THE POLITICS OF KILLING BIN LADEN; SIPPING MIDEAST KOOL AID

Osama is dead! Long live Obama! That ought to be good for about a week before returning to "Down with Obama" and all his works as we get one week closer to the next presidential election. Meanwhile, what political advantages can be squeezed from the death of the man responsible for the destruction of the World Trade Center and the killing of almost 3,000 people nearly a decade ago?

While commending Obama for the daring mission that ended with the killing of bin Laden, some Republicans were quick to point out, correctly or incorrectly, that the trail that led to bin Laden began with information about couriers who were especially close to the al Qaeda leader. Find the courier, follow the courier, and he will lead you to bin Laden's secret lair. But, as some Republicans have claimed, the trail to that courier was discovered through the "enhanced interrogation techniques" used by the Bush administration to extract intelligence from al Qaeda and al Qaeda-linked captives. Put another way, "you may object to such techniques as water boarding, but they paid off by leading us to bin Laden."

That may be a bit of near term political payoff for those attacking President Obama's anti-water boarding policy, but there may be an important longer term benefit to the President. We have gone nearly 10 years without a second 9/11-scale terrorist attack which persons like former Vice President Dick Cheney attributes to the anti-terrorist policies and programs put into place by former President Bush. That assertion is a corollary to criticism of Obama as being soft on national security/anti-terrorism, thus making the U.S. more vulnerable to another massive terrorist attack. If such an attack had occurred before bin Laden was killed, the cry against Obama would have been "we told you so". Now perhaps the dynamic has changed a bit.

If another terrorist attack on the U.S. does occur, it can be viewed within the context that the attack was in revenge for the killing of bin Laden, the goal devoutly wished for by the American public. That may play politically different with the public than the Cheney soft on terrorism argument. While any such attack would work against the President, the revenge scenario may diminish the political damage.

As a facetious add on. Will Donald the Trumpet now launch an investigation into whether bin Laden is really dead, DNA evidence, like a birth certificate, notwithstanding?

0-0-0-0-0

The previous posting was about the early implications for U.S. foreign policy in the Middle East with the overthrow of Egyptian President Mubarak, the former regional spear carrier for both the U.S. and Israel. Among the early changes cited was Egypt's brokering a reconciliation between Hamas, labeled a terrorist organization by the U.S. and Israel, and Fatah on the West Bank which is the organizational base of support for the Palestinian Authority (PA), the western accepted bargaining agent for all Palestinians. The Hamas-Fatah reconciliation was to be formalized this week with a signing of the agreement in Cairo. Upon formalization the next question concerns the ability for the two sides to come to agreement and remain in agreement on some sticky issues that have divided them.

Israel lost no time in showing its opposition to the agreement and its continued hostility to Hamas which is equally hostile toward Israel in calling for the latter's destruction. Israel sees the Hamas-Fatah patching up as an obstacle to any peace agreement between Israel and the Palestinians. The Israel government backed up this displeasure by announcing it was withholding $100 million in revenues it collects on various taxes and custom duties for the Palestinians which, when turned over to the PA, is used to pay the tens of thousands of Palestinian public employees. No turn over of the money, no pay day for the PA workers. That is, unless Israel relents under international pressure.

Meanwhile, Hamas has taken a different tack toward Israel, saying it would honor an unofficial truce with Israel, the central feature of that truce being no launching of missles from Gaza into Israel. Such truces have been declared before but have not lasted, often because the Palestinians governing Gaza do not control all of the various anti-Israel militants located there who launch missiles into Israel.

From time to time I depart from my basic cynicism and take a pollyanna view of a cassandra reality. Perhaps it would be too much to hope that the Israelis, meaning Prime Minister Netanyahu and his extreme right wing coalition partners, would view the Hamas-Fatah reconciliation as a starting point for a confidence building strategy between Israel and the Palestinians as a prelude to some real negotiations on creation of an independent Palestinian state. On the Israeli side confidence building would require policies to end or substantially reduce the economic isolation and discrimination imposed on Palestinians both in the Gaza strip and the West Bank. And, of course, Israel giving the PA the money it owes it. On the Hamas side, confidence building would require a final end to rocket launching from Gaza and for Hamas to back away from its call for the extinction of the Jewish state. So much for drinking the kool aid or chewing khat.