military command and notable conservatives, along with a growing peace movement. Apparently it is also shared by the French government and an uncertain number of other members of the anti-Iraq coalition.

In this unusual American political realignment, the position of Jews may be pivotal. In the early stages of the crisis, prominent members of this community professed to be completely neutral about whether the United States should launch an attack on Iraq. But in recent weeks, they appear to have become influenced by prominent Israeli journalists and politicians who have publicly and stridently come out against a “deal” with Saddam Hussein and in favor of an offensive war. Establishment Jewish organizations and many Jewish journalists and politicians in this country have gone along with this bellicose stance or have been uncharacteristically silent.

To advocate a containment policy coupled with serious diplomatic efforts is not to deny a possible serious threat by Iraq to American interests or to Israeli security. Containment should include a continued, though reduced, presence of international troops as a tripwire against any future Iraqi aggression, continued and credible international inspections to prevent an Iraqi nuclear arms program and a continued international embargo until Saddam Hussein withdraws from Kuwait.

Most American military experts estimate that even a decisive American victory would cost thousands of lives. As the bodies come home, in their grief Americans will wonder why the war was fought. Early in the crisis, there were right-wing voices blaming Israel and its American supporters for escalating the crisis. In the aftermath of a bloody war openly encouraged by Israelis--and in the context of budget limitations and declining American enthusiasm for Israel’s government--an anti-Israel backlash at a politically salient level is all too likely.

Senate Republican leader Bob Dole has already advocated a reduction of aid to Israel. Israel needs that aid desperately, particularly as thousands of Soviet immigrants flow into the Jewish state each day. But a groundswell of anti-Israel sentiment in the middle of a recession could dramatically change the politics of U.S. aid.

Furthermore, the gulf crisis is taking place against the backdrop of increasing violence between Israelis and Palestinians living in the West Bank and Gaza. Clearly, the Palestine Liberation Organization has not been helpful to peace in its lionization of Saddam Hussein. In Abba Eban’s memorable words, “The Palestinians never miss an opportunity to miss an opportunity.” It might also be said, in light of Israel’s failure to implement its own proposal for elections in the occupied territories, that the Likud government has never missed an opportunity to erode American support.

Finally, no matter how confident one is in the superiority of the Israeli military, every war is a risk, and Israel, with its tiny population, could be traumatized even in victory.

Emotional reactions are good for blowing off steam, or for playground scuffles, but in times of crisis, rational leadership is required. For American Jews to succumb to emotional appeals that favor war is to sacrifice true vision. Neither the United States nor Israel nor the rest of the world can afford the luxury of such indulgence.