The recent war in Gaza is yet another symptom of the larger conflict between moderates and radicals in the region. The free world must stand together in order to stamp down the influence of extremists and to prohibit a nuclear Iran.
The Munich Security Conference convenes to take a hard look at managing global instability. In the Middle East, managing instability may turn out to be more complicated during the transitions marking 2009; a new American administration and upcoming elections in Israel, Lebanon, Iran, and possibly the Palestinian Authority. Where will this lead an already turbulent region so rife with conflict, violence, and threats to the stability of the free world? Much depends on the will of the free world and the moderate elements in the region to actively shape events, rather than react to them.
Elections are a vital tool of democracy, but lacking a culture of democracy, they may ultimately serve a cause contradictory to the very values they wish to protect, namely, freedom and peace. In Iran, the Mullah's regime freely bans candidates in order to guarantee its grip on power. In Lebanon and in the Palestinian Authority, two Islamist movements - Hizbullah and Hamas - established themselves as political parties while wielding independent armed and terror capabilities, using them domestically and serving Iranian interests alongside their own. Hamas, for one, used its electoral victory in January 2006 to prepare the ground for its bloody overthrow of Mahmud Abbas's administration in Gaza in 2007.
Conflict between radicals and pragmatists
Indeed, today's key issue in the Middle East is the historic conflict between radicals and pragmatists. The radical axis, led by Iran, has gained momentum in recent years as Iran drives diligently toward a nuclear military capability. Syria has become a pivot in this axis, while Hizbollah and Hamas have exploited the weakness of Lebanon and the Palestinian Authority to establish Iranian backed armed entities in south Lebanon and Gaza - areas from which Israel unilaterally withdrew - and to threaten the Israeli hinterland with tens of thousands of rockets.
The triad of non-conventional capabilities, terror, and rogue actors looms over the horizon, posing a threat not only to Israel, whose right to exist is blatantly denied by these actors, but also to the moderate forces in the Middle East and to the stability of the entire region and beyond. With a strong radical axis in its midst, the Middle East will be ever more a source of instability. Implications of a nuclear Iran are grave: a regional nuclear arms race; an increase in violent and audacious acts taken under the nuclear umbrella; stronger pressure against potential peace initiatives; and, in years to come, the possible proliferation of non conventional capabilities to non-state actors.
Israel faces some of the thorniest fault-lines between radicals and moderates. This is the wider context of the Second Lebanon War, in the summer of 2006, and of the recent Israeli operation in Gaza. In Gaza, Israel was ultimately compelled to do what any sovereign nation would do: protect its civilian population. This, after sustaining thousands of rocket and mortar attacks over the last eight years, despite having left Gaza three and a half years ago and having given ceasefire a chance in the summer of 2008.
Die weltweite Abrüstung stockt, die Region um Afghanistan bleibt Krisenherd und Staaten konkurrieren um Einfluss: Die Herausforderungen der Sicherheitspolitik in Bildern.
Contrary to the hidden aspiration of certain Middle East actors, Israel did not seek to eradicate Hamas rule in Gaza. Instead, Israel sought to revalidate its deterrence vis-à-vis Hamas in order to establish a sustainable cease-fire, and to stop the flow of weapons into Gaza. I believe that we are on our way to success on both fronts.
Barack Obama schickt eine hochrangige Delegation nach München, um die neue US-Außenpolitik zu skizzieren. Das zieht so viel Polit-Prominenz an wie lange nicht. Ein Who's who in Bildern.
The smuggling of weapons to ''Hamastan" in Gaza must stop. The growing range and lethality of these weapons will inevitably trigger another round of violence, perhaps wider ranging than the recent one. Egypt is now willing to play a key role in preventing the smuggling of weapons through practical measures. And with wide international involvement and willingness to support this important role, there is a chance for a different reality than the one existing along the Lebanon-Syria border that has allowed Hizbullah to triple its arsenal of rockets since 2006.
In the face of this complex regional picture, Israel seeks to promote and expand the peace process with its neighbors while maintaining its deterrent posture. There are more shared interests between Israel and the moderate Arab actors than meet the eye. With international backing, we could quietly work together to block the Iranian threat - the nightmare of moderate Arab regimes - advance peace and stability, and bolster pragmatic regional forces.
A regional approach towards peace- making in the Middle East is hence warranted, one which would take some elements of the Saudi peace initiative and provide an umbrella for individual peace tracks between Israelis and Palestinians, Syrians, and Lebanese, hand-in-hand with a process of normalization and economic development.
For the vast majority of Israelis, the Two-State Solution is the only viable solution for Israelis and Palestinians. As one who went as far as any Israeli leader in this quest, I believe we should make a well measured effort incorporating a top-down process of political negotiations with a bottom-up process of capability- and institution-building in the Palestinian Authority, to prepare the building blocks for Palestinian statehood.
Noticeable progress has been registered in the West Bank over the last year through the relentless efforts of the Palestinian government, US Generals Jones and Dayton, Quartet support, and quiet Israeli backing. We should all invest more in this process, and through it, prepare the ground for a future solution to the outstanding problem of ''Hamastan" in Gaza, which, given Hamas's current nature and policies, undermines any prospect for peace.
Above all, if the radicals are to be defeated, the international community, incorporating Russia, China, and India into a wider and more cohesive front, must coalesce to stop Iran's process of nuclearization through strong economic and diplomatic pressure. Moderate forces in the region will join hands. Time is of the essence. If engagement with Iran is to be used as a diplomatic tool, its aims and conditions, including a tightly limited timetable, should be clearly defined. At the same time, no option should be removed from the table.
Israel, for its part, attributes great importance to the exploration of peace with Syria. Should this succeed, it will also separate Syria from the radical axis, serving a fatal setback for Iran.
Sir Winston Churchill once remarked: ''It is not enough that we do our best; sometimes we have to do what is required." Together, let us do what is required.
Ehud Barak, formerly Israel's Prime Minister, is currently Minister of Defense and Chairman of the Israeli Labor Party