100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

The University of Michigan Library provides access to these materials for educational and research purposes. These materials may be under copyright. If you decide to use any of these materials, you are responsible for making your own legal assessment and securing any necessary permission. If you have questions about the collection, please contact the Bentley Historical Library at bentley.ref@umich.edu

January 27, 1984 - Image 2

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Detroit Jewish News, 1984-01-27

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

2 Friday, January 21, 1984

THE DETROIT JEWISH NEWS

Purely Commentary

Mubarak Must Explain:
Is Treaty Scrap of Paper?

A rather shocking bit of news was imparted in an AP
story from Casablanca, submitted by the agency's corre-
spondents Michael Goldsmith and Farouk Nasser. They
reported on a statement by King Hassan II who quoted
Egyptian President Hosni Mubarak as having told him:
"President Mubarak told me Camp David is
dead now that Egypt has recovered its Sinai and
its oil fields," Hassan told reporters Friday. "The
peace treaty as such remains in force, but Camp
David is empty of substance."
Mubarak has never made such a statement
publicly and often has declared Egypt's commit-
ment to the Camp David agreement. During a
meeting earlier this week with delegates of his
National Democratic Party, he again said Egypt
would not renounce its peace treaty with Israel.
If it wasn't the language of diplomacy, in the guise of
which "kings can do no wrong," such a quotation could be
recorded among the most indecent in international rela-
tions. Egypt had gotten everything: the Sinai, its oil wells,
an end to warfare so that neither Israel nor Egypt have had
any casualties since 1978. But Mubarak would benefit only
from the latter, which is in itself a blessing for all con-
cerned.
When, however, the Egyptian sentiment is to scrap the
Camp David decisions, even the great benefit of ending
warfare could be destroyed.
It is no wonder that there is so much skepticism about
the agreement with Egypt in many Israeli and Jewish
ranks. Mubarak is the person to undo the damage done in
the statement quoted by the Moroccan king.

Quakers Negate Their
Traditional Peace Role

Quakers — American Friends Service Committee —
reputedly is a peace-advocating movement. In the instance
of Israel it is like the counterpart of the terrorists when it
negates efforts to encourage peace among the nations of the
Middle East.
In the ranks of the fair-minded, Lebanon is likened to
Egypt in its relations with the Jewish state. The Lebanese-
Israel agreement of last spring was akin to the Camp David
Egyptian-Israeli pact. It was the second time in Israel's
history that an Arab government had signed an agreement
with Israel. But Quakers have the audacity to urge the
abandonment of that agreement. That would mean the
creation of a war spirit between two nations who only
needed a signed pact and had never actually been at war.
The Quakers' previous, numerous antagonistic acts
toward Israel have been ignored. It is no wonder that the
latest one, ad1ocating a breach between Israel and Leba-
non, finally drew deserved condemnation from national
Jewish organizations. The rebukes were well earned —
exposing war-mongering on the part of a group that speaks
in religious terms when dealing destructively with Israel.

UN vs. Israel

In an important summation of the tensions created in
the United Nations toward this country, in the feature
article "The U.N. vs. the U.S." in Sunday's New York Times
Magazine Section, Richard Bernstein, the NYTimes chief
of the UN Bureau, also touches upon Israel's plight. Berns-
tein briefly described the UN vs. Israel:
Then there is the organization's preoccupa-
tion — some would call it obsession — with certain
bedrock issues, notably South Africa and Israel.
Virtually every committee and commission in the
United Nations has created some sort of unit
whose main function is to condemn Israel and to
express solidarity with the PLO. There is a Com-
mittee on the Exercise of the Inalienable Rights of
the Palestinian People; the Special Committee to
Investigate Israeli Practices Affecting the Human
Rights of the Population of the Occupied Ter-
ritories. There is a United Nations-mandated In-
ternational Day of Solidarity With the Palestinian
People. In the Secretariat, there is a Division for
Palestinian Rights. Since 1967, the Security
Council has voted on some 200 anti-Israeli resolu-
tions, which were either adopted or were defeated
only by an American veto.
These elements of United Nations behavior
have remained largely constant no matter who
was carrying out American diplomacy at the
organization — whether figures generally ac-
commodating to the Third World, such as Adlai E.
Stevenson or Andrew Young, or more confronta-
tional representatives like Daniel Patrick Moyni-
han and Mrs. Kirkpatrick. Nor has this situation
been affected by the changes of Secretaries Gen-
eral. The present holder of the top United Nations
job, Javier Perez de Cuellar of Peru, is universally
regarded as an astute and independent diplomat.
Yet,- what is conspicuous even under a leader of

Mubarak, Quakers, UN and Accumulated
Obstacles to Peace ... The Demands for
Justice Still Major on World Agenda

his skill, is that United Nations activities rarely
generate genuine, sincere suggestions for how to
resolve conflicts.
In the wake of the Six-Day War of 1967, the
Security Council passed a resolution that
envisaged a comprehensive settlement of the
entire Middle East conflict, one recognizing the
right of all states to live within secure boundaries.
In recent years, however, resolutions have been
largely condemnatory, setting forth extreme de-
mands but offering no realistic frameworks for
solutions.
Indeed, many delegates these days acknowl-
edge that the organization has not played a major
role in resolving a conflict since. the 1973 Yom
Kippur War between Israel and Egypt. Since
then, there have been the crises in Afghanistan,
Cambodia and Cyprus; the conflicts in the Middle
East between Iran and Iraq, between Syria and a
faction of the Palestine Liberation Organization,
and between Israel and the anti-Israeli forces in
Lebanon; there has been the war between Argen-
tina and Britain over the Falkland Islands; and
there has been the civil conflict in Chad, and the
fighting between Morocco and Algeria over the
Western Sahara.
In none of these disputes has the United Na-
tions, riven by Soviet-American conflicts and
lacking in consensus among its members, had a
measurable impact for the good. Moreover, the
intemperate and sullen quality of the debate at
the United Nations, where hurling abuse often
replaces sober discussion, can be said to have
done more at times to aggravate conflicts than to
compose them.
Even in its brevity, these facts expose the hatreds that
have been fanned and continue to be the core of Third World
Arab and Soviet bloc attitudes toward Israel.
Unfortunately, neither the U.S. nor Israel have much
hope for an early resolving of the problem. It's sad!

American Gathering of Holocaust
Survivors Still in Session
With Demand for Justice

When the American Gathering of Jewish Holocaust
Survivors adjourned the sessions in Washington a year ago,
it was sadly commented that it could be the last such as-
sembly — because the survivors are aging and the aim of
keeping alive the memory of the bestialities could be di-
minished. It isn't. That assembly is still in session. That
became evident in a New York Times Op-Ed Page adver-
tisement Jan. 20 signed by Benjamin Mead, who presided
at the Washington conference, and by "American Survivors
of the Holocaust."
The American Gathering retains an office at 122 W.
30th St., New York 10001.

By Philip
Slomovitz

Here is the text of the Times Op-Ed Page advertise-
ment:
How many Jews will German weapons kill
this time?
Forty-two years ago today, at the Wannsee
Conference in Berlin, Nazi Germany committed
itself to the Final Solution. Today, the new demo-
cratic Germany is in danger of following in the old
Germany's footsteps.
In the name of protecting the Persian Gulf,
the German Federal Republic is about to supply
Saudi Arabia with $5 billion worth of Germany's
latest, most sophisticated weaponry: Leopard
tanks. Tank-killer and anti-aircraft vehicles.
Helicopter-mounted anti-tank missiles and com-
bat helicopters to mount them on. Infantry anti-
tank missiles. Anti-aircraft missiles. Bridge-
laying and amphibious tanks, which are far less
useful for fording the Persian Gulf than the Jor-
dan River.
Saudi Arabia has declared the Arabs' war
against the Jewish state to be a jihad, a holy war,
just as Hitler did with the Nazis' war against the
Jews.
It is Saudi Arabia that puts up the huge sums
of cash Syria spends to buy weapons from the
Soviet Union. And it is Saudi Arabia that funnels
money and weapons from the Western democ-
racies to terrorists and hostile states throughout
the Middle East.
We, the survivors of the Nazi death camps,
urge Chancellor Kohl and Defense Minister
Worner to keep German weapons out of such
hands. Only by so doing can they ensure that our
children and our grandchildren today do not fall
to German weapons as our husbands and wives,
our sons and daughters, our parents and our
grandparents did less than a lifetime ago.
This message speaks for itself. It is a reminder that
German weapons were used to annihilate millions of Jews,
and as many more of their victims among non-Jews. But
the non-Jews do not need "a last rampart," a guaranteed
homeland to end wanderings, to provide to Jews who have
survived the Nazi onslaught to be masters of their own
destiny.
Therefore, the logic of the survivors' demand, their
indictment, their appeal for justice. Therefore, the logic of
expecting that the non-Jewish world will join in an admoni-
tion, supplementing accusation inferred in the demand,
that enemies of Israel, those striving for the Jewish state's
destruction, should not be provided with weapons for such
an intended calamity.
A sad note must be appended to the Holocaust sur-
vivors' message. Germany is not alone in the line of
weapons merchants who lend power to Israel's enemies.
Perhaps the chief guilt is at the doorstep of the United
States. The guilt is evident — and it has assumed global
dimensions!

Kayston Retires After 48 Years With JTA

NEW YORK (JTA) —
John Kayston, retiring
executive vice president of
the Jewish Telegraphic
Agency, was presented with
a plaque at the annual JTA
Board of Directors meeting
in Atlanta for his 48 years of
"outstanding and dedicated
service to promoting the
dissemination of Jewish
news around the world."
Martin Fox, JTA
president, in presenting the
plaque to Kayston, praised
him for his many years of
service to the JTA. "To work
in one job for 48 years is
quite rare in our society to-
day." Other comments from
board members included
Philip Slomovitz, editor and
publisher of The Jewish
News of Detroit and JTA
vice president. In a letter to
the board he wrote that
Kayston "is a pioneer in
Jewish journalism who has
earned every blessing and
honor that can be accorded
him."
Following the meeting,
Kayston expressed some
thoughts on the world he
helped to shape. He ex-
pressed his belief that the

past half-century is the
most momentous period in
Jewish history. The most
important events during
that period which pro-
foundly affected Jewish life,
he said, were Hitler's mur-
der of six million Jews and
the birth of the state of Is-
rael.
There is general
agreement, Kayston ob-
served, that the JTA
played an important and
vital role during these
turbulent years in col-
lecting and disseminat-
ing news affecting
Jewish lives everywhere.
Little is known, however,
of some behind-the-
scenes stories in which
JTA was involved.
One such story, Kayston
recalled, was the deporta-
tion of Boris Smolar, then
JTA's chief foreign corre-
spondent, from Berlin in
1937. He went to Nazi Ger-
many in 1933 to stay for a
few days to do a series of ar-
ticles on the plight of the
Jews in Germany and
stayed for four years. His
stay there was fraught with
danger.

Martin Fox (left)
and John Kayston

Propaganda Minister
Joseph Goebbels alluded to
this when he said that Smo-
lar was a "courageous man"
for daring to send out re-
ports about the Nazi re-
gime. The JTA office in Be-
rlin was closed in 1933. In
their deportation order
against Smolar, the Ges-
tapo stated that his
presence in Germany was "a
danger to the Third Reich."
Kayston also recalled
that in 1945, immediately
after, the Allied victory. in,

Europe and the liberation of
the concentration camp in-
mates, JTA was able to ob-
tain lists of survivors in var-
ious countries under Nazi
occupation and sent them
for distribution in the
United States an_d other
countries so that relatives
could get in touch with the -
survivors.
There is no question,
Kayston said, that the ex.._
cellent reporting of Smo-
lar, JTA's chief foreign
correspondent during
the 1920s and 1930s, from r "
Europe and the Middle`
East, helped to a large ex-
tent to establish JTA's
credibility with the gen--
eral media.

Kayston also reminisced
about the Overseas News
Agency (ONA), founded in
1940 as a subsidiary of the
JTA. At that time, some of
the daily newspapers which -I
subscribed to the JTA news
service, especially the New )
York Times, felt they no -,
longer could use the'
"Jewish Telegraphic
Agency" slugline, because

Continued on Page .3)

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan