The warnings issued yesterday by several countries, calling on their citizens and official representatives to leave Israel, illustrated the proximity of a war with Iraq, which now seems inevitable. The danger is not great. But it does exist and there is no point in denying it.
Despite fears for their personal safety, it appears that the majority of Israelis stand behind the Americans and British, who are going to war to rid the region and the world of the scourge of Saddam Hussein.
There is no ardor for a military campaign, which will evidently take a heavy toll. Israel would be happy if the Iraqi regime were to cooperate with the international inspectors and dismantle its weapons of mass destruction, as it had agreed to do in the wake of the first Gulf War. But Saddam Hussein's Iraq chose to be a regional hotbed of active hostility, constituting a strategic anxiety from Israel's point of view.
Iraq's support for the worst of the Palestinian terror organizations is well known. Still to this very moment, money from Baghdad continues to make its way to the families of suicide bombers striking at Israel's cities.
Beyond its obvious interest in the ousting of a sworn enemy, Israel, as a member of the family of nations, has an unquestionable interest in the success of the campaign against Saddam's regime. From the regional point of view as well, an American-British success could also be fortuitous and inject life into efforts to bring about peace in the Middle East.
Some countries have raised concerns, reasonable within themselves, with regard to the fate of Iraq after an American attack - even if it ends successfully. The war could unleash powerful forces and lead to the dissolution of Iraq as a unified state. Other countries are fearful of the future of world stability in the wake of the undermining of the current strategic order.
If the English-speaking nations have to go to war on their own, what value will the NATO alliance have? If the Security Council stands aside, does this signal the collapse of the United Nations?
It would, without a doubt, have been preferable if American diplomacy had succeeded in gaining more widespread military and diplomatic support for the campaign against Iraq. For a short moment, following 9/11, it had seemed that the nations of the world planned to join forces in the battle against global terrorism. But with time, it transpired that selfish concerns of certain states - in particular, the temptation to gnaw at the puissance of a wounded superpower - have overcome even the universal interest in stripping a tyrant like Saddam Hussein of his ability to strike.
To the good fortune of the Iraqi leader's victims, the United States has not weakened in its resolve to oust Saddam, despite the problems and disappointments encountered en route. Israel, which has placed itself firmly in the pro-American camp, hopes for a hasty outcome, with a minimum of losses
Haaretz.com, the online edition of Haaretz Newspaper in Israel, offers real-time breaking news, opinions and analysis from Israel and the Middle East. Haaretz.com provides extensive and in-depth coverage of Israel, the Jewish World and the Middle East, including defense, diplomacy, the Arab-Israeli conflict, the peace process, Israeli politics, Jerusalem affairs, international relations, Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon, the Palestinian Authority, the West Bank and the Gaza Strip, the Israeli business world and Jewish life in Israel and the Diaspora.
