ROAD MAP TO NOWHERE: The Return of Elliott Abrams

Elliott Abrams was infamous for the Iran-Contra scandal of the 1980s. Now Bush has appointed him to the National Security Council to “mediate” the Israeli-Palestinian problem. “Aggravate” is more like it unfortunately.

If you are looking for reasons why the Middle East peace process is as deadlocked as usual, here is one big reason: The infamous Elliott Abrams, major figure in the Iran-Contra scandal of the 80s and all-purpose apologist for Central American human rights atrocities, has been appointed to a high-level post within the National Security Council. In December 2002, Bush appointed Abrams to become senior director of the Near East and North Africa office of the NSC. This appointment effectively makes him the behind-the-scenes point man on the administration’s efforts to mediate the Israeli/Palestinian problem.

Abrams once wrote, “American Jews must arise from their slumber and face the facts that peace will never happen.” This from the man who President Bush picked to head his peace effort.

James Zogby of the Arab-American Institute (AAI) said of the appointment: “He will be yet another filter blocking reality from the president.”

Rashid Khalidi, respected Middle Eastern scholar at the University of Chicago, said: “This is a tragedy for the American people as well as for Palestinians and Israelis.” He refers to Abrams and the like as “American Likudniks.”

Retired admiral and diplomat William Crowe said: “He’s a snake who is hard to kill.”

The consensus is that Abrams ended up with this job instead of others because NSC appointments don’t require Senate confirmation, which would have been a major embarrassment for the administration. Abrams has a well-deserved reputation for lying under oath and showing contempt and hostility for anyone who dares question him about his inept and sordid past. He once referred to critics as “vipers.”

Like previous assignments for which he clearly had no qualifications, Abrams came to this high-level position in the NSC without any expertise on the Middle East. His only qualification, it seems, was a relentless hostility towards the Palestinian peace efforts of the past, and his unwavering and uncritical support of Israel. Abrams never saw an Israeli action or military intervention he didn’t like. His support for Sharon borders on adoration, and his dismissal of Palestinian aspirations is well documented in his own writings and public statements.

In 1982, Ariel Sharon left office in disgrace after a commission found him complicit in the massacre of many civilian Muslims in the Lebanese refugee camps of Sabra and Shatila. Abrams was contemptuous of the decision, claiming that Sharon’s forces had merely stood by and allowed the massacres to take place. It is frightening to think that a man with this kind of moral numbness is now formulating Middle East policy in the name of the American people.

Abrams’ convoluted approach to the Middle East is documented in his book Present Dangers which was produced by the Netcom think tank “Project for the New American Century.” Abrams wrote: “Our military strength and willingness to use it should be our key factor in promoting peace.”

He also wrote, “Our intentions in the Middle East will not be realized for the most part through painstaking negotiations.”

In other words, might equals right — our might gives us the right to impose our will on the Palestinians. And Americans wonder why so many people in that region fear and distrust us. The question becomes why did President Bush think Elliott Abrams was the man for this important job if he was serious about working for a fair and just peace for the Palestinians? For the Arab-American community, the appointment of Abrams was the final straw that convinced them that the Bush Road Map to Peace was just a public-relations snow job. It is hard to argue to the contrary.

Behind the scenes, one of the most vocal critics to the Abrams appointment was George Bush Sr.’s highly respected NSC chairman, Brent Scowcroft. The first Bush administration declined to ever hire Abrams during its four years in office. It wanted nothing to do with his disgraceful reputation as Assistant Secretary of State for Inter-American Affairs (1985-1989) during the Reagan presidency — one of several assignments Abrams was given for which he had no obvious qualifications other than being known as a Cold War hawk and a right-wing ideologue, which Bush Sr. decidedly was not.

In his post as assistant secretary (1985-1989) Abrams consistently defended the brutal El Salvador dictatorship against an avalanche of human-rights-abuse charges — over 22,000 atrocities in a 12-year period, including the infamous El Mozote village massacre. In a 1992 National Review article, Abrams wrote of our role in El Salvador: “American policy was right, and it was successful.”

Nor did Bush Sr. want anything to do with Abrams’ complicity in the Iran-Contra fiasco. Abrams was indicted by the special prosecutor for giving false testimony to a congressional committee and for illegal fund-raising for the Contras. He pleaded guilty to two lesser charges in the hope of avoiding a trial. But for reasons still not understood today, Bush Sr., just before leaving office, pardoned Abrams and others saving them from having to serve jail time.

< past." the of matter a "That?s dismissively, said Fleisher Ari spokesman presidential convictions, and past reckless Abrams? reminded when time, appointment his>

Not true! The turmoil in the Middle East is a festering sore that drains our attention, resources, and political capital — not to mention our good name. As long as it goes unsettled and unresolved in a fair and just manner for both sides, it will remain so. The people our government appoints to work on this problem must be of unassailable character and integrity. They represent all of us.

Elliott Abrams fails on all accounts — therefore, we would all fail with him.

We cannot afford to fail — therefore, Abrams must go.