MR. ABOUREZK: I happen to be a pacifist, and I absolutely believe violence is wrong, no matter what. I think I could bring myself to defend my family and myself in a violent way, but I don't think that I can condone anybody undertaking acts of violence, because, as Joe Valachi used to say, "Them that lives by da gun dies by da gun." I can't justify violence. But I have to hark back to what Oliver Tambo, the head of the African National Congress, said when he was in Washington in early 1987. In a speech at the Press Club he said, "Those who make political revolution impossible make violent revolution in- evitable." So you see, while you can ask me to lay blame and point the finger of blame on Palestinians and on Lebanese in southern Lebanon who are resisting the Israeli oc- cupation, I have to lay it back on Israel. There really is no sensible alternative but to stop the occupation; let these people have their own country, let them have self- determination. Let's not just talk about self-determination in an abstract form; let's do it in reality. MR. SHIPLER: Well, let's explore the political dimension before we turn to Mr. Bookbinder. There is a spectrum of opinion in the Arab world, even among Palestinians, even within the P.L.O., about the appropriate political stand to take with respect to deal- ing with Israel, negotiating with Israel. How do you come out on that? Do you criticize one particular viewpoint or another? Where do you put yourself in that spectrum? For example, would you subscribe to the idea of a Palestinian- Jordanian delegation negotiating with Israel over the future of the West Bank? MR. ABOUREZK: I think there ought to be an international conference with every state in the region involved, including the P.L.O., the Soviet Union, and the United States. I think there should be a P.L.O. delega- tion by itself. I don't believe we ought to continue to mask the refusal on the part of Israel to negotiate by allowing them to say that they won't accept certain Palestin- ians. It just doesn't make sense for Israel to choose the Palestinian negotiators, which is what they're trying to do. If they were successful in choosing a Palestinian negotiator, how valid and how solid and how long-lasting would the ensuing agree- ment be? Obviously, the Palestinians have their own representatives in the form of the P.L.O. MR. SHIPLER: Well, Mr. Bookbinder, let's give you the same question. What Israeli positions do you criticize? MR. BOOKBINDER: Well, first, if I may, Mr. Shipler, with all due respect, I do not accept your first comment about our presentations, that one sees it all black and one sees it all white. I've presented a gray picture, because I believe it is a gray pic- ture. Over and over again I have said that both peoples have suffered as a result of the conflict, and both have made mistakes. Both have been wrong at times. In your book, Arab and Jew, you said, quite properly, "Both peoples are victims; each has suffered at the hands of outsiders, and each has been wounded by, the other." I concur. That's why there is this great need to seek accommodation, to seek a way out of this terrible, horrible dilemma that two peoples with legitimate claims to the land and to peace and recognition find themselves in. This conflict must be solved somehow. You also said, in dealing with the ques- tion of terrorism and violence, "The Arabs and the Jews have been quite asym- HYMAN BOOKBINDER AND JAMES G.ABOUREZK TFROUGH DIFFERENT EYES TWO LEADING AMERICANS, A JEW AND AN ARAB, DEBATE U.S. POLICY IN THE MIDDLE EAST Moderated by David K. Shipler A debate in print on the past and future of American policy in the Mideast. metrical on this point of terrorism, with the Arabs generally hailing their terrorists and the Jews punishing theirs." That's the difference. That's a very, very important difference. While people in both groups have indeed engaged at times in violence, in horrible crimes, I believe it is fair to say that overall the Jews have themselves been repelled, repulsed, indig- nant at acts taken by their own people, while overall the Arabs have said they are compelled to engage in this kind of ter- rorism and violence. Now, Mr. Abourezk may say that he's a pacifist, but it's a weird kind of pacifism that leads him to say, as he did in the very first part of this book — on more than one occasion — that he justifies the violence. He says they had no alternative but to do these terrible things. No pacifist should ever talk that way. No pacifist should ever justify violence of that type. And there's a difference, of course, be- tween violence that is a tragic part of war and violence that is initiated by a group specifically for the purpose of compelling political decisions, with innocent victims. So, have Jews been guilty of incidents that one must reject? Yes, indeed, and I have said so in the earlier part of the book. No need to recite the specifics. Have the Arabs been guilty? Yes, they have. All of this — all of this — argues for a really serious effort to understand what can bring the parties together. Finally, let me say this. I entered this exercise, this debate, with the hope that as a result each of us would indicate a readiness to understand and accept at least part of the other's viewpoint. I'm com- pelled to say that I feel less hopeful now that Mr. Abourezk is trying to understand our agony and our aspirations. I say "our" meaning Jewish. I suggest that Mr. Abourezk can tell me right now that I'm wrong. Let him do it, and I'll be glad to acknowledge I'm wrong. I believe that Mr. Abourezk personally shares the hope of too many Arabs that, indeed, the state of Israel should cease to exist. I think he'd like to wake up tomor- row morning and find out that in one way or another Jews are no longer the majori- ty in Israel, or that one way or another all of the Arabs, who he says were forced out have returned, and either through electoral process or some other process have now un- done the Jewish state. That's what he would like to see happen. MR. SHIPLER: Mr. Abourezk, can you respond to his question about your desires on behalf of Israel, whether you would real- ly like to wake up one morning and see the disappearance of the Jewish state? MR. ABOUREZK: I would like to see true democracy come to Israel. And if the peo- ple allowed to vote want to continue the state, that's wonderful. I believe in self- determination. And if they vote not to have an exclusively Jewish state, that's fine with me as well. But I think the people ought to be en- titled to decide that, particularly because the people who support Israel and who speak for it consistently say it's the only democracy in the Middle East. Well, let's let the democracy work. MR. BOOKBINDER: I'd like to hear you say that history, compassion, justice, and plain humanity now justifies the existence of a Jewish state in that part of the world. MR. ABOUREZK: I've already said that. MR. BOOKBINDER: No, all you've said so far is that you accept as a fact that Israel exists. Would you amend that at least to say you believe it has a right to exist? MR. ABOUREZK: Well .. . MR. BOOKBINDER: It has earned the right to be there as a Jewish state?