EDITORIAL

Fighting Resourcefully

In this era of multi-million-dollar election
campaigns, high-priced image consultants
and glitzy, prime-time television spots, the
vastness of a candidate's "war chest" is as im-
portant as his stand on the issues.
Quite simply, winning requires money.
So it's no surprise that in his attempt to
secure re-election, U.S. Sen Carl Levin is
amassing funds for an expected strong
challenge from the Republicans, possibly by
savvy U.S. Rep. William Schuette. The
sources of these funds reflect the breadth of
Levin's support and include small individual
contributors as well as action committees
with particular interests.
Among those supporting Levin's re-election
campaign are committees who agree — and
even disagree — with positions he has taken
and votes he has cast. One committee has a
strong interest in the survival and well be-
ing of Israel. It is this support that the Arab-
American Institute seeks to exploit in hopes
of rallying the Detroit area's Arab-American
communities to vote against Levin — not for the
Republican candidate — and help defeat him in
November.
If Levin were a single-issue politican — and

Israel his only passion — then he would be
fair game for any and all shots the Arab-
American Institute could muster. But Levin's
value to the state and the nation cover an ar-
ray of causes, from defense appropriations
and the environment to civil rights and social
services. Also, the local American Arabic and
Jewish Friends, a group building relation-
ships and trust, selected Levin as its recent
honoree for his long-standing efforts toward
bettering relations between Arabs and Jews.
The Arab-American Institute has every
right to target Levin. It has every right to
challenge just one aspect of his service. And
yes, it has the right to sling mud, too, by
claiming that money is buying Levin's votes.
The challenge for Levin's supporters inside
and outside of Detroit's Jewish community is
to provide the resources needed to effective-
ly counter the Arab-American Institute's
charges, to reinforce among the electorate the
special and strategic relationship that exists
between the U.S. and Israel, and to keep this
Washington, D.C.-based pressure group from
succeeding in its single-minded desire to
smear him.

Bush's Honorable Decision

It took him three weeks to do it, and during
that time he gave the culprit every possible
chance to redeem himself. But last week,
President George Bush finally broke off the
administration's dialogue with the Palestine
Liberation Organization. The decision was as
welcome as it was overdue.
In the 22 days between the May 30 terrorist
attack on a Tel Aviv beach and Bush's an-
nouncement that U.S.-PLO talks were being
suspended, the president leaned over
backwards to give PLO Chairman Yassir
Arafat every chance to satisfy the White
House.
Washington had requested that Arafat de-
nounce the attack and take steps against its
leader, Abu Abbas. At one point, the presi-
dent offered a face-saving compromise:
Arafat would suspend Abbas — the reputed
mastermind of the Achille Lauro ship hijack-
ing — from the PLO's Palestine National
Council until Arafat fully investigated the
attack on Tel Aviv.
Bush's tardy decision means the ad-
ministration has concluded that the PLO is,
at heart, still a terrorist organization, despite
all of Arafat's protests to the contrary. Since
December 1988, when he told the world that
he recognized Israel and had renounced ter-
rorism, Arafat has talked a good line. But

now it appears the chairman was merely
reading a script of his own devising: His ac-
tions, and those of his cohorts in mufti, con-
tradicted all the rosy words.
Where all this leads the Middle East, and
the role of the United States there, is difficult
to say.
This is certainly not the best of moments for
the region. Extremist elements are on the
rise in many Arab nations. Moderates are on
the defensive in the PLO. The most right-
wing government in Israel's history has just
been installed in Jerusalem. And the ad-
ministration in Washington apparently is fed
up with Mideast shenanigans.
But to get anything moving in the Middle
East, it has to occur "on the ground," as they
say, and not along the Potomac. The PLO
must decide if it has a vision of peace that it is
ready to defend, even to the point of disciplin-
ing hard-liners within its ranks who advocate
terror. And Israel must decide whether its
priorities are settling Soviet Jews, dealing
with adjacent Arab states or realistically con-
fronting the Palestinian issue.
These are hard choices, all just as hard as
the move to suspend talks with the PLO was
for Bush. But at least the White House was
guided by the duplicity of Arafat, a duplicity
that gave the United States no honorable
choice than to do what it did.

LETTERS

No Apology,
Just A New Threat

The "chief architect" of
perestroika gets excited when
asked about the Soviet Jews.
The journalists are accom-
modating him by very rarely
asking such questions. When
this subject came up once
more at the press conference
after the second US-USSR
Washington summit, on June

6

FRIDAY, JUNE 29, 1990

3, Mikhail Gorbachev angrily
retorted that he, as well as
President Bush, will not
tolerate the resettlement of
Soviet Jews in the Israeli-
occupied territories. Gor-
bachev said that the Soviet
Union might stop the emigra-
tion altogether if Israel would
not provide guarantees that
the Soviet Jews are not
resettled in the West Bank
and Gaza. In this respect, the

Soviets remain unchanged;
instead of an apology comes a
new threat.

The greatest paradox of our
times is the passive behavior
of the American Jews and the
idleness of the major
American Jewish organiza-
tions in face of the un-
precedented flourishing of the
anti-Semitism in the Soviet
Union. Whereas the

demonstration on Dec. 7,
1987, prior to the first Gor-
bachev visit, drew 200,000
people, a similar demonstra-
tion on May 29, 1990, at-
tracted only 150 people.

Isaac Tarasulo
American Association
of Russian Jews
Bethesda, Md.

Does The Press
Have Amnesia?

They may mean well, but
good people who favor in-
dependent statehood for the
West Bank Jordanians —
which will permit them to let
in the Palestine Liberation
Organization, Syria, Libya
and any enemies of Israel in
the rest of the Arab world —
are inadvertently sowing the
seeds of another attempt to
annihilate Israel.
In 1967, the Arab nations
made a massive attempt by
way of Jordan to take over
Israel once and for all. The
press and the whole world
praised and applauded Israel
for its courage and success
against overwhelming odds in
avoiding destruction by
pushing the larger and
better-equipped Arab armies
back across the Jordan River,
thus enabling Israel to use
the West Bank as a buffer.
That buffer has prevented at-
tacks by any of the Arab na-
tions by way of Jordan since
1967. Insofar as Israel and
the year 1967 are concerned,
much of the American press
today has amnesia. For Israel
to allow the West Bank Jorda-
nians to form an independent
state would be suicide for
Israel.
There are no immediate,
permanent solutions to the
problems of the Middle East.
And statehood for West Bank
Jordanians is certainly not
the answer. However, a step in
the right direction might be
for both sides to consider a
satisfactory resettlement of
West Bank Jordanians across

the Jordan River to their
mother country, Jordan.
Israel, and the Arab nations
(who started the war that put
the West Bank Jordanians in
the position they are in) could
participate in the adequate
payment to the West Bank
Jordanians for their property
and resettlement.

Leo Pevsner
Oak Park, Ill.

Reform Guides
Environmentalism

I appreciate the attention
given to my project and to
Jewish environmentalism in
Jennifer Gubkin's recent ar-
ticle "A Ten-Month Trek
Changes At Least One Per-
son's World (June 22). While
the environmental side got
considerable focus, far too lit-
tle attention was paid to the
underlying Jewish commit-
ment to the environment.
Most important, I was not
and do not condone an ap-
proach to Judaism based on
wholesale rejection of our
tradition. In fact, I was only
quoting the great Orthodox
rabbi, S.R. Hirsch, in speak-
ing about "yardsticks by
which we measure our
Judaism." He called bal
taschit (do not waste) "God's
first and most general call."
Kashrut, attending shul and
so on are undeniably crucial
— I only add recycling and
energy to the list.
My background is solidly
Reform and I am proud of
that. Reform is not a move-
ment of convenience nor of re-
jection; it is rather one of
study and of choice. In fact,
my Reform upbringing is
precisely what compelled me
to further study, and thus to
activism. "When deeds ex-
ceed learning, learning en-
dures; when learning exceeds
deeds, learning does not en-
dure." That is why I am
walking.

Fred Dobb
West Bloomfield