I EDITORIAL Casting A Vote "If there be among you a needy man, or of thy brethren in any of thy gates . . . Thou shalt not harden thy heart, nor shut thy hand from thy needy brother . ." — Deuteronomy 15:8 There are many heavy hearts in our midst. As the possibility of amending Israel's Law of Return lingers, rising or falling on whether Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir's Likud bloc can make the necessary political concessions to form a governing coalition with a cluster of religious parties, concern mounts over whether the issue will drive a wedge between Israel and Diaspora Jews and diminish needed funds flowing from U.S. Jewry to Israel. While hearts may be heavy, they must not harden. This Sunday, volunteers for the Allied Jewish Campaign will be contacting thousands of prospective contributors, seeking support for vitally important programs that assist Jews in need, be they new immigrants to Israel from Iran or Ethiopia or elderly shut-ins in Detroit lacking proper medical attention or merely looking forward to a hot kosher meal. While unable to vote in Israel's elections, we can still cast a ballot for Jewish unity by increasing contributions to the Allied Jewish Campaign, sending a clear message that despite the political jockey- ing in Israel today, our commitment to helping Jews in need is enduring. "Thou shalt surely open thy hand unto thy poor and needy brother" — a lesson that Jews learned only too well during the Holocaust — is that among the nations of the world, there is no correlation bet- ween majority and morality. Just because virtually every nation in the world votes against you doesn't mean you are wrong. The United Nations lost its moral authority long ago when it became increasingly dominated by Third World regimes, who spend an inordinate amount of time there expressing hostility toward one of the few democracies in the world: Israel.. Now, to ensure a platform for Arafat, the United Nations will move its session to Geneva. The question for Washington to consider is do we ever want the United Nations back? George Will, the syndicated columnist, suggested that President- elect Bush tell the United Nations to go to Geneva and not come back until it rescinds the 1975 Zionism-is-racism resolution. After all, Will notes, the Republican platform calls for rescinding the resolution and asserts that "failure to repeal that resolution will justify attenuation of our support for the U.N." Will, like a good many others, worries that Bush and his nominee for Secretary of State, Jim Baker, lack the kind of instinctual em- pathy for Israel that Ronald Reagan and George Shultz share. What could be a better signal that the next administration is firmly in Israel's court than to seize the initiative and underscore the United Nation's utter lack of fairness? Stay In Geneva Abba Eban, Israel's former ambassador to the United Nations, once said of the U.N.that if the Arab bloc proposed legislation pro- claiming the earth flat, it would pass 151-2, with perhaps three abstentions. His musings come to mind- in light of the recent furor over Secretary of State George Shultz's decision not to grant a visa to Palestinian Liberation Organization leader Yassir Arafat to address the U.N., and the subsequent uproar by the members of the world body. The General Assembly voted to "deplore" the American decision by a vote of 151-2 (Israel and the United States), with Great Britain abstaining. One important lesson for Americans to learn from this episode LETTERS Middle East Peace Proposal The "knee-jerk" reaction to the PNC declaration of statehood was to reject it as too ambiguous, and too full of "fish-hooks." Further thought, however discloses possibilities which I feel should be explored. Why doesn't the govern- ment of Israel offer to recognize the Arab state, on condition that it recognize Israel without qualifications and agree to an immediate armistice in the "war" that has been raging for 40 years? The fact that we don't like the PNC, or the PLO for that mater, is immaterial. They appear to speak for the ma- jority of the people in Gaza, 6 FRIDAY, DECEMBER 9, 1988 Judea and Samaria, and as such come closer to a representative government than anything else in the Arab world. If they are to assume the position of the government of these people, it carries with it the respon- sibility for their conduct. That by itself would be an ac- complishment .. . If there is mutual recogni- tion and an immediate ar- mistice, they should be follow- ed by face-to-face peace negotiations, which is something Israel has always wanted .. . Such an offer, coupled with an immediate armistice and peace negotiations, would be a showing of good faith and would go a long way toward negating the present world- wide claim that - Israel is refusing to negotiate and really doesn't want peace. The offer should be coupled with a requirement that the "Palestinian Government" accept responsibility for any future acts of terrorism by its people, failing which the "peace talks" would be abrogated. Balfour Peisner Southfield PLO Ploy, Not Peace It seemed like a fresh breeze reading the forthright commentary of Philip Slomovitz on Arafat's recent cynical public relations ploy. It was a suitable antidote to the wishy-washy response of the recent Jewish News editorial on the same event. Cursory analysis of the PLO declaration makes it clear that even Israeli doves will never accept Arafat's at- tempt to impose a U.N. for- mula based on a 1947 plan that will result not in peace but in one piece at a time. The Algier's resolution did not ex- plicitly recognize Israel's right to exist, did not repudiate the infamous PLO Covenant, did not give up ter- rorism in the whole of Israel, and did not even offer free mutual negotiations. Only our misguided "friends" call this a step in the right direc- tion . . . The mainstream of Israel and American Jewry is eager for peace and willing to make reasonable concessions, but will never accept the suicidal program of Arafat and the New Jewish Agenda. Dr. Milton J. Steinhardt Southfield Soviet Jewry Vs. Boat People Micah Naftalin's article ("Let Soviet Jewish Refugees Into U.S. Now," Dec. 2) is obscene in its comparison of the current U.S. freeze on en- try visas to the closed doors which faced Jews trying to escape the Holocaust. The State of Israel is waiting with open arms to ac- cept every Soviet Jew who can get out. Those Soviet Jews who are waiting now for U.S. Continued on Page 10