Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert rejected one of the main proposals of the Iraq Study Group Report released on Wednesday.  He said, "The attempt to create linkage between the Iraqi issue and the Mideast issue … we have a different view." 

The report chaired by James Baker linked the resolution of the Iraqi crisis with the resolution of the Arab-Israeli conflict.  It said: "The United States will not be able to achieve its goals in the Middle East unless the United States deals directly with the Arab-Israeli conflict."

Ralph Peters from the New York Post was far less diplomatic than Olmert.  He blasted this part of the report:  

"Of all the many retro proposals scattered throughout the report, the notion that the road to peace in Baghdad runs through the West Bank just may be the worst.  Certainly, the most perverse: By tying Iraq to Palestine, Baker makes the problem immeasurably tougher, not easier. The Palestinian problem isn't the cause of all that's gone wrong, just another symptom. If Iraq can't be fixed without resolving the Palestinian issue, then the answer is that Iraq can't be fixed."

Mitchell Bard of the A.I.C.E. criticized the linkage too:    

"The report asserts that the conflict is “inextricably linked” to the situation in Iraq. This is demonstrably false. If the conflict ended tomorrow or Israel disappeared, it would have no impact whatsoever on the situation in Iraq. The violence is based on internal political, social, economic and religious rivalries that are completely unrelated to Israel."

The report highlights a fundamental difference in how the problems of the Middle East are perceived.  Is the Israeli/Palestinian conflict the central issue that once resolved will bring peace to the region, including Iraq?  If you're James Baker you're in this camp.  Or is the core issue a radical Islamic agenda dedicated to eradicating Israel as the first step in its goal of a global conquest of the world for Islam?  Menashe Amir, an expert on Iran agrees with this analysis. 

Amir is the voice of Israel Radio Farsi.  He told CBN News today the report gives the impression the United States does not understand Iran or its goals. 

What are those goals? Amir says the goals of Iran are to export the Iranian Islamic revolution to the region and eventually the world.  In order to achieve this they want to destabilize the region and use this chaos to establish a Shiite caliphate throughout the Middle East.  This is the motivation behind the current crisis in Lebanon, the violence in Iraq and Iran’s pursuit of nuclear weapons. 

As Amir points out, Iran perceives the U.S. and the West in decline and Iran and Islam on the rise.  So when the report says the following: "Given the ability of Iran and Syria to influence events within Iraq and their interest in avoiding chaos in Iraq, the United States should try to engage them constructively."

In this light, the Iraq Study Group report confirms their world view, that Islam is winning and the U.S. and the West is losing.  It's red meat for Iran.  It puts the U.S. in a weak position of entreating Iran (and Syria) to help the U.S. out of the crisis in Iraq, a crisis both of these nations have worked hard to create.   

It's an understanding of this radical Islamic world agenda that seems lacking from the report.  Appeasing this agenda will not reduce the danger but only embolden Iran (and Syria) and accelerate their radical regional and worldwide plans.  If the 1930's were any lesson for us today, the road to appeasement is the road to war.