I have not often had occasion to praise President Bush over the course of his second term in office. Of late, I have only found myself increasingly entrenched in opposition to him, and locked in debate with his defenders, some earnest and honorable, others brassbound and full of sophistry.

I extend to him my praise this Monday morning. I believe it merited by his response so far to the crisis on the Israel-Lebanon border. President Bush is doing something unpretentious but utterly necessary: he is enunciating our principles, true and simple. They are, chiefly, two in number. (1) Israel is our ally and friend. (2) Regional war should be avoided, if it is possible to avoid it. The first precedes the second, and thus we must be unabashed in our affirmation of friendship and support. Happily, Israel needs no material or military support; she is perfectly capable of taking care of herself, which is in part why — and sometimes I wonder if Americans realize this — she is such a valuable ally. We share with her not only the affections of kindred, and an accord of interest, but the vigor of independence.

What support Israel needs, in short, is only that natural and unguilty support, and eagerness of support, which friend feels toward friend. In diplomacy, in public utterance, in oratory, whatever of that may be needed, we will calmly maintain our backing of Israel, while working to avoid committing ourselves, awkwardly and needlessly, into a crisis that does not, in point of fact, involve us.

When this crisis first exploded into one — or at least showed itself to be something more than the usual crisis in that unfortunate land — sometime last week, some friends of mine were quick to raise the parallel of the crisis of 1914 in Sarajevo, which became a war that destroyed a world. Well of them to do that, though I have some question whether the raising of such an awful parallel would have the effect they might expect. The point of this parallel, as I see it, is that a small quarrel, reacted to in sufficient folly and truculence, can become a regional war, or even a global war, faster than anyone can defuse it. Now the First World War obliterated the prosperity and hope of the Nineteenth Century; from it came Bolshevism and the first ironclad Communist States, and a proliferation of totalitarian parties, some of which would go on to careers of wickedness beyond imagination; in it was laid the groundwork of the Second War, and its blood and massacre. If you raise this parallel, the lesson you teach is an emphatically cautionary one. As it should be.

Caution, also, President Bush has shown — caution and restraint. He deserves praise for it.