Other Columns by Christopher G. Adamo
Christopher G. Adamo Bio

Printer-Friendly Version

Among the Syrians, Iranians, and their surrogates known as Hezbollah, this latest "cease fire" with the Israelis will only be a time of reorganization and rearming. To those in the West, it is a time of naive and baseless "hope" for a result that has never been and will never be. And this false hope is sure to be shattered whenever the Islamists choose once again to assert themselves.

Many Westerners consider President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad to operate somewhere between fanaticism and insanity. And among Iran's leaders he is certainly not the first to give such an impression. When American embassy workers were first taken hostage in Tehran, in November of 1979, this country's government and its allies were quick to invoke such invective against the villainous Ayatollah Khomeni and his minions.

Threatening unspeakable brutality against the hostages throughout the remaining year of the Carter Presidency, the Iranians nonetheless became absolutely serious about negotiating a peaceable end to the crisis from the very moment Ronald Reagan was elected to succeed Jimmy Carter.

Hardly the "crazies" they had been portrayed to be, the Iranians suddenly became very rational and desirous of a settlement. Nor did they show any inclination to achieve the martyrdom so greatly esteemed in their religion. In the end, the hostages were released at the very moment Reagan was sworn in as President. No coincidence there.

Twenty-seven years later, the status quo still holds in every respect. Hamas and Hezbollah still wantonly murder Israelis, and they still revel in plans to destroy Western Infidels. And, in a pattern that has been unbroken since the modern resurgence of militant Islam, their successes and failures are determined solely by the willingness of Westerners to accommodate them.

Israel easily could have moved in an unrestrained manner and vanquished those Islamists of Hezbollah who provoked its wrath by terrorizing its cities and murdering its citizens. Among those who desire true peace in the region, it is understood that this is the exact course they should have taken.

Yet, fearing diplomatic repercussions, Ehud Olmert, the current Israeli Prime Minister, chose to pull his punches right from the beginning of this most recent conflict. In so doing he lost his strategic edge while ensuring that the protracted nature of the conflict would result in the very condemnation he had so inordinately feared. Now he seeks to cut his losses by engaging in yet another meaningless "cease fire."

Israeli restraint and capitulation has never garnered anything but an increase in the confidence, and thus the aggressiveness of its mortal enemies. So to expect anything different this time around, as key leaders and diplomats in the West are currently promising, indicates a degree of "wishful thinking" that itself borders on the insane.

Abu Heija, a writer for the Hamas publication Al-Risala, expresses the popular sentiment among Israel's foes very plainly, stating that Israel's willingness to abide by the "cease fire," constitutes a "victory" for Hezbollah, and thus signals a "go-ahead" for new attacks from Hamas.

>> Continued -- Page 1 2