TUESDAY, NOVEMBER 20, 2001 — The United States finally has the terrorists on the run. What better time to shift the focus of the world’s attention from Al Qaeda, the Taliban, and Afghanistan? Secretary of State Colin Powell did just that when he delivered his long-awaited speech on Middle East policy at the University of Louisville in Louisville, Kentucky yesterday. It represented a triumph of moral equivalence — something at which State Department officials are skilled.

In his speech, Powell was most stern when criticizing Israel’s presence in the Occupied Territories of the West Bank and Gaza. "The occupation must end," he thundered. "Israeli settlement activity has severely undermined Palestinian trust and hope. It preempts and prejudges the outcome of negotiations, and in doing so, cripples chances for real peace and security. " In short, Powell’s equation was both simple and fatuous: Palestinian terrorism equals Israeli settlement activity. By equating the two, Powell is setting the stage for more terrorism, not less.

Don’t get me wrong. I’m no fan of settlements, never have been. But the message behind the timing of Powell’s speech could not have been more clear: Arab terrorists struck America on September 11, in part because of the Israeli-Palestinian struggle, and the State Department is now taking the opportunity to lash out against Israel. Powell can make as many disclaimers as he wants — as he did when he said: "Nor do the terrorists speak for the Palestinians, whose leaders have rejected bin Laden’s attempt to hijack their cause. "But the facts are the facts. And the operative facts here are that the same Saudi regime that helped fund bin Laden and his al Qaeda organization is the same Saudi regime that prodded the Bush administration to speak out against the Israeli settlements.

Powell’s sanctimony seems to ignore reality. Yesterday, he blamed settlements for helping to spark Palestinian terror. A little more than a year ago — after Ariel Sharon visited the Temple Mount — the talk was all about how Sharon had caused the Palestinian uprising. That was the prevailing belief until word leaked out from the Palestinian leadership that Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasser Arafat and his minions had actually plotted the violence after he refused Prime Minister Ehud Barak’s generous peace offer at Camp David. The truth is that Arafat turned to violence when he saw world political opinion beginning to turn against him for failing to take the peace deal. Arafat rightly knew that if the world was confronted with new facts — daily fighting between the Israelis and Palestinians — it would forget who rejected what deal.

It's only fair to point out that Powell also applied stern language to Arafat’s commitment to fight terror. "Terror and violence must stop now," he said. But what everyone forgets is that the Louisville speech marks the umpteenth time the US has called on Arafat to crack down on terror. This was the original premise of the Oslo Agreement between Israel and the Palestinians, which gave Arafat land, a government, and an army — in short, a quasi state all in exchange for a commitment to peace. It’s also been the premise of a host of mini-agreements between Israel and the Palestinians elsewhere.

Criticism of Powell’s speech — in both Israel and the US — has been relatively mute. Administration officials leaked so many outrageous scenarios about what it might say that the speech itself seemed relatively mild. "In Louisville, Powell added nothing new to the wishful thinking that has long passed for State Department policy when it comes to Israel and the Palestinians," wrote New York Post columnist John Podhoretz. This is, in actuality, a triumph of spin.

Powell’s speech raises a final question. What is it about the State Department, ensconced in its headquarters in Foggy Bottom, that makes these bureaucrats fail to see the world in clear terms? Sometimes it seems as though State Department bureaucrats are still angry that President Harry Truman went ahead and recognized Israel over their objections. That was back in 1948. If we’ve learned anything since then, it’s that the State Department is more often than not wrong about issues of a serious nature. Most recent examples? Don’t ally with the Northern Alliance. Don’t enter Kabul.

Well, here’s one rule Bush could follow that might ensure continued success in the war on terror: don’t listen to the State Department.

Agree? Disagree? Got a gripe with our writer? Respond to "Today's Jolt" in the Phoenix Forum.