100%

Scanned image of the page. Keyboard directions: use + to zoom in, - to zoom out, arrow keys to pan inside the viewer.

Page Options

Download this Issue

Share

Something wrong?

Something wrong with this page? Report problem.

Rights / Permissions

This collection, digitized in collaboration with the Michigan Daily and the Board for Student Publications, contains materials that are protected by copyright law. Access to these materials is provided for non-profit educational and research purposes. If you use an item from this collection, it is your responsibility to consider the work's copyright status and obtain any required permission.

February 09, 1980 - Image 4

Resource type:
Text
Publication:
The Michigan Daily, 1980-02-09

Disclaimer: Computer generated plain text may have errors. Read more about this.

4

Page 4-Saturday, February 9, 1980-The Michigan Daily
Palestinians are not center of world crises

H. Scott Prosterman's article, "Motives
Behind Soviet's Afghan Move" (Daily, Feb. 1)
could have been an interesting and informative
explanation of the crisis in Central Asia.
However, in addressing himself to "the most
threatening development in power politics sin-
ce the Cuban Missile Crisis," he derives a
series of illogical conclusions.
According to Prosterman, the major issue in
the region in the midst of crisis in Iran and
Afghanistan is the Palestinian question.
Following his logic, in order to stabilize the
Middle East the United States should "force"
Israel into solving the Palestinian problem.
Such an American policy would supposedly win
over the confidence of Arab and Muslim coun-
tries and insure their support for American
security interests in the region.-
YES, THE PALESTINIAN problem needs to
be~solved. Yes, Israel has a major role to play
in such a solution. But is the Palestinian
problem really the core of the conflict in the
Middle East, as Prosterman seems to be
claiming? Is it so easy to infer, as Prosterman
does, that if the Palestinian problem were to be
solved through direct American pressure on
Israel then threats to American and world
security will be minimized?
It is hard for me to understand how Proster-
man believes that by simply (emphasis mine)
solving the Palestinian problem-and he puts
the sole burden on Israel to do so-other con-*
flictsin the region will be eased. Such logic is
not only fallacious, but it is dangerous because
it puts us under the false illusion that simple
solutions will resolve complex conflicts which
at present dominate Middle East and world
politics.
This attempt to directly link the Palestinian

issue to political turmoil elsewhere in the
region and the world is faulty on a number of
grounds:
1) IT IS DOUBTFUL just how much the Arab
and Moslem countries care about the
Palestinians; it has appeared that these coun-
tries have used the Palestinian issue as nothing
more than a political tool against Israel.
The bottom line of the Arab-Israeli conflict,
which antedates the Palestinian question,
remains: no Arab nation except Egypt has
even recognized Israel's right to exist. To
think, as Prosterman does, that even the Arab-
Israeli conflict will be resolved-let alone the
other compounding crisis to which he ad-
dresses himself-if Israel changes her
positions vis-a-vis the Palestinians, contradicts
the history and nature of the Arab-Israeli con-
flict.
2) Prosterman's proposal to "force" Israel to
change her policies to "win the confidence of
the more stable Muslim and Arab nations"
assumes that there are such stable countries.
He also assumes that such countries are willing
to support American interests in the region.
Yet such assumptions contradict what he him-
self recognizes : the instability of political
regimes in the region and traditional distrust of
American imperialism.
3) PROSTERMAN REACHES his conclusion
in terms of coldly calculated "national and
world security interests." I assume that he is
referring to American access to Middle East oil
and the ability to counteract Soviet aggression.
According to Prosterman, Israel stands in the
way of these vital interests. What is implied is
that by her "arrogant refusal to deal seriously
with the Palestine problem," Israel not only

By Jeffrey Colman
jeopardizes American access to oil-the old
argument-but also inhibits American ability
to contain the Soviets-the new argument.
It is true that Prosterman concedes that "the
defense of Israel should remain an important
American policy consideration" but only so
long as it does not block support from Arab
countries.
The similarity to John Connally's argument,
though perhaps unintentional, is striking.
Genuine threats to Israel's security are forgot-
ten. The stable nature of the Israeli gover-
nment is deemed of little importance. The fact
that Israel is the only democracy in the region
with political goals compatable with the U.S. is
ignored.
BUT EVEN IF Prosterman ignores these
facts and limits his concern to what Israel can
do for the United States, his argument is still
faulty.
Hisyunqualified statement that "Israel ob-
viously can not be counted on to defend the
Persian Gulf and Arabian Sea countries in a
time of crisis" is totally untrue. Israel already
provides services to American armed forces
and her sophistcated air and naval facilities
could be essential for the United States in the
event of a military emergency in the region.
The reliability of Israel as an ally vital to
American strategic interests cannot be denied.
It is true that Israel will not serve as America's
proxy in the Middle East, but just whom

Prosterman expects to defend American and
world security interests in the region is
unknown.
Prosterman tops off his argument in the last
paragraph of his artice with the classic in-
sinuation about a "powerful lobby" that con-
trols American Middle East policy. According
to this old and unsubstantiated conspiracy
theory, American policy-making has been
dominated by pro-Israel lobbyists who, in
Prosterman's own words, "jeopardize national
and world security." Of course, he leaves this
assertion dangling as nothing more than an in-
nuendo. Just what "powerful lobby" is
Prosterman referring to? the American
Jewish copmunity? a Zionist conspiracy? the
U.S. Senate?
PERSONALLY, I AM tired of hearing this
familiar and dangerous argument that has
been used for years to explain and change
America's commitment to the Jewish State. By
using the "powerful lobby" argument,
Prosterman is confirming his prejudiced views
which were obvious in his previous articles on
regional affairs.
As one who feels strongly that the Palestinian
problem needs to be solved, I find that
Prosterman's argument both fallacious and un-
constructive. By placing the burden on solving
the Palestinian problem solely on Israel's
shoulders, he is ignoring the fact that other key
Arab states, particularly Jordan, have not been
willing to join autonomy negotiations, He also
is ignoring the need for a moderate and
legitimate Palestinian leadership to assume

the responsibilities of autonomy. Certainly the
terrorist Palestine Liberation Organization
which is aligned with the Soviet Union can not
be expected to fill this role.
By linking the Palestinian problemt
America's ability to respond to threatening
events elsewhere in Central Asia, Prosterman
is implying a trade-off that does not have to
exist: America's commitment to Israel vs.
American influence in the Arab world. By put-
ting American choices into such dichotomous
terms, he is urging that unless Israel changes
her policies to the liking of America's potential
allies in the Arab and Moslem world, the U.S.
should shift its policies away from Israel
(that's, called blackmail). Such a propos4
assumes, perhaps foolishly, that the Moslem
world wants to align itself with the United
States.
Prosterman's argument is unconstructive
because it provides a panacea to a series of
conflicts that are monumental in scope.
Dealing with the Palestinian issue is a com-
plicated task within itself. To believe that
Eastern and Central Asia will be a more
peaceful and friendly region by merely solving
the Palestinian problem puts ourselves under a
false illusion. In view of the Soviet occupati4
of Afghanistan, the American hostage crisis in
Iran, the rise of ethnic nationalism among
Kurds, Baluchis, and others, the revival of
Islamic fundamentalism, and the upsurge of
traditional resentment of the West, there are no
quick-fix solutions.
Jeffrey Colman is an LSA senior major-
ing in political science and history.

I

N

4

m

Ninety Years of Editorial Freedom
Vol. XC, No. 107 News Phone: 764-0552
Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan
Carter's registration plan

I

-TNrluK x UP P4uG tr
JUST MB A 6 GC 6om
U"g" j

I

1

FTER DAYS of rumors,
President Carter has finally an-
nounced that he wants both men and
women to register for a military draft.
Further, he proposed yesterday that
youth aged 19 and 20 be required to
register now, and 18 year-olds in a
year.
Altholgh the mood of the country as
a whole is clearly in favor of resum-
ption of registration at this time, it is
A nevertheless a bad idea. Not only will
9 registration accelerate the Cold War
fever currently sweeping the country,
it will also alienate those Americans
who will have to register.
It seems to be precisely this second
consideration that Carter is addressing

by calling for the registration of only 19
and 20 year olds. Whatever his true
motives, it appears a terribly shrewd
political move-now only a very small
percentage of voters will be alienated.
If there must be registration for a
draft-and this seems
inevitable-women should without
question be included in that
registration. Indications from
Congress-which must approve any
plan to register women-are that Car-
ter's proposal might be turned down.
This would be an unthinkable, sexist
mistake, for such a rejection of Car-
ter's plan would ,indicate that women
are not equal to men.

0/7r'

LETTERS TO THE DAILY:
Jakubowski clarifies his statemets

6

I

WIQB change unfortunate
I F THE MAIL the Daily has received path offerings. Airplay was given 1
is any indication, WIQB radio's such local artists as Steve Nardell
format change-from free form, and John Mooney, and at night, jaz
album-oriented rock to soft and addicts could get a midnight fix.
mellow-is an extremely unpopular But advertisers pay the bills for mos
one among students. At any rate, if the media, and WIQB's new owners wan
majority likes the new format, they're ted to cater to the interests of loca
too "mellowed out" to come forward merchants. After aH, the owner
and say so. argued, the merchants "deserve
Before WIQB joined the dozens of that."
other automated stations, local Unfortunately, the market is floode
listeners could turn to FM 103 to hear with just the kind of predictable, dul
an agreeable variety of off-the-beaten- stations that WIQB has become.

to
a
z
st
n-
al
rs
d
d
1l1

To the Daily:
In the Daily of February 7th,
Mark Niziak professed that I was
ignorant of the facts when I made'
my recent comments regarding
Stacy Stephanopoulos and Leslie
Morris. Mr. Niziak, unfor-
tunately, misunderstood what I
espoused when I said that Ms.
Morris "wants anshot at the
mayor's job, and so she is
building a loyal Second Ward
organization that can pull out the
student vote sometime in the
future." Hence, I feel a detailed
explanation is necessary.
I am fully aware that Ms.
Stephanopoulos decided to run on
her own, and that the pressures of
running a campaign are too great
a burden for a junior at the
University of Michigan to under-
take just to be someone else's
stalking horse. What I meant was
that after Ms. Stephanopoulos
decided to run on her own, Ms.
Morris seized upon the oppor-
tunity and endorsed her for two
reasons; by endorsing Ms.
Stephanopoulos and working to
get her elected to the City Coun-
cil, she was covering herself by
eliminating the possibility of a
student challenging her in next
years primary; also, if Ms.
Stephanopoulos were to prove to
be successful this year, Ms.
Morris would then have a student
organization ready and willing to
work for her when she decides to
challenge for the mayor's
position. These facts are well
known and accepted by many
Democratic leaders in the city of
Ann Arbor. I didn't intend to im-
ply that Stacy Stephanopoulos
was a stalking horse for Ms.
Morris, for I believe that she is
very sincere, albeit premature,
in her attempt at acquiring a seat
on the City Council.
Mr. Niziak also charged that
Earl Greene was not running a
fair campaign, and that I.was one
of Mr. Greene's "hounds."
People that live in glass houses
shouldn't throw stones, Mr.
Niziak. For the Stephanopoulos
campaign staff has run a very
dirty and immature campaign.
To prove my point, I will cite two
examples from the campaign.
Just last week, a woman
phoned Earl Greene'e headquar-

linked to Stacy's staff, I ask you:
Who could it have been?
My second example dates back
to therbeginning of the campaign.
In certain sections of the ward,
Stacy went door to door
professing to be a representative
of a senior citizens group, and,
upon gaining admittance into the
houses, she thenturned the con-
versation to politics with the in-
tention of gaining support for
herself.
These are just a couple of the
many examples I could give.
There are many more where
these came from, and if Mr.
Niziak wishes to hear them, he
need only to inquire to the Daily
and I would be more than happy
to accommodate him. But I must
ask the people of Ann Arbor one
question; Is this the type of
woman you want on your City
Council?
-Ken Jakubowski
Feb.7
No-war poem
To the Daily:
I have written the following
anti-war poem for the 1980s, en-
titled "Stop the War Before It
Starts."
Stop the war before it starts,
The Joint Chiefs of Staff are
all old farts;
When I come to meet the
judgment day,
No damn commie 's going
to blow me away.
I don't care about that stupid
oil,
All day long I'd rather toil.
Chop me some wood for my
fire,
Get other energy fror a
hydro wire,
Heat my water with the sun,
Use a down blanket when day
is done.
So if you are thinking about
going to war,
ask yourself: "What the hell
for?"
-Charles Hallock
Feb. 1
Greene camp
To the Daily:

swering. Rather than come for-
ward with substantiation of the
number of supporters Greene
has, Bokovoy has instead twisted
the issue, trying to make it seem
as if the charge itself is somehow
dishonest. Once more then, Mr.
Greene, Mr. Bokovoy: who are
your workers?
Even more upsetting to respon-
sible citizens was the totally
spurious charge by Ken
Jakubowski that the
Stephanopoulos campaign is a
front for a future 'Morris for
Mayor' drive. Leslie Morris is in-
volved in the campaign-as an
issues advisor. Stacy
Stephanopoulos decided to run
for Council on her own, and setrup
the organization on her own. It is
not for sale or rent to any other
candidates. Ms. Morris is a com-
petent Council member, and I
would not oppose any future am-
bitions she might or might not
have, but to claim that Stacy is
somehow her puppet is a lie, and
Mr. Jakubowski could have
checked his facts by calling
anyone in the campaign, or Ms.
Morris. Perhaps someone ought
to remind Mr. Jakubowski, who
is ostensibly 'angry' that
Stephanopoulos is running, that.
people get angrier at people who
spread malicious rumors than
they do at people who participate
in the Democratic process by
running for office, as is their
right.
-Marc Abrams
Senior Advisor,
Stephanopoulos
for City Council
Feb. 6
Free speech
To the Daily:
The latest attack on free speech
by the Ann Arbor Committee for
a New Jewish Agenda is noted
with regret. No. American com-
mitted to free speech can afford
to allow these attacks on our civil
liberties to go unchallenged. The
Viewpoint Lecture Series has had
many speakers of diverse views.
Rabbi Kahane has a right to
speak. He has a point of view.
The fact is the "New Agenda"

Blast WIQB

6

Ston eggs
To the Daily:
I think it was wise to print both
Prof. Close's letter (concerning
the Soviet invasion
Afghanistan; Daily, Jan. 22) an
Mr. Esper's (Daily, Jan. 22).
Personally, I side with Prof.
Close; Russia's "protection" of
Afghanistan resembles the Soviet
treatment of the Letts, the
Czechs, the Poles, the East Ger-
mans. It is a rather crushing kind
of support, like that of the tender-
hearted elephant who sees some
unattended ostrich eggs. "Poor
motherless orphans," she claim
as she sits on them to hatch them.
As for the Young Socialists, I
would like to hear their views on
-the Sakharov case; that might be
the funniest letter yet.
-PrestonSlosson,
professor emeritus
Jan. 26

J

To the Daily:
Ann Arbor lost a large portion
of its musical identity last Satur-
day. It's appalling that so many
people either failed to notice or
even worse, simply let it pass.
WIQ.B was Ann Arbor's own. It
was intelligent, unpretentious,
and committed to new music.
Where are we as a culture when
computer-chosen 'mellow' or
familiar sounds from any of the
last 15 years will attract "five
times the listeners" (according
to station owner Ernie Wynn) as
local shows featuring current
albums and local requests? Are
we all ready to trade the potential
transcendence of the live, human
voice for the unreal, automated
certainty of "more music?"
This ain't no disco. These are
the 198os. The McDonald's life
encroaches everywhere but radio
must be more responsible
because it sells feelings. At the
very least, the potential for mass
recognition of lowest common
denominator feelings must never
outweigh the challenge of making
new feelings known among
rnnle whoncare.

y
f
,, ,
,
: ,

ppp -

' "

..

Back to Top

© 2021 Regents of the University of Michigan