Secretary Of State Ariel Sharon.(Brief Article)

In sending Colin Powell to the Middle East, America finally appears to be taking control of its policy in the region. Since it came into office, the Bush administration has attempted a hands-off policy toward the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. But for the world's superpower to have no policy is itself a policy. Whether intended or not, Washington's laissez-faire attitude has had the practical effect of subcontracting American policy to Ariel Sharon. This is a bad idea because America's goals in the region do not coincide with Sharon's.

President George W. Bush has been entirely correct to say that Yasir Arafat has failed to demonstrate a commitment to peace. One could say more; Arafat is a terrible leader, a curse on his people. But Sharon has done little to inspire confidence either. It is Sharon who, after all, joined Arafat in rejecting the Clinton-Barak peace plan; who went to the Temple Mount in September 2000, a move that many Israeli commentators predicted would instigate Palestinian riots; who decided to ignore a CIA-brokered ceasefire last summer. It was Sharon who ignored the Arab League's resolution, dangling the prospect--for the first time ever--of normal relations with Israel and all the Arab states. And it is Sharon who initially paid no attention to the president's call that Israel withdraw "without delay" from the occupied territories.

The Palestinian resistance to Israel's occupation has turned into a guerrilla war. In such circumstances, military operations like Israel's will crush opposition for the moment, but in the long run they enrage the local population and radicalize a new generation. That is what happened to the French in Algeria, the British in Ireland and the Americans in Vietnam. Now Sharon wants to make his foe "irrelevant," but the Israeli onslaught has turned Arafat into the hero of the Arab world.

Military tactics work only if pursued in tandem with an intelligent political strategy. That's why after September 11, America did not just flatten Afghanistan--much as it was tempted. It made sure that the conflict did not spill over into a "clash of civilizations"; it allied with all non-Taliban forces to achieve a national-unity government; it cultivated Pakistan as a key Muslim ally.

One of the criticisms of Sharon's military operation is that it is purposeless. This is not true. It has two goals. First, it is a justifiable effort to disrupt future terrorism. No society would allow suicide bombers to wreak havoc on it, and Israel should not be faulted for responding forcefully. But the scale of the operation suggests Sharon's goals are much broader than that. Israeli forces have ...