After Bush, the Green Line
By Amir Oren Haaretz 1 May 2006
www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/711310.html

BRUSSELS - Even if it is too soon to anoint him as U.S. President George
Bush's successor, Senator John McCain marks a swing in policy from the
Republican right to the middle of the map, close to the leading candidates
in the Democratic Party. McCain is nearly ready to decide whether to run
again in 2008 for the Republican nomination, which he lost in 2000 to George
W. Bush. However, as long as he is not a declared candidate, his comments to
Haaretz on Saturday, during a weekend break from American politics here in
Brussels, reflect the personal opinion of a senior and influential figure in
the area of defense policy in the United States Senate, rather than an
attempt to formulate policy guidelines for his administration.

The marks of having been wounded and held captivity as a naval combat
aviator in Vietnam are clearly evident in his face and his bearing. His
military background prepared him for his current profession less than did
other experiences, and of his various military duties, he cherishes most of
all his year at the National War College, after his release from captivity
and prior to his retirement from the military with the rank of navy captain.
Yes, captivity also taught him a lot, but then it was clear what his
capabilities were and who the enemy was, which is not the case in politics.

McCain does not volunteer his opinions regarding Israel and the Arabs. In a
speech of about 3,500 words that he delivered at the Brussels Forum for
American-European Relations, Israel was mentioned only as being threatened
by Iran. Although he mentioned that the range of Iran's missiles also
extends to European capitals, the main and deciding argument for thwarting
the Iranian nuclear program - via a military operation, if softer means
prove to no avail - is Iran's explicit threat to annihilate Israel. The
Pentagon does have plans in its drawer "for every place on the globe," and
in the Iranian context, he believes that these plans can be implemented -
but only after an assessment is made regarding the second phase of the
operation, the counterattack that the Iranians are no doubt planning.

He is as hostile toward the Hamas government as he is toward its patrons in
Iran. Financial aid must be kept from Hamas, he says, and action must be
taken to isolate it in the international arena. Hamas aspires to topple the
government of Jordan by calling for free elections there and to help
Hezbollah gain control of Lebanon. What should be done? Moderate Palestinian
elements should be encouraged - Palestinian Authority Chairman Mahmoud Abbas
is "a good man, but not the strongest" - but there is no point in an effort
to topple the Hamas government, because the organization would likely win
again in new elections, for the second time in a row, and this would
strengthen it. He expects Israel to do, more or less, what it is doing:
"Defend itself and keep evacuating."

As president, McCain would "micromanage" U.S. policy toward the
Israeli-Palestinian conflict, because in his opinion, this is still the
source of the ferment in the region: Every time an Arab leader wants to
provide a distraction, he argues that the problem is due to Israel, and also
in the matter of Iran, "we would not have been so concerned" over its
nuclear program had it not threatened Israel with extinction. He is fed up
with the evasiveness of the Arab states - and most of all with Egypt, which
has not given adequate return for the extensive American aid it has
received - with regard to helping to achieve peace between Israel and
Palestine.

A McCain administration, alongside his close supervision from the White
House, would send "the smartest guy I know" to the Middle East. And who is
that? "Brent Scowcroft, or Jim Baker, though I know that you in Israel don't
like Baker." This is a longing for the administration of the first president
Bush, or even for the administration of president Gerald Ford in the
mid-1970s. In both of them, general Scowcroft was the national security
adviser. McCain will act to bring peace, "but having studied what Clinton
did at Camp David, perhaps not in one try, but rather step by step, and I
would expect concessions and sacrifices by both sides." In general, a
movement toward the June 4, 1967 armistice lines, with minor modifications?
McCain nods in the affirmative.

Whoever the next American president is, the overall impression from a
conversation with a leading candidate like McCain is that the government of
Israel is deluding itself if it believes that "convergence" into "settlement
blocs," as opposed to a nearly total withdrawal from the Green Line, will
satisfy the next administration. In 2009, it will be a different show:
Neither Bush nor settlement blocs.