The current situations in Iraq and Lebanon offer unique historic opportunities for Israel. If used creatively, they can change the strategic balance in the Middle East, at least partially, in Israel?s favor. Regrettably, the Israeli leadership, it appears, does not consider these options because they lie outside the realm of conventional geopolitical thinking. Instead, the government continues to circle around old and bankrupt ideas.

Almost four years ago, I wrote an opinion piece entitled ?Israel and her Future?, which argued for profound changes in the geopolitical landscape of the Middle East in order to ensure the removal or significant weakening of the Arab and Muslim threat to Israel?s survival. Namely, I argued for the creation of several new entities on Israel?s perimeter that will attract Arab ?attention? for generations to come.

In particular, I stressed the need to help the Kurdish people establish an independent Kurdistan. Curiously, this idea may come to fruition as a result of the failing American enterprise in Iraq. Don?t get me wrong, the removal of Saddam Hussein?s regime was undoubtedly a good thing, but what happened afterwards was a blunder.

Without going into the real goals of the invasion of Iraq, suffice it to say that imposing democracy on this country is not going to work. Democracy is a product of a society based on a more or less developed market economy with corresponding legal, social and cultural frameworks. In short, democracy is a result of capitalism, and also a result of a long historical process. It takes time to develop a common market that can bond a country together in the absence of force provided by a totalitarian regime. In any case, in the absence of a developed market economy and society, democracy imposed from above will quickly deteriorate into anarchy or dictatorship.

Additionally, no amount of goodwill can overcome the fact that Iraq is an artificially created country with at least three distinct population groups - Sunni Arab, Shi?a Arab and Kurds - that have very little in common and harbor quite a lot of hate for one another.

In all likelihood, the so-called ?sectarian violence? in Iraq will evolve into full-blown civil war. The chances are even greater today, after the Democratic victory in the U.S. congressional elections. Democrats will press for changes in American policy in Iraq that will objectively make the civil war unavoidable. Without a substantial American presence, war would have been raging in this country already. There is an opinion that Iraq in a state of civil war will be a breeding ground for extremists. But it will also become a killing ground for both Sunni and Shi?a terrorists battling each other for the control of Iraq.

In the wake of this civil war, an independent Kurdistan could and should emerge. Like any other people, Kurds have the right to self-determination. They are the only major nation in the Middle East that does not have a state of its own.

Some peculiar signs of this development have already recently appeared that point in this direction. Kurdish organizations such as the Kurdistan Development Corporation have started an advertising campaign on American TV networks that underlines the fact that Kurds are grateful to the US for the liberation of Iraq and the realization of Kurdish self-rule there. These ads create the appearance that Kurds would like to distance themselves from Arabs in Iraq in their attitude toward Americans and the USA.

Is the Israeli government ready for the appearance of an independent Kurdistan on the map of the Middle East? Are there any preparations for this development? I hope there are, but, frankly and sadly, I doubt it.

Now let?s turn to Lebanon. In my opinion piece mentioned above, I also wrote about the need for Israel to work towards establishing a Christian state in Lebanon.

Unfortunately, the government of Israel missed the opportunity to influence the development of Lebanon in this direction during last summer?s war against Hizbullah. Instead of responding to the unprovoked aggression by launching a massive ground campaign to destroy Hizbullah militarily and change the balance of forces in Lebanon, the Olmert-Peretz-Livni government failed miserably to achieve any meaningful victory. Few people doubt that a new round of fighting with Hizbullah will happen sooner rather than later. Yet, the present situation in Lebanon may offer the opportunity to realize the goal of changing this country in a direction desirable for Israel.

Hizbullah is busy creating a ?revolution? in Lebanon with the explicit goal of toppling Fouad Siniora?s government, which, according to Hizbullah chief Hassan Nasrallah, is in a ?huge state of defeat.? Nasrallah is clearly preparing to establish full Hizbullah control over Lebanon, with the help of Syria and Iran. Israel should not allow this to happen. Israel should establish contacts with those forces within the Christian and Druze communities that are ready to fight for their future in Lebanon. All kinds of assistance, including military support, should be provided to these forces.

The Christians and Druze in Lebanon should be put into circumstances that will force them to defend themselves against Muslim onslaught. In the end, Israel should seek the establishment of a Christian and Druze state on Lebanese soil. The French created Lebanon as a refuge for Middle East Christians. It did not work that way, but Israel should try to make it happen as a strategic option. If the Druze will refuse to cooperate in this process, then Israel should rely solely on the Christians.

In these circumstances, and in light of continued Syrian support for Hizbullah operations, war with Syria cannot be ruled out. It may turn out that the conflagration with Syria is unavoidable in any scenario. It is better to deal with this problem once and for all than to prolong agony that will further endanger the Jewish State. A complete defeat of Syria will substantially improve Israel?s strategic position.

The Syrian issue may become especially urgent. There are worrisome indications that both the Americans and the British may seek an exit from their troubles in Iraq at the expense of Israel. James Baker is no friend of Israel and recommendations of his group, which is gaining influence in Washington, may include measures like pressuring Israel into concessions on the Golan issue in order to appease Syrians and win their cooperation in Iraq. Needless to say, Israel should not retreat from the Golan Heights under any circumstances.

If Arabs and Muslims in general are not only espousing plans for the destruction of Israel, but also openly advocating those genocidal designs as a ?solution? to the Middle East problem, then Israel has every right in the world to undertake whatever measures necessary to guarantee its existence and security. What Ahmadinejad has on his tongue, most Arabs have in their minds.

The Arab mindset will change only after a string of substantial defeats that will show them they are losing at every turn in their battle with Israel.