OTHER VIEWS

PIPES from page 35

JN SourceBook

READERS'
CHOICE
AWARDS

for

Jewish
Detroit

Here's your
chance
to tell us what
you like best
about
our community.

Jimmy Choo
Robert Clergerie
Sigerson • Morrison
Alberta Ferretti
Henry Cuir
Miu Miu

TENDER

Use official
ballot
on page 106

-or-

vote online:

www.detroitjewishnewsnews.com

271 WEST MAPLE

jig

6/7
2002

36

DOWNTOWN BIRMINGHAM

248 258-0212

Ballots due June 20

victory over Israel in four days "at
most." Egypt's President Gamal Abdel
Nasser showed no signs of concern,
insisting that Israelis were incapable of
mounting precisely the surprise air
attack that they, in fact, pulled off.
More broadly, one high Egyptian
official said about his side's leadership
that it believed "the destruction of
Israel was a child's game that only
required the hooking up of a few tele-
phone lines at the commander's house
and the writing of victory slogans."
(Washington, ironically, was more
confident than Tel Aviv of an Israeli
victory; two weeks 'before war broke
out, Oren shows, the U.S. secretary. of
defense predicted that if Israel pre-
empted, it would defeat its three ene-
mies within the week — precisely
what happened.)
• How did the war affect Arab-Israeli
diplomacy?
It fundamentally changed the
terms.
Already in mid-May, weeks before
hostilities started, the Middle East
hand at the White House, Harold
Saunders, suggested that Israel should
be allowed the time to trounce its ene-
mies, seeing in this a way "of settling

DOCTOROFF

from page 35

their worthy quest for statehood,
Palestinians live up to the moral
example set by, not just Dr.
Koppelman, but many of the other
Israelis — teachers, storekeepers,
politicians — with whom I came into
contact.
Incredibly, they often expressed
sympathy for the same suicide
bombers who have so profoundly
altered the complexion of Israeli socie-
ty (in major cities, restaurant- and
theater-goers are protected by armed
guards; Jerusalem's once bustling
shopping district is now eerily serene
at mid-day), describing their foes as
"victims" of Palestinian leadership.
It is this humanitarianism that com-
pels Israeli generals to put the.lives of
their soldiers at increased risk during
military campaigns to avoid civilian
casualties. It also underpins a recent
Israeli Supreme Court decision mak-
ing it illegal to use torture to extract
information from terrorists, even in
"ticking time bomb" situations.
In stark contrast, Palestinians' prim-
itive impulses are routinely manifest.
Palestinians are known to have sum-

borders and, maybe even refugees." By
the second day of warfare, President
Lyndon B. Johnson had formulated
the outline of the land-for-peace poli-
cy that 35 years later still drives U.S.
diplomacy toward the Arab-Israeli
conflict: Israel should return the land
it conquered in 1967 in exchange for
its recognition by the Arabs.
Americans expected the scale of
Israel's military triumph to show the
Arabs the futility of their hopes to
destroy the Jewish state, an analysis that
found immediate agreement among
some Israelis (including Yitzhak Rabin,
later the prime minister who initiated
the Oslo negotiations, which was
premised on precisely this assumption).
But, as recent events have so vividly
proved, the land-for-peace premise
was false. With just a few exceptions
(such as Egypt's President Anwar
Sadat), Israel's willingness to make this
exchange precipitated violence against
it, not acceptance, by the Arabs.
Oren shows how land-for-peace was
based on American hopes, not Middle
Eastern realities; his research points to
this failed policy needing finally to be
replaced by a more realistic approach.
As Oren's subtitle suggests, those six
days of war had truly profound conse-
quences. ❑

marily executed and publicly mutilat-
ed the bodies of those suspected of
collaborating with Israel; it was the
Palestinian "street" that erupted in
paroxysms of joy after the World
Trade Center in New York City col-
lapsed into mounds of burning
embers and mangled steel.
Still, like an amnesiac incapable of
placing events in a proper context, the
world, especially Europe, excoriates
Israel, accusing it of Nazi-like geno-
cide while giving short shrift to its
right to protect its citizenry.
What explains this bias? Raw anti-
Semitism? An intellectualized, 'post-
colonial aversion to "occupation" even
when those occupied are bent on your
destruction? A tendency of media to
dramatize events by painting them in
black and white, eschewing shades of
gray? The demagoguery of politicians
pandering to Arab voters?
Amidst this uncertainty, only one
thing seems obvious: Israel, which
strives to be just, is treated unjustly by
those who condemn it. Dr.
Koppelman, his arms reddened by the
blood of terrorists lying supine on
HaEmek's operating tables, knows this
all too well. ❑