0 Page 4-Thursday, March 13, 1980-The Michigan Daily An Israeli examines the Palestinian problem International conflicts in general and the Arab-Israeli conflict in particular entail a sub- tle and delicate balance between emotions and facts; between 'hot' ideologies and beliefs and 'cold-blooded' calculations. Students of such conflicts must be aware of the existence of this balance, and further, must be careful not to make inferences on the basis of a single element in that balance. It is particularly disturbing when emotions become the prime guide for empirical analysis. The article by H. Scott Prosterman (Daily, Feb. 29) offers an excellent example for such a tendency toward emotional bias. I would like to respond to a number of arguments raised in this article. Prosterman says he is qualified to' make judgments by virtue of his being a member of a family that has many survivors of the Holocaust. Well, Mr. Prosterman, here are my "qualifications" to answer you. I am an officer in the Israeli reserve forces. I have fought in two Arab-Israeli wars as well as in numerous incidents against Palestinian guerrillas bet- ween these wars. Many of my friends are the victims of these wars. Also, I come from a family that has many survivors as well as non-survivors of the Holocaust. Does this personal record make me more or less qualified to make a diametrically opposed judgment to that which you have made? I believe that it does not. Neither your family's record nor mine makes us authorities on Mideast Politics. The sole basis for making authoritative judgments is our relative familiarity with the realities of the conflict, with its participants, and with their values, fears and expectations. There are, as Mr. Prosterman suggests, similarities between the history of the Palestinian people and that of the Zionist movement. Both peoples have been a target for oppression by the ruling elites of the countries in which they were dispersed; both managed to maintain their' national identity in spite of this oppression, and managed to avoid complete in- tegration into their host societies. Moreover, both peoples succeeded in developing a high level of education and political participation which far exceeded their numerical proportion in the host societies. BUT HE WHO points out these striking similarities should also be aware of the crucial differences between the two national movements. Two major elements come to mind in this respect. First, Zionism has never-even in its most extreme ver- sions-established an ideology whose major theme calls for the liquidation of another people or nation-state. The PLO, on the other hand, from the time it was formally established in 1964 to the very present, is explicitly loyal to its national charter which calls for the liquidation of the state of Israel. Its ideology is based on the idea of politicide if not genocide. The second crucial difference, between these two movements concerns political realism. Zionists have always viewed politics as the drt of the possible. Thus they learned to give up ancient dreams in exchange for the limited op- portunities offered by international reality. Perhaps the most important decision in Zionist history was the decision to accept the plan for By Zeev Maoz the partition of Palestine in 1947; to settle for a state the size of New Jersey, rather than trying to accomplish the unrealistic goal of getting the whole of Palestine (the eastern bank of the Jor- dan included). It has been the Palestiflian national movement which has consistently and fiercely rejected the idea of partition of Palestine into two states. Thus if anyone is to be blamed for the misery and suffering of the Palestinian people, it is not the Zionists, not even the Arab states, but the Palestinians themselves. But Mr. Prosterman claims that the PLO is undergoing a rapid process of moderation. His evidence? Well, here we have a slight problem. H4is only source is a set of impressionistic remarks made by an American professor, who happens to be an expert in the French language, and not in Middle Eastern politics. Although there is some evidence regarding the shift in tactical objectives of individual Palestinian leaders, the bulk of it still points in the other direction. Said Hamami, the former PLO representative in London who met with Israeli "doves" was assassinated by his own "comrades." Issam Sartawi, who was invited by Bruno Kreiski to accept the "Kreiski Peace Prize" together with a Zionist doveish leader, Aryeh Eliav, was called to Beirut and charged , with treason. If a decision to accept the two- state solution has been made, why has it not been publicized? WE ARE TOLD by Mr. Prosterman that Arafat cannot officially recognize Israeli's right to exist because it is the only bargaining chip the PLO has. But consider for a moment the following scenario. The PLO accepts a modified version of U.N. Security Council Rtesolution 242, which includes the Palestinian' right of self-determination (incidentally, such an offer was made by the U.S. back in 1977, but was rejected by the PLO Central Committee). The U.S., according to its stated policy, would be the first to officially recognize the PLO, and the rest of the world-i.e., those nations which have not yet done so formally-would soon follow. The pressure on Israel-political and economic-would be tremendous. Even the most intransigent state (and Israel is not) would have to back off in the face of such a pressure. The result? A two-state solution would be clearly imnposed on Israel. The Palestinians would get their state and Israel would get its security. Why does such a scenario not take place? The answer is quite simple. The PLO is not a monolithic unit. It is a loose and shaky coalition of hawks and doves; of extremist militants who view even the thought of a two-state solution as treason of the worst kind (e.g., the PFLP, Hawatma, Jibril), and moderates like Hamami (may he rest in peace) and Sartawi. Regardless of Arafat's own positions, he has to hold the delicate balance between the fac- tions and prevent its complete disintegration. The minute that Arafat recognizes Israel's right to exist and/or decides to sign a peace treaty with the "Zionist state" will be the PLO's last minute as an umbrella organization of the various factions. The Palestinians nee their own Ben-Gurion. Arafat has not fit the b so far. This is indeed a vicious circle. The PLO will not accept Israel's right to exist as long as Israel does not declare willingness to negotiate. Israel will not recognize the PLO or negotiate with it as long as the PLO denies Israel's right to exist. Which.of the parties should be the first to jump? I believe that it is basically up to the PL Given its maximalist ideology, given the s fering of its people and given the fact that some influential Israelis feel quite comfortable with the present status quo, the ball is in the PLO's court. The PLO has to realize that Sadat got the Sinai only after he had made his historic trip to Jerusalem. If Arafat is indeed the kind of moderate and pragmatic leader portrayed by Mr. Prosterman, then he should be the one to make the spiritual-if not the physical-trip to Jerusalem. It is time the PLO stopped blami* other nations for "selling out the Palestinian cause" and took their destiny in their own han- ds, if they ever want to have their own homeland. Zeev Maoz is a graduate student in the political science department. He is engaged in research on the Egyptian-Israeli peace process. p -3-. LA Feiffer GhIe Stcigan :a'I Ninetv Years (f Editorial Freedom UKF 14l iFC i5 t 7ROtdH pwrNv Vol. XC, No. 127 News Phone: 764-0552 COI-tAP Nr2 p~F615 A W.O ure t5 6WW5~; @l t x(j) B G G68OL 4 t - FN65 a LFOT(IJTY t Edited and managed by students at the University of Michigan Boycott classes tomorrow b g I~f 1 i '..z -a9 tAttE I T'S NOT EASY to get national attention for any cause these days, what with skilled media consultants employed by dozens of different per- sonalities and competing interest groups. Perhaps the only way, short of violent alternatives, that students can get a share of attention from national policy makers is by massive demon- strations of alliance with a particular point of view. The class boycott scheduled tomorrow to protest President Carter's registration plan provides just such an opportunity. Some members of the University community have answered those calling for the boycott with thek argument that war fever ought to be met with attendance to studies, not by skipping classes. Not unreasonably, these boycott opponents argue that the, nation's growing militarism can best be answered with informed resistance. The planners of the boycott (Washtenaw Committee Against Registration for the Draft and the Public Interest Research Group in Michigan, among other groups) have replied to the opponents' argument quite effectively: They have linked the boycott to a three-day teach-in featuring workshops on all aspects of war resistance and speakers ranging from local anti-war figures to Ramsey Clark, former U.S. attorney general. The large demonstration on the Diag January 30 attracted cameras from Detroit, as well as play on network news programs and in major metropolitan newspapers. It is likely that an organized boycott, where students are not only expressing- discontent, but actually making a sacrifice in support of the new anti-war cause, would be even more highly publicized. Perhaps the President and his cabinet can be made to see that draft-age Americans are simply not going to sit still for conscription this time around. Surprisingly, Congress has also not gone along with the administration's . call to arms. The President's proposal has met with stiff resistance in the House, and on Tuesday, the Senate greeted the proposal with similar skep- ticism. It's good to have friends in high places. -V (F E't MPOiSt - P GIMP A6 '5 Q soEj11 ON - O- vH - W~- ThM fOI~T NA PTO rn f ,Ie 4 e mo iatomf .ow LETTERS TO THE DAILY: MSA president explains finances 0 Higgin: S, :-r-- RO TA DM ('{ J! NOR1lIVyFS'ER i . s : t _ ' , . , , l " I , f , .. , ....~ ., , ,, To the Daily: I have been disturbed as of late concerning the recent right side column by David Meyer ("Go the easy way-take MSA," Daily, Feb. 28). In particular, there are several factual errors. However, there are several sections of the column which border that gray area between truth and falsity. It is not my intention to create fur- ther controversy over this matter but I feel compelled to inform the public of what I believe to be in- cumpetent journalism. First and foremost are the allegations by Mr. Meyer con- cerning the financial accoun- tability of the Michigan Student Assembly (MSA). If Mr. Meyer had checked his facts first, he would have found that my trip to Washington, D.C. cost the studen- ts $350 rather than the $600 he alleged. Also he intimated that MSA comes up with money only when they need it and not for- student organizations. There again if Mr. Meyer had checked further, he would have found out that MSA budgeted money in Sep- tember for travel to appropriate conferences. Why did he wait until the trips had been taken to object? MSA, as the official voice of students on this campus, has a responsibility to increase their effectiveness and to strengthen the role of students in the broad range of policy making, local and national. The statement by Mr. Meyer concerning the funding of student organizations,f"MSA decided it could not afford to finance half of the almost $30,000 requested" is also grossly misleading. The Budget Priorities Committee did not base their allocations on whether or not' MSA could afford it (although ultimately that will be a criteria). Rather, the decisions to fund half of the amount requested were based on criteria of total impact to the student body, financial need of the organizations, ability to raise other funds, and other factors which were particular to the various groups. As another mat- ter of fact, our travel budget this year was less than in many past years, including those when student organizations got much less money in allocations. In another aspect concerning the trip by Michigan students to the American Student Association conference in Washington, D.C., Mr. Meyer claims that a former MSA mem- ber attended. First of all, Brad Canale was not a fdrmer member at the time of the trip as he was still Treasurer, and he is now an officer of the Assembly, as the Economic Affairs Coordinator. The implication of the article was that he no longer had anything to do with the Assembly, which as I have pointed out is totally un- founded. Another statement of Mr. Meyer's which I find personally repugnant, misleading, and un- true is, "MSA members, especially those of us who got to see the Lincoln Memorial and the Washington Monument, will con- tend that student interests are best served by flying members about the nation to participate in organizational meetings." Mr. Meyer is implying that the pur- pose of the trips was sightseeing and I find this rather obnoxious. In my case he never even talked to me about my activities (as if I had time to sightsee) and I don't believe he asked the others about their free time activities, either. I uphold the right of Mr. Meyer to disagree with priorities and financial allocations of the Assembly. However, as a mem- ber of the staff of the Michigan Daily, I earnestly expect his columns to be factually correct and free from misleading in- nuendoes which only tend to More Proste To The Daily: The column in the Feb. 29 issue of the Daily titled "Myths abun- dant about Israel, PLO, and Arafat" by H. Scott Prosterman perpetuates many myths that a lot of Americans have about the Middle East. One of these myths is that Yassir Arafat is the core of the problem. In America all problems have a core and if you get to the core of the problem, you have the solution. The problems in the Middle East are so complex and have roots that go back centuries, so to claim that appeasing Yassi r Arafat will provide a solution is as ludicrous as it is dangerous. The best that can be hoped for is a de- escalation of the present situation until it is tolerable to both sides. The second myth perpetuated by Mr. Prosterman is the moderation of the PLO. In doing so, he shows his ignorance of the Arab and Middle Eastern psyche. One of the key motivations in the Middle East is revenge and while it seems irrational to us, it is a shake the truth from the people who matter the most, the studen- ts of the University. I hope that in the future when Daily writers embark on the i sometimes seemingly spiteful: task of criticizing the Michigan Student Assembly they take the oppo . tunity to speak to me. Not on during Mr. Meyer's "research" for his column did he talk to me about the Assembly activities. As president I have a responsibility as spokesman for the student body and I fully intend to utilize that role whenever possible. -James M. Alland, President, Michigan Student Assembly March 11 ?rman myths survivors of the Holocaust" I claim it is Mr. Prosterman that has forgotten the major lesson of the Holocaust. That lesson is no matter how comfortable a Jew feels in a country that is not his own (including that haven of freedom, .America) he is still, Jew and will always be recognized as one. No other group in history has the record of persecution that the Jews have and when the persecutors come again they will come for Mr. Prosterman also. To be a Jew is to be a Zionist and those Americans who "vocally disassociate themselves from the Zionist ,movement" are trying in vain to renounce their Judais and haven't learned the lesson o pre-World War II Germany. I fear that because Americans are impatient they will try to swing public opinion towards ap- peasement of the PLO, as public opinion in England was originally for appeasement of Hitler. Columns such as Mr. Proster- man's are proof of this impatien- raT nannln ..n ilri h-a rnnra WAMW4 i i ii / j j / ./ i / / Draft quotes clarified To the Daily: February 24's Sunday Magazine article on the draft quoted me as having the inter- nally inconsistent position of sup- tant not to put the jargon of the government into the mouths of dissidents. My personal ambivalence toward draft counseling alluded ~Aff/ m