History Lies Behind Headlines

Dennis Fox

MSU State News
March 8, 1983

S.'s criticism of The State News editorial "Sharon, Begin Should Be Out of Government" (2/16), which I wrote as part of my duties as a paid editorial writer, clearly illustrates a perspective on events in the Middle East that does nothing to contribute to a solution to the problem. His defense of Israel's invasion of Lebanon -- the so-called "Peace for the Galillee Operation" -- demonstrates a total lack of consideration for the history that lies behind today's headlines.

There are several points S. raises that I'd like to briefly respond to. For one thing, his justification of the invasion on the grounds that the Palestine Liberation Organization was bombing settlements in northern Israel omits the fact that such attacks had totally stopped in the months before the invasion and that it was Israel that broke the existing cease fire in the area, in keeping with Ariel Sharon's long-standing position that Israel must destroy the PLO in Lebanon regardless of the actual level of danger. S's statement that "the delicate political balance that existed in Lebanon was dramatically upset" beginning with "the influx of Palestinians in 1970," while accurate, should make him consider more sympathetically the destabilizing role played in the Middle East by the influx of masses of European Jews to Arab Palestine within the past century. Finally, his assessment that the positive results of the invasion include the Reagan Peace Plan, King Hussein's role in negotiations, and the international peacekeeping forces, fails to take into account that all three of these "benefits" ignore what is the only realistic long-term solution to the conflict: a role for the Palestinians in negotiations for their equal national rights.

S.'s focus on the details of the past few years is in keeping with a general failure on the part of many supporters of the Israeli government. The problems between Israel and the Arabs did not begin in 1970, or even in the 1940s. Zionism, as a political movement of liberation for the oppressed Jews of Europe, from its beginning at the end of the 19th Century was in direct opposition to the growing movement of Arab nationalism. Although there were sporadic attempts to provide simultaneously for the rights of both peoples, in general the Zionist movement failed to consider the displacement of Arabs by Jewish immigrants to be a problem. That the native Palestinians resisted Jewish attempts to become a majority is not surprising. Although both sides spawned their fanatics, Zionism, as the intrusive movement of immigration, must bear the greater share of the blame for the results. The extreme need of Jews in Europe for a refuge from persecution, while certainly understandable, does not justify the actions taken at the expense of others; it remains for Israel to meet the Arabs more than halfway in trying to reach a solution.

As far as the ins and outs of Begin's reluctance to fire Sharon after the report of the Commission of Inquiry, S. has his opinion and I have mine. The fact that Sharon remains in the cabinet continues to strike me as a violation of the spirit of the recommendations; his "knowledge, dedication, and love of Israel" do not compensate for his criminal lack of regard for the rights of Palestinians as human beings. My suggestion that he be tried as a war criminal still seems reasonable to me -- and, speaking for myself rather than The State News (as I was in the editorial), I think Begin and the other leaders named in the report should also be treated as criminals. (Not that I think only Israel commits war crimes. My suggestion of criminal charges could properly be applied to a wide range of political and military leaders throughout the world, past and present. We might start with Nixon and Kissinger. Murder should not become acceptable merely because a "legitimate" government "authorizes" it.)

S.'s dismissal of my opinion that Begin should resign, on the grounds that as a Jew I could go to Israel and vote against him, misses the point. For one thing, as a human being I have a right to express an opinion about anything I want to; the fight against injustice need not be limited to local residents, and victims of oppression need worldwide support whether they are in the Middle East, South Africa, the Soviet Union, or the United States,

As a Jew I resent attempts by Menachem Begin and other Israeli leaders to speak "in the name of the Jewish people" when it suits them, while they refuse to pay attention to the views of those Jewish people. Israel maintains an understandable "special relationship" with world Jewry, and for the most part Jews recognize the importance of the existence of Israel and support its continued survival. But for a relationship to have any meaning it must be reciprocal. As long as Begin invades Lebanon and holds on to the West Bank in the name of the Jewish people, Jews the world over have a special responsibility to express their opinions. Support for Israel's right to exist does not mean knee-jerk support for every policy enforced by a government bent on committing national suicide by refusing to face reality.

If S. and the other members of the Jewish Student Union wish to seriously investigate the origins of the Middle East crisis by looking at Zionist, non-Zionist, and anti-Zionist views of history, they are again invited to participate in forming a cooperatively run study group with members of Jews for Social justice and other interested people. Past invitations to study the issues together have gone unheeded; I hope S. and others in the community will decide that looking at a variety of views of history is not such a bad idea.