OTHER VIEWS
It's All About Syria
our editorial questioning the
timing, details and benefit
of Wayne State University's
agreement with the Syrian
state-controlled Damascus University
was right on target ("Syrian Ties
Misguided," Jan. 24, page 33). The
efforts of recent letter-to-the-editor
writers to defend the agreement still
fail to provide substantive informa-
tion rather than appeals to trust the
university.
As Islamist terrorists target
Americans, Israelis, Jews and others
around the world, platitudes about
"promotion of democratic values" and
"understanding" just won't cut it as a
rationale for-signing a new agreement
with a. government that promotes
hatred, incites violence, supports ter-
rorism and validates genocide.
OASIS (Optimizing American
Support for the Israeli State), which
has been leading the effort challeng-
ing the agreement, recognizes that
WSU and President Irvin D. Reid are
not enemies of the Jews or Israel. No
one said they were. But just as we
y
Don Cohen is spokesman for the West
Bloomfield-based OASIS-Optimizing
American Support for the Israeli State
(www.ayc4israel.org).
understand and appreciate U.S. sup-
port for Isra'el, it would be wrong and
self-defeating not to question and
challenge U.S. policies when we
believe them to be misguided and
harmful. Such is the case with WSU.
A particularly striking example is
the Faculty of Islamic Law at
Damascus University, the body that
educates and accredits all religious
teachers throughout Syria. The head
of its Beliefs and Religions
Department is Sheikh Ramadan al-
Bouti whose Web site at
www.bouti.org contains calls to
destroy the United States and Israel,
boycott all American goods and wage
jihad [holy war] to compel people to
adopt Islam — as well as giving reli-
gious rationale to homicide bomb-
ings.
Al-Bouti also claims "Zionists"
control the United States and Islam is
the only true religion; he says to
President George W. Bush that unless
he stops American "tyranny" and "ter-
rorism," God will strike him "with an
incurable disease that will cause you
to die a slow death."
Unlike American universities,
where unpopular ideas and controver-
sial faculty are protected by academic
freedom and the Constitution, there
is no such freedom in Syria.
Michigan as a precedent is
The university is a total
plain wrong. U-M's involve-
instrument of the state and
ment in a NASA project on
subject to Baath Party and
infections from blood-suck-
regime control. In other
ing insects lasted just seven
words, Al-Bouti is govern-
months, ended three years
ment-sanctioned.
ago and involved one
Additionally, likening
researcher who never left Ann
opposition to the WSU-
Arbor. No agreements were
D ON
Syrian agreement to those
signed with Syria and
CO HEN
who call for academic boy-
Damascus University was not
cotts of Israel are diversionary
Com munity
involved.
and untrue. We must fight
Of course, it is not news
Vi ews
that type of linkage rather
that Israeli universities seek
than give it credibility. In Israel and
cooperation with Arab universities; it
the United States, universities are not
would be news if Arab institutions
under the political control of the gov- sought cooperation with Israel.
ernment, and opinions are hotly
Suggesting cooperation exists because
debated in a myriad of free and open
Israeli and Syrian universities are
forums. It is precisely because we
both in an academic consortium
oppose linking academics with poli-
makes as much sense as saying the
tics, that we must reject giving aca-
U.S. works with Iraq because they are
demic credibility to countries where
both in the U.N. In fact, there are no
they are one and the same.
academic agreements between either
Further, the examples given by
Hebrew University or Tel Aviv
defenders of agreements between
University and Damascus University.
American universities and the
OASIS, together with Lebanese
Damascus University are misleading.
Christian groups, are working to
Such agreements are few and far
oppose the WSU-Syrian agreement
between, and not of the general "let's
and attempts to appease the Syrian
find things to work on together" spir- dictatorship by highlighting the
it of the WSU agreement.
appalling record and actions of the
In fact, citing the University of
Syrian regime. 0
Palestinian Aspirations
Philadelphia
by are Palestinians so angry
at Israel? There are two
possible reasons.
• Politicai They accept
the existence of a Jewish state but are
angry with this or that Israeli policy.
• Re jectionist: They abominate the very
existence of Israel and want to destroy it.
Which of these explanations is cor-
rect has many implications. If the
Palestinians only want changes in what
Israel is doing (such as building towns
on the West Bank), then it is reasonable
to ask Israel to alter those actions —
and the main burden of resolving the
Palestinian-Israeli conflict falls on Israel.
But if Israel's existence remains at
issue, then it follows that the conflict
will end only when the Palestinians
finally and irrevocably accept the
Daniel Pipes is director of the Middle
East Forum and author of 'Militant
Islam Reaches America" (WW Norton).
His e-mail is Pipes@MEForum.org
2/21
2003
24
Jewish state. Seen this way, the main
burden falls on the Palestinians.
Also, dies a routine political dispute,
diplomacy and compromise are the way
to make progress. But if the Palestinians
reject Israel's very existence, diplomacy
is useless, even counterproductive, and
Israel needs to convince the Palestinians
to give up on their aggressive inten-
tions. More bluntly, Israel would then
need to defeat the Palestinians.
Which interpretation is correct?
In a spring 2002 poll of residents in
the West Bank and Gaza conducted
by the Jerusalem Media and
Communication Center, a Palestinian
organization, 43 percent of respon-
dents called for a Palestinian state
only in the West Bank and Gaza and
51 percent insisted on the state in "all
of historic Palestine," a codeword for
the destruction of Israel.
Thus, Palestinian rejectionism flour-
ishes. But the outside world averts its
collective eyes from this fact. Those
institutions and individuals with a
megaphone — in both Israel
and the United States, not to
speak of the United Nations, the
Left, and in diplomatic, journal-
istic, artistic and academic cir-
cles worldwide — generally
assert that Palestinian acceptance
of Israel has occurred and focus
instead on Israel's need to "take
risks for peace."
In contrast, only by a small
number of conservatives in
Israel and the United States
point out the continued power
of Palestinian rejectionism.
accepted Israel's existence and
71 percent-think the opposite.
To learn American views on
this issue, the Middle East
Forum recently sponsored a
poll asking a national cross-sec-
tion of one thousand likely vot-
ers, "Do you believe that the
goal of Yasser Arafat's
DANIEL
Palestinian Authority is to have
PIPES
a small state living in peace
Special
Commentary alongside Israel, or is its goal the
eventual destruction of Israel?"
The response was clear.
Nineteen percent of respondents said
Arafat seeks a small state living in peace
alongside Israel; 61 percent said he
Weighing Intentions
seeks the eventual destruction of Israel.
Given this backdrop of mostly wishful
(Technical aside: the remaining 20
thinking, it is remarkable to see how
percent did not know or refused to
realistically the Israeli and American
reply; and this poll conducted on Feb.
electorates view Palestinian intentions.
11-12 by the New York polling firm
The Tami Steinmetz Center for Peace
McLaughlin & Associates has an accu-
Research at Tel Aviv University found
racy of +/- 3.1 percent at the 95 per-
in fall 2002 that 18 percent of Israeli
cent confidence interval.)
Jews believe the Palestinians have
PIPES on page 26