The crisis in the Middle East is rapidly reaching dangerous proportions. Unless someone or somebody injects a heavy dose of sanity into the region's affairs immediately, it is likely to escalate into a wider conflict that will make Iraq look like a picnic. The only player perhaps capable of playing this role is the US. But thanks to a lame-duck President, whose credibility at home and abroad is embarrassing, the world's only super power ᠴe natural guarantor of global order ȱ2mains like its leader, ineffective and directionless on the global stage.

The US has most to lose if things go out of hand. Its key interests in the region are oil, Israel, and liberalism - and they are all in jeopardy. Oil is already at a record high, over $77 at the moment due to fears of disruption in case of a wider war. Israel has never been more insecure. Its two biggest enemies, Hamas and Hizbollah are effectively in control in the North and South and are shooting rockets at it from the North and the South.

US attempts to promote democracy and liberalism in the region had made both Hamas and Hezbollah legitimate political forces creating hopes of positive transformation in the two players. Now its own ally, Israel has undermined Palestinian democracy with its military campaign in Gaza and by attacking Lebanon and pounding it mercilessly it is weakening the forces of democracy and strengthening support for Hezbollah.

Israel could have easily engaged in a prisoner exchange with Hamas and Hezbollah as it has done several times in the past, and most recently in 2004, and the matter would have ended there. But Israel's overwhelming response to the capture of its soldiers, at a time when Iraq is on the brink of a civil war and the Iranian nuclear crisis is at its zenith, is undermining all the key pillars of American national interests in the region. However, I do not blame Israel for this crisis, it is doing what it thinks it must to pursue its security and its interests. I am wondering whether the US is doing everything it should in the region to defend its interests.

All players in the region are pursuing self-interest. The ability of Hamas and Hezbollah to attack the invincible military of Israel and score successes, killing and capturing soldiers, and shooting rockets as deep inside Israel as Haifa, must have sent a chill down Israel's spine. It is reacting with overwhelming force out of fear. Israel's future depends on its ability to terrorize the Arab world through superior military power, and it thinks that by punishing innocent Palestinians and Lebanese civilians it can restore that fear and deter future attacks.

Hezbollah, which is under pressure from within Lebanon and the international community to demilitarize, has once again succeeded in presenting itself as the only defense that Lebanon has against Israel. Israel's killing of dozens of Lebanese civilians and bombing of Beirut will merely increase support for Hezbollah, attract more recruits and funding, and increase hatred for Israel. Right now, even the Christians in Lebanon must hate Israel, as their tourism industry suffers because of this new war that Israel is waging against Lebanon.

Iran, thanks to America's foolhardy adventure in Iraq, is rapidly emerging as a regional power, more capable of shaping the political and geopolitical realties in the Middle East than even the US. It is protecting itself from America's pressure on the nuclear issue by creating a dangerous diversion. Already it has succeeded in dividing the G-8, with France and Russia condemning Israel for excessive force while the US justified it.

What is the US doing at the moment? First of all, by justifying Israel's excessive use of force, the US has immediately distanced itself from the very powers it was seeking solidarity with ű and Russia. America's weak response and support of Israel has probably done billions of dollars worth of damage to the public diplomacy campaign that every one thinks is so vital to win the war on terror.

Muslims all across the world are watching a nuclear power supported, armed and funded by the US, bombard and kill dozens of innocent civilians, destroy the economy and infrastructure of Palestine and Lebanon, kidnap dozens of elected Palestinian leaders, bomb their homes even when there are children present, and all US does is provide political cover for Israel in the UN security council and on the world stage. Al Qaeda must be running out of enrollment forms.

The escalation in the region is not in US interests. It strengthens anti-Americanism worldwide and fuels radicalism in the Arab and Muslim world. It also reverses hard earned gains in the region such as fledgling democracies in Palestine and Lebanon. It is a shame that in moments of crisis American leadership does not take decisive steps to safeguard its own interests. The US does not have to abandon Israel to defend its other interests in the region, all it has to do is use its enormous leverage to ensure that Israel's policies are moderate and prudent and safeguard both Israeli and American interests.

I know all about WND, and I'm not a fan of Buchanan, though he is the one conservative who has stood up and criticized the Bush administration fairly consistently. It is significant that something so critical of Israel would appear on wnd.

I know Dobbs and often disagree with him but I can tell you he is not racist, nor rabidly pro-Israel. His views on immigration are motivated by his economic views and security concerns, not by racism, I assure you. But he has been supportive of Israel in the past (not "rabidly" so) and this column appears to mark a serious sea change in his views.

>security concerns, not by racism<

I'd have to disagree with that. I've seen enough of his shows to know that his obsession on immigration crosses the line into the politics of racial demographics. I remember clearly on one particular show he clearly expressed "concern" at the rapid rise of the non-white population in America, regardless of immigration. His support of the racist "minuteman" project is another marker of his extremism.

That surprises me DrM, because I've known the guy for 25 years, and have never heard him say anything racist or behave in a prejudicial way towards anyone. In fact, he has always seemed open to different views, sits and listens when contradicted, and seeks out the opinions of the people he works with, even those on the lowest rungs of the ladder. I disagree with him plenty, but have always respected him because of that. I rarely catch his show though, and I do disagree with him on immigration, among other things.

I'm curious, what do you think of Ted Turner?

I dont know too much on Turner...I know he was under fire for his criticism of Israel at one time....but havent followed up on him for a while. But CNN sucks to put it mildly.

Oh, but the production values are so much better at CNN now! Music, montage, catchy names for disasters! Unfortunately, back in the day they had poor production values, but better journalism. Once Ted lost control, it was all over for CNN.

I think part of it has to do with competition and ratings. MSNBC tried to outfox FOX by hiring scum of the earth Michael Savage(Weiner), and I hear CNN just got right wing lunatic Glenn Beck. Overall the state of American tv is awful....isnt it ironic that in an age of reality TV shows...nobody knows whats happening in the real world?

Yeah, FOX and MSNBC brought CNN down. As long as Ted owned it, the priority was on the news, warts and all. Too bad he got snookered by Time Warner bean counters and lost it all.

Beck... CNN has hit an all-time low. Unfortunately, I caught that dangerously stupid man by accident on YouTube today when looking for amateur video of Lebanon. He was ranting moronically about how he'd rather be eating a bowl of ice cream than having to worry his pretty little head about this complicated mideast business then gave his uninformed opinion anyway. He's like Daniel Pipes' even less articulate, pudgier brother.

>>isnt it ironic that in an age of reality TV shows...nobody knows whats happening in the real world?<<

LOL. I just said that same thing in something I wrote (for a French audience). A scary number of people in America seem to care more and know more about the Latino Dietitian from Miami being voted off the island than they do about the war in Iraq or anything else their own government is up to. I know people, educated, previously well-informed people, who no longer follow the news -- "too depressing." Man, if they can't handle seeing it in the newspaper or on TV, how would they handle trying to live in the middle of war?

What are the chances that because of their ignorance, they'll learn the answer to that question the hard way?

I was going to add my own DrM-style stupidity metaphor to that Beck assessment, but couldn't top "The wheel is turning but the hamster is dead."

Props.