w w w . h a a r e t z d a i l y . c o m

He who rides on the back of a tiger When Ariel Sharon goes to bed at night, it wouldn't be surprising if the thought that runs through his head is what a lucky streak he's on. On that fateful day in September, Bush practically became an in-law, a bedfellow in the terror victims and fighters ward. Before 9/11, if you recall, the Palestinian conflict was not exactly uppermost in Bush's mind. Thereafter, he declared that a settlement of some kind was crucial for assembling a coalition of Islamic countries to back him up in his family vendetta against Saddam. But the terrorist attacks here, coupled with Arafat's corruption and lies put a damper on Bush's efforts - until he decided, at a certain stage, to pursue his agenda to wipe out the perpetrators of terror, as he promised his people, and, of course, Iraq, not to mention that silent pledge to his father. For Sharon, this has probably been something of a relief. It has spared him having to make those "painful decisions" he committed himself to, or embarking on any kind of initiative, even though some positive things are happening in the PA as we speak. Now he's waiting for the Americans to present him with a new order in the region. America will get rid of those who shelter terrorists for him. If Iraq is attacked, Syria, Iran, Hezbollah and Hamas could come next. And maybe Libya, too. Why not? In short, Bush will do the work for us, and Sharon will reap the fruits. Sharon's strategy is to rely on an American victory, which will put an end to Arafat and usher in a Palestinian leadership with views that are softened and ripe for an agreement - Sharon's kind, of course. Are we or are we not the only ones around here on the side of the good guys? In his patriotic speech to the nation after the attack on the World Trade Center, Bush declared a war on terror and those who harbor terrorists. His popularity soared to the heavens, muffling the doubts about his leadership ability and judgment, and the shadowy circumstances that led to his winning the election on the strength of a court ruling. The Americans love tough cowboys. The first frontal attack on Afghanistan was greeted warmly. The United States enjoyed global support; the number of American casualties was low (the thousands of innocent Afghans who died don't count); and the Taliban regime was overthrown. The embarrassing part was that they never got their hands on bin Laden. The organizational chiefs and his international network are still alive and well, and the world is bound to hear from them yet. The fact that an "orange alert" was declared on the anniversary of 9/11 proves that the primary objective of socking it to those responsible for the September attacks has failed. Concentrating on toppling the regime of Saddam Hussein is not a logical continuation of the war on terror. The U.S. secretary of state himself has publicly admitted that there is no connection between Saddam and bin Laden's organization. If there are misgivings in America, especially on the part of former generals, it is out of concern that the whole affair is a personal settling of scores, that America's goal will not be achieved and that its actions will set off a chain reaction of unexpected responses. And to make matters worse, while Bush senior managed to cobble together an international and Arab coalition for his war on Iraq, Bush junior is all alone, with only Britain and Israel in the cheering section. This is because Bush has changed the goals of his war in midstream: Forget the war on terror; what he wants to do is replace regimes in the Middle East. European countries aren't buying the idea that the United States should decide what sort of governments ought to be in power, and if America turns up its nose, it's goodbye. And of course, this is doubly true for totalitarian Arab regimes, which live in fear of democratization and regard it as an American-Israeli conspiracy. You never know what the consequences of this kind of butting-in will be. In 1982, Sharon tried to replace the government in Lebanon, and instead of the Christians, he got the Shi'ites and Hezbollah. What Sharon wants is pretty clear. But if you're riding on the back of tiger, it's not a bad idea to think about what might happen tomorrow. What if Bush's plan to replace evil regimes with good regimes falls through? What if Saddam stays put, or a Shi'ite regime takes his place? What will we be up against then? What will the sheikh's son look like? What price will we pay for our lack of initiative and inaction when there is no longer anyone to fall back on, and we are surrounded on all sides by those who have scores to settle and hunger for revenge? By Yoel Marcus