EDITORIAL Austria's Latest Insult It is time for you to get out and die where you wish but do not die among us. It ends with the lines: With Kurt Waldheim as the freely elected president of Austria, is it any surprise that the country continues to act immorally when it comes to its Nazi past? For years the Austrians have insisted that they were the first victims of the Nazis, forced into the Anschluss (or, annexation) with Hitler in 1938. Of course that does not explain why Hitler was given a huge hero's welcome when he marched into the country or why there was a tremendous increase in Nazi Party membership follow- ing the event. Now the Austrian Parliament has voted to offer further compen- sation to victims of Nazi rule — a decision that is unsettling for two reasons. First, if the Austrians were indeed victims of the Nazis as they have claimed, why should they feel obligated to provide monetary compensation for those who suffered? Second, if Austria was indeed responsible for its actions during the Second World War, how can the government salve the national conscience by offering the victims onetime payments ranging from $208 to $416 per person? It is true that no amount of money can compensate for the suf- fering and loss of the victims. But West Germany has proven that reparations can begin to heal old wounds and signal national remorse. Since 1951, West Germany has provided reparations to Jewish victims in Israel totaling $37 billion, assistance that helped assure the economic survival of the Jewish state. Only a country that can acknowledge and come to grips with its dark past can begin to emerge from the depths. Austria still needs to learn that token payments do not compensate for dastardly deeds. Get out of our land our continent, our sea our wheat, our salt, our sore our everything, and get out of the memory of memories. In its 52 lines, the poem says "get out" ten times. This, from a man who has often called for coexistence and dialogue betwen Israelis and Arabs, has caused a furor in Israel, strengthening the fears of those who argue that the Palestinians will not be satisfied with a state in the occupied territories — that they want is to control all of Israel. Darwish says now he was misunderstood, that he only meant for Jews to "get out" of the West Bank and Gaza, but Amos Keinan, a dovish Israeli writer, noted that Israelis who have been worried about negotiating with the Arabs "may decide there is nothing to discuss, except through the barrel of a gun." It is clear that whether one judges the Palestinians by their ac- tions, which have been murderous, or by their words, the skepticism in Israel about making sacrifices is understandable. ME YOU V ~ 1iTiNC ~ reti Elii411 CR A SOLUTiON TO TVIE UNREST ? j L Taking Words Seriously Israelis who are skeptical of giving up land for the prospect of peace suggest that the equation is not symmetrical: relinquishing land is a tangible act while promising to make peace is merely a verbal act that can be negated easily with more words. Can the Palestinians who say they are ready to make peace really be believed? That question took on added meaning this past week with the publication of a poem by a leading Palestinian writer, Mahmoud Dar- wish, long regarded as a moderate within the Palestine Liberation Organization. The poem, addressed to the Jews of Israel, was publisehd in The Jerusalem Post, and includes the lines: Live where you wish but do not live among us C4'011Cb- I COMMENT •• - How Should Jews Respond To The Arab Uprising? JAMES DAVID BESSER Washington Correspondent ashington — It was not billed as a de- bate, but by the time it was all over, Leonard Fein and Martin Peretz—well known journalists who have been in the thick of the con- troversies over Israel's hand- ing of the recent disorders— were locking horns with good- humored fervor. The arena was a public meeting in the Dirksen Senate Office Building spon- sored by the New Democratic Forum. W Fein, the founding editor of Moment magazine who now works with the Union of American Hebrew Congrega- tions—described what he sees as a shift in the position of the American Jewish community on the question of Israel's response to the recent disorders. A month ago, he argued, the American Jewish com- munity was "anguished" over events in the territories; now, he sees a circling of the wagons. "I see a community that increasingly seems to be consolidating and coalescing and reverting to its tradi- tional support, not only for Israel, but for the policies of Israel's government," he said. The causes of this shift, he said, include the weaknesses of the Shultz plan, the reduc- tion in television coverage of the disorders, "the mobiliza- tion of hawkish elements" in the Jewish community, and the "remarkable success" of Prime Minister Shamir dur- ing his recent visit to Washington "in presenting himself as someone whose disagreements with the American plan were mainly technical." Fein added that in the ear- ly weeks of the uprising, "any number of us were saying `don't pay so much attention to the uprising and Israel's response; the real issue is the occupation! Maybe we won that argument—but the mom- ent the issue becomes the oc- cupation, it becomes a much more delicate issue to deal with?' Peretz, publisher of The New Republic, agreed that the occupation poses a major stumbling block to progress in the Middle East. "It is a politically unten- able occupation, and a moral- ly untenable occupation for the long-term health of the Jewish state," Peretz said. "I am in favor of major terri- torial concessions. And as an American who sees Israel as a strategic-asset in our world view, I do not want to see Israel burdened with what becomes a strategic burden!' But Peretz cautioned against pressuring Israel to accept "psychologically unsecure borders!' The idea of security, he suggested, is as much psychological as it is military. A major disagreement be- tween the two men centered on the proper role of Ameri- can Jews in discussions about Israeli policy. Fein focused on the agoniz- Continued on Page 12