Conservatism is right leaning and could tend to isolation as seen by the proponents of anti-immigration and anti-international policies. Therefore they view in alarm the neo-conservatives, which is strictly a term relevant to the U.S., who are a subclass of conservatives, but have a very aggressive foreign policy stance. (Conservatism)
The common ground of both the conservatives and the neo-conservatives is the support for a strong U.S. military. The Conservatives, however have strong reservations with regard to military intervention and the so-called nation building of the neo-conservatives. The events subsequent to September 11, taken against the governments in Afghanistan and Iraq are clear indications that the neo-conservatives have no inhibitions to force regime change and reshape states believed hostile into the American image of what a state should be. This is alarming to the conservatives and gives support to the charge that the current administration is strongly under the influence of neo-conservatives. The neo-conservatives also believe in strong action in whatever form deemed necessary to end state sponsored terrorism and this is likely to cause an aggressive stance for democracy in the Middle East by the Bush administration. Even with what happened on September 11, many conservatives look upon this as a dream with too much zeal and quite likely to cause nightmarish consequences. (Neocon 101 some basic questions answered)
The Conservatives and the Israel -Palestine Issue:
Despite the pressures on President Bush by the neo-conservatives who could use the tag of being anti-Semitic on the President and advice him that there should be no pressure on Israel, Bush did call on Ariel Sharon to pull out of the West Bank in 2002 and this stance is supported by the conservatives in keeping with what they believe is the right action by the U.S. In Israel. That it did not come to much as Sharon refused to is a different matter except that it shows that the administration did not push on with it because of the neo-conservative support to a hands-off policy on Israel. The Conservatives support the stance that former U.S. NATO commander Gen. George Joulan took in that the U.S. might have to impose a peace on Israel. The Conservatives do not believe that this would be a sell out of an ally, by asking Israel to give up the West Bank and the Gaza strip for peace and stability in the area as claimed by the neo-conservatives, who compare it to the sell out of Czechoslovakia by Britain and France in pressurizing the country into giving up Sudetenland to Hitler's Germany in 1938 in exchange for peace. (Whose War? A neo-conservative clique seeks to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America's interest)
The Conservatives believe that President Bush needs to pressurize Israel into trading these lands for peace in keeping with the Oslo Agreement as was believed by his father, when he was President and the then Israeli Prime Minister Yitzak Rabin, despite any criticism he may face from the neo-conservatives. This is because the Conservatives believe there will be no peace in the Middle East if President Bush fails to achieve this with Sharon. This volatile situation in the Middle East will pose a security threat to the U.S., as there will be no end to the terror the U.S. will have to face. This terror threat, as per the Conservatives, is because the U.S. has failed to be even handed in the events there and the viewing of the protagonists. These include the failure to restrain the provoking actions of Ariel Sharon, failure to condemn the Israeli excessive use of force, and the moral complicity in the U.S. turning a blind eye to the looting of lands of Palestine by Israel and the denial of Israel to the Palestinian right to self-determination.
These actions help to sustain the anti-American feeling in the Muslim world in which terrorists and terrorism breed. The Conservatives take the view that the Israeli people are friends of the American people. That they have the right to lasting peace and secure borders is also a part of the concern of the Conservatives and also that the U.S. should assist them in securing these rights. The Conservatives also believe strongly in the moral commitment that the nation has and has been endorsed by half a dozen presidents that the Israelis should not be made suffer anymore in seeing their country conquered and destroyed. This is a commitment that should be honored by the Americans, but the Conservatives also believe that the interests of the U.S. are not identical with those of Israel. As a result there are times of conflict between them and it is the view of the Conservatives that the interests of America should prevail over those of Israel. They do not share the view that the current Ariel Sharon government in Israel can be considered America's best friend. (Whose War? A neo-conservative clique seeks to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America's interest)
The Conservatives hold the view that since the time of Ben Gurion the successive Israeli regimes resemble Jekyll and Hyde. In support of this are these incidents cited by them. In 1950, Mossad the Israeli intelligence service got agents in Egypt to destroy U.S. installations just to make it appear to be the work of Egypt so that relations between America and Egypt would be destroyed. During the Six Day War there were repeated attacks on the undefended USS Liberty by Israel leading to the death of thirty four American sailors and injuries to another hundred and seventy one. The machine-gunning of the life rafts carrying the survivors compounded this act. Yet due to an act of national cravenness this massacre was never investigated or punished. For every Jewish citizen in Israel the Americans have provided $20,000 yet there seems to be the minimum concern of Israel towards the interests of America. They continue to refuse to stop building settlements that remain the root cause of the Palestinian unrest. The American good name has been dragged through the mud and blood of Ramallah and all requests of President Bush for restraint have been turned down.
In addition they have sold American weapons technology to China against the American interests. These technologies include the sale of the Patriot, the Phoenix air-to-air missile and the Lavi fighter, which is founded on the American F-16 technology. Direct action by the U.S. prevented the sale of the AWACS system to China. Israel used Jonathan Pollard to get all the American secrets and refuses to assist in ascertaining whether any of these were sold to the Russians, by the return of the documents they have. As the price for signing an agreement at Wye Plantation with Arafat, that President Clinton was trying for, the then Israeli Prime Minister wanted the release of this same agent so that he could take this traitor back to Israel as a national hero. The Conservatives ask these actions of the supposed friend Israel be compared with those of their closest ally in Europe namely Britain to differentiate what a friend is. They repeat their admiration for President Bush yet they have their reservations in any attempt to start endless wars in the Middle East all because it serves the interests of Israel. (Whose War? A neo-conservative clique seeks to ensnare our country in a series of wars that are not in America's interest)
The Conservatives and the Iraq War:
The Egyptian President has said that the war on Iraq and subsequent events there has caused unprecedented hatred in the Middle East of Americans like was never seen before. The picture of America as an honest broker has been destroyed. The reaction to this is likely to be seen worldwide and the interests of both the Americans and Israelis are not likely to be safe anywhere in the world. This is exactly the Conservatives feared and now believes that the neo-conservatives and Israelis have got President Bush exactly, where they want him headed towards a wider war in the region using American troops got by conscription, just to serve as the legions of Israel. The Conservatives believe that America went to war on false pretexts of weapons of mass destruction and the non-existent links of Iraq with Osama bin Laden. The American Secretary of State lied in the UN and then set course to destroy what was left a country ruined by fourteen years of sanctions and American bombings. (and Now for the Conservative View: Locked on Course to Wider War)
Neo-conservative ambitions coupled with Israeli requirements got attempts at spreading this war to Syria and Iran but were curtailed due to the lack of troops, yet events there have kept fueling Iraqi uprisings that could provide the necessary reasons for this. The likely reactions in the form of uprisings and further acts of terror will justify any call for more troops by President…