In case you missed them, here are three different solutions by foreign policy experts on how to solve the current crisis. They run the gamut, from war, war, and more war to the more judicious and practical. You will know where you stand.
First up, here is Richard Perle to explain why he thinks the Israeli response is an appropriate one.
An Appropriate Response
By RICHARD PERLE
Washington
ISRAEL must see the current fighting through to a conclusion that is unambiguously a defeat for Hezbollah and Hamas.
The world's diplomats, always generous with advice for the Israelis, cheered when Israel withdrew from Lebanon in 2000. They pretended not to notice as Hezbollah poured Iranian-supplied rockets into Lebanon: first a hundred, then a thousand, then ten thousand and even more. None of the world's foreign ministries described Israel's failure to respond to Hezbollah's arming as a disproportionate response to an obvious menace.
The word "disproportionate" re-emerged in recent days as a criticism of Prime Minister Ehud Olmert's epiphany: Israel is a country that two terrorist organizations, Hamas and Hezbollah, are dedicated to destroying, and following the advice of diplomats to respond "proportionately" would leave those terrorists free to pursue that goal.
Israel must now deal a blow of such magnitude to those who would destroy it as to leave no doubt that its earlier policy of acquiescence is over. This means precise military action against Hezbollah and its infrastructure in Lebanon and Syria, for as long as it takes and without regard to mindless diplomatic blather about proportionality. For what appears to some to be a disproportionate response to small incursions and kidnappings is, in fact, an entirely appropriate response to the existential struggle in which Israel is now engaged.
Judith Kipper's logic & sanity.
Don't Just Talk to States
By JUDITH KIPPER
Washington
THE Bush administration should give up war and rhetoric and do some meaningful diplomacy instead.
Hamas and Hezbollah, supported by Iran and Syria, have opened a new diplomatic front for the United States. President Bush should undertake a robust diplomatic initiative that, directly or through third parties, engages not only states, including even Iran and Syria, but also non-state parties to the conflict, especially Hezbollah and Hamas. Both are political parties and social welfare organizations, but their lethal military wings must be disbanded. Without engaging Hezbollah and Hamas, any diplomatic effort to end the violence permanently will fail.
Such an American diplomatic campaign would be enthusiastically supported by the international community and the Arab states. Talks should focus on difficult but achievable goals: to rebuild Lebanon physically and politically and to revive the detailed peace plan already negotiated by the parties to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict and supported by a majority on both sides. From the blood and destruction in every Middle East crisis arises an historic moment for peacemaking. The president has made war; can he now make peace?
And finally, Khalidi on the "terrorism" frame.
The Terrorism Trap
By RASHID KHALIDI
WASHINGTON needs to understand the real problem in Palestine and Lebanon. Viewing the current crisis through the distorting lens of terrorism, as the Bush administration and the Israeli government do, leads to the unreflective use of force.
Starting from the premise that as long as there is an occupation, there will be resistance, might instead lead the United States to undertake aggressive, multilateral diplomacy with the goal of ending Israel's presence in the West Bank.
Although the violence that has killed hundreds of Lebanese and Palestinians and more than a dozen Israeli civilians must be halted immediately, no good can come from focusing exclusively on recent events rather than on the underlying problems, which include the denial of rights to Palestinians and the occupation of Arab lands. This crisis is rooted in Israel's nearly 40-year occupation of Palestinian lands and its occupation of Lebanon from 1982 to 2000.
If the American and Israeli governments do not shift their worldviews away from empty bombast about terrorism, which leads to an excessive reliance on the use of force, and toward resolving the deeper issues through diplomacy, they risk stumbling into a major conflagration, possibly involving Iran.
With 130,000 American troops in Iraq, such a conflict could be as dangerous as any since World War II.