The Middle East: a time for real imagination
■"A Political Arabesque: The way to reform in the Middle East is not a straight line," op-ed by Thomas L. Friedman, New York Times, 19 Dedember 2004, p. WK11.■"A Modest Proposal: Israel Joining NATO," by Steven Erlanger, New York Times, 19 Dedember 2004, p. WK6.
■"Sizing Up The New Toned-Down Bin Laden: He is acting like an elder statesman from a borderless Muslim nation," by Don Van Natta, Jr., New York Times, 19 Deeember 2004, p. WK1.
Even Tom Friedman now sees hope on Middle Eastern peace, if only the U.S. is imaginative in how it approaches Arab states and Iran. Iran, of course, is not Arab but Persian, which is why Friedman says not to worry so much about Iran ruling over the Arab Shiites in Iraq. Sure, Iran can ruin the prospect of peace there, but it can't exactly determine the nature of peace there either. It needs help to make that work, just like we do.
Again, like me, Friedman is asking, Is this administration imaginative enough to see the potential here? I know Friedman will probably freak when he reads my Esquire piece in January, as he won't know what to make of it any more than he does of PNM, which, according to mutual acquaintances, he has read but declines to comment upon. Then again, he writes for the careful Times, whereas I write for Esquire and Putnam, so I can afford to take more risks.
But taking risks is the name of the game right now in the Middle East. Osama's taking risks right and left by trying to appear more statesman like, and even cracking jokes about not choosing to attack that bastion of personal freedom (and licentiousness?): Sweden! What does that tell us about Osama right now? He's not winning, and so he's adjusting to what he hopes will be negotiations with . . . somebody . . . please!
But who can Osama count on nowadays? Who is the big power that will stand up to the U.S. when all of those big powers seem to be coming together ever more intensely in a global economy?
So it's a time of desperate moves and imaginative proposals, like admitting Israel to NATO. Why?
I dunno. Maybe Israel will need some systematic backing once Iran has the bomb—Iran, the same country that's just signed huge energy deals with rising eastern powers India and China. Maybe some balancing will be in order.
Maybe even a grand bargain of sorts.
Again, it's all about imagination. Anyone can write policy pieces about what's feasible in this current climate. You know those pieces—boring as all hell get out.
But where to find the real strategy?
Hmmm, I'm betting on the Feb issue of Esquire!