Dr. Charles Kennedy makes the case for American non-intervention in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. He acknowledges the complexity of the situation, avoiding the tendency of many supporters of both sides to trivialize the others’ grievances, but also draws attention to the gravity of U.S. involvement:
This writer accepts the view that Israel has the to right defend itself from attack by radical Islamists (or any other attackers). However, it must be kept in mind that it is weaponry paid for by taxpayers here in the U.S. that gets used in Israeli military actions. When Israel responds to attack (or attacks preemptively) in such a way as to inflame its enemies to perpetrate more violence, it cannot happen without some sort of consequence to the U.S. We imperil ourselves by attempting to take one side or the other, or even worse, attempting to play both sides of the conflict, as we have done at various times. Our on-again, off-again policy has essentially jerked people around who should be left alone to try to resolve their own problems and conflicts. The more we interfere, the more inflamed tensions and passions become. It’s rather like pouring gasoline on a fire.
Citing the long-held stance of Ron Paul on the subject, Kennedy suggests that complete American neutrality could speed up the process of creating peaceful coexistence in the region, and would certainly better both our financial situation and international relations in the mean time.