4 OPINION Wednesday, September 28, 1988 Page 4 The Michigan Daily 4 Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan Misquoted and harassed Vol. IC No. 15 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board. All other cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. Israel supporters refuse to accept the current PLO position: Coveting a Covenant W HY DO SUPPORTERS of Israel waste time calling for the retraction of the National Covenant of the Palestine Liberation Organization? The answer is clear: the P.L.O. seeks to negotiate and the Israeli government rejects peace. This reality boggles minds acclimated to the soothing balm of innocent Zion- ism, and the Covenant provides an old stone to hurl. New organizations write charters to provide a framework for group unity. Over time, as a group changes to meet new demands, a charter may no longer reflect accurately its group's aspirations or mentality. The National Covenant of the P.L.O. is one such document. At its inception in 1964, the Covenant united the young and diverse factions of the P.L.O. and gave it an organizational identity and relationship to the Palestinian people. The Covenant talks about the liberation of Palestine from Zionism, which it defines as an aggressive colonial movement. Its main concern was to unify Palestinian society on all levels. The Covenant, ratified in 1968 fol- lowing the occupation of the West Bank and Gaza, has long been out- dated. The Palestinian people are no longer disorganized and isolated from the world. Over 100 countries recog- nize the P.L.O., which has a diplo- matic network spanning the globe and observer status in the United Nations. As the organization matured, it devel- oped new proposals for peace, varying from the plan for a secular democratic state, to some sort of Palestinian-Jor- danian configuration, to the position of two neighboring states - a proposal agreed upon by all factions at the Palestine National Council in Algiers in 1987 (which saw the P.L.O. united for the first time since the Lebanon War of 1982). Yasser Arafat has called for "dialogue with all Jews, any Jew in Israel, or elsewhere, who recognizes our national rights," (In These Times, 8/5-18/87, p. 11). The P.L.O.snow seeks to establish a state "in every part of the country which will be liberated from or vacated by Israel" in the context of all United Nations resolutions on the Palestinian- Israeli conflict (emphasis added). Such a position entails the acceptance of the state of Israel and its right to secure borders, and the same for the Palestinian people. In the midst of the uprising and in- creasing Israeli brutality in the territo- ries, another document has appeared. A P.L.O. pamphlet at the Algiers summit of June 7, 1988 described the Pales- tinian desire for "lasting peace and se- curity for themselves and the Israelis because no one can build his own fu- ture on the ruins of another's. We are confident that this desire and this real- ization are shared by all but an in- significant minority in Israel," and went on to call for direct negotiations to attain peace (New York Times, June 23, 1988). Here clearly is an opening for peace, yet the Israeli government dismisses P.L.O. overtures and in fact has outlawed discussions between any Israeli and representatives of the P.L.O. In the meantime, over 400 Palestini- ans have died in the occupied territo- ries, including at 13-year old girl shot in the head with a rubber bullet. If sup- porters of Israel really want peace and justice, they should stop dusting off the Covenant and urge Israel to go to the negotiating tables. To do otherwise is to be deliberately obtuse. By Ali Mazrui There are people who want the United States to be a less open society than Is- rael. Among them is Marc J. Berman, President of the Union of Students for Is- rael. The sort of issues I raised in my lec- ture in the Rackham Amphitheater on Sept. 22 are debated almost daily on Israeli campuses, Israeli media and the wider arena of public discourse in the Jewish state. I borrowed the very term "Judeo- Nazism" from the Israeli scholar, Profes- sor Yeshayahu Leibovitz of the Hebrew University and editor of the Encyclopedia Hebraica. And yet people like Mr. Berman want to stifle debate on this campus about these issues. Why should the University of Michigan be a less open and tolerant campus than the Hebrew University in Jerusalem or the University of Tel Aviv? Mr. Berman's second sin is of distorting what I said. A number of students tape- recorded my lecture. So Mr. Berman should have no difficulty listening to it again. I went to great lengths in the lec- ture to point out that Israel was an open society with a democratic system, and that the fascist element was a minority. But my lecture was a warning to those who love Israel that the society was getting more racist and repressive. Just because American television no longer carries nightly reports of Israeli killings in the occupied territories should not be taken to. mean that the killings and maimings have stopped. On the contrary one of the worst cases of violence has occurred since my lecture. Killings occurred on Monday, Sept. 26, 1988 (ABC Newscast with Peter Jennings, 9/26/88). Ali Mazrui is a Professor of Political Science and of Afro-american and African Studies at the University. My concern is that there seems to be less outrage in public opinion in Israel about these atrocities than there used to be in British public opinion when the Em- pire's armed forces went out of hand in colonial Kenya where I grew up. Israel has become an imperial power at a time when the rest of the Western world is disengag- ing from its imperial past. On the evi- dence of Israeli performance so far, if I was given a choice between British imperial- ism and Israeli occupation I would chose the British all over again. The day after my public lecture in Rackham a student turned up in my regu- lar class. She introduced herself as Jewish Berman are quite wrong in the charge that I am anti-Semitic. I have taught and be- friended generations of Jewish students in the United States, some of whom are still in correspondence with me. They have been perfectly aware of my position on Israel. It is an issue which has often fea- tured in my classes. We have debated and disagreed in a civilized manner, which is what a university should be all about - not just in Tel Aviv but also in Ann Ar- bor, Michigan. I am pleased to report that at the end of the class on Friday, September 23rd, after the confrontation with the intruder, three 'Why should the University of Michigan be a less open and tolerant campus than the Hebrew University in Jerusalem or the University of Tel Aviv?' -Ali Mazrui, Professor of Political Science and belonging to a Jewish organization. She was not a member of my class. She stood up and read out a statement clearly intended to intimidate me. She accused me of being a dangerous presence on this campus and promised to mobilize Jewish organizations to have me removed. I de- scribed her behavior as precisely the kind that could lead to "fascism." And fascism was one of the themes of my Rackham lecture to which she was objecting. Fortunately the majority of Jewish or- ganizations in this country are too sensi- ble and too democratic to go around intimidating professors who have posi- tions about Israel different from their own. That intruder in my class and Mr. Marc Jewish students came to speak to me. The disassociated themselves from what the intruder-had said to me. They reaffirmed that they had heard nothing from me which was anti-Semitic. They recognized the distinction between anti-Semitism and strong criticism of Israel. I was a critic of the policies of Israel but not remotely an ill-wisher of the Jewish people. I had never lost faith in the ultimate fairness of my students. Those three who came to re- assure me at the end of the class helped to strengthen my confidence. Israelis are entitled to have free and open universities. So too are the American people. I hope Mr. Berman will reconsider his ominous attitudes. Wasserman W"VE sfuDlev I% V-'FlrecZS OF ReCEM HARM.. (KTASTROHES - Aa 0046 t ~ETT~ t4I MUTMD %c- KuicME IN JV XMCo 0 a- oug ANA4LY% IDltmm~s -TFV~iEY To SUPZ IviG 1'TIS . t-S CI pO oaI ---r 70o0 -)P. K 2 kio unstz NOT To gE Qoot Q f r ~ 3 . i rT- -- - t t 4 Save abortion rights FOR OVER A MONTH, Shawn Lewis was denied control of her body. The court injunction that handed down this decision as well as an upcoming elec- toral proposal represent two more in a long series of threats to women's re- productive rights. Lewis is now three months pregnant. On Aug. 9th, Lewis' estranged hus- band obtained an injunction from the Genesee County Circuit Court barring her from choosing an abortion until he could appeal to the U.S. Supreme Court. The case went to the Michigan Supreme Court which ruled last Thursday that Shawn Lewis had the right to choose an abortion - but allowed the injunction to stand. Finally on Monday, the U.S. Supreme Court wisely denied an emer- gency request by her husband and anti- abortion activists to extend the injunc- tion during the appeal. Since the risks of abortion escalate as the pregnancy continues, the delay imposed on Shawn Lewis by her husband and anti- abortion activists constitutes a threat to her health and perhaps endangers her future fertility. No one has the right to interfere with Shawn Lewis' right to choose. Unfor- tunately, Shawn Lewis' rights are not the only ones in danger. This case has the potential to restrict the 1973 Roe vs. Wade decision that legalized abortion in the United States. Yet another threat to women's repro- ductive rights comes from Proposition A which appears on the November ballot that, if passed, would cut off Medicaid funding for abortion. By putting abortions out of their financial grasp, this legislation would effectively discriminate against women in lower income brackets. Michigan is one of only 14 states that still funds abortions through Medicaid. In the other states, 75 percent of women who choose abortion but are on Medicaid find other ways to pay for their abortions, but the remaining quarter are forced to carry their preg- nancies to term. These pregnancies end up costing the state ten times what it would have cost to fund their abortions through Medicaid payments. Proponents of Proposition A claim that ending Medicaid-funded abortions would save tax money. This is untrue. Pre-natal, delivery, and newborn care cost more - not to mention the added burden on the Social Security system when these women and their children depend on Medicaid and other social welfare programs. But even these eco- nomic arguments are trivial compared to the very real horror of forced parent- hood. Freedom of choice means little to women unable to fund their own reproductive choices. Proposition A also fails to provide for women who have become pregnant through rape or incest. It fails to pro- vide for women who contract AIDS and would be forced to watch their children be consumed by the disease while the state supports the financial burden of their deaths. Lewis vs. Lewis and Proposition A are two steps of a gradual process spearheaded by anti-abortion activists to erode women's reproductive rights. These steps are not inevitable. Those concerned must take action now. Planned Parenthood is organizing a "No on A" campaign. To volunteer, call 973-0710. Women's By Mindy Friedman For the past week I have been following the comments made in response to Nikita Buckhoy's and Elizabeth Paige's editorial regarding the dispersement of douches into first year women students' "gift packs" or "goody boxes." Before I begin, I would just like to express my outrage at the lack of sensitivity on the part of those MSA representatives who responded to this edi- torial. Furthermore, I would like to place a special emphasis on my distaste for Richard A. Shanks "letter to the editor." In this letter, he declared the issue of douches as offensive to women as unimportant and unfeminist. Instead, he suggested that we should abandon further discussion of this issue in favor of other causes which are more "real" and pertinent to women's lives. Frankly, it never ceases to amaze me that despite feminism's goal of empower- ing women to speak for themselves, this man has not only deemed it appropriate to appoint himself spokesperson for an entire Mindy Friedman is a senior in LSA women's studies and political science. issues tr movement of women, but to also promote the age-old stereotype that women are irrational and over-emotional (and in this case have "oversensitized an unimportant issue"). I guess I was unaware that men now had the privilege of setting the agenda as to what is an appropriate "feminist is- sue" and what is not. In essence, Robert Shanks has trivialized what is not only an appropriate but central issue to women's lives - their bodies. As both Nikita and Elizabeth noted, women have been historically oppressed by a commercial health care market which promotes the sale of items such as douches. These products are meant to con- vince women that their bodies are dirty and something to be ashamed of. I applaud them for going to MSA to educate those rather unenlightened representatives as to how insulting douches really are. These were not women who were upset that we [MSA] did not instantaneously concede to their demands, but rather gutsy women who were trying to make their grievances known. Their editorial was simply a pro- ductive outlet for their outrage. MSA's response, in turn, was one of ignorance and not as Robert Bell put it, "a ivialized case of not being able to please everyone all of the time." As a Resident Advisor, 4 woman ,and as a feminist, I am appalled at the level of ignorance and insensitivity being displayed around this issue. Our goal as members of the university com- munity should not only be to fight those forms of sexism (or other types of dis- crimination for that matter) which are readily apparent, but also those inadver. tent, subtle forms of oppression which penetrate our daily lives here at Michigan. MSA made a mistake - whether it was intentional or not is not the issue. How- ever, rather than offer an apology or better yet make an effort to educate themselves about the politics surrounding the ex- ploitation of women's bodies, they instead chose 'to harass two women whose inten- tion was obviously to improve, not belit- tle the services of their organization. On a more informal note, as a person who has made a commitment to change the quality of women's lives here in the residence halls, I can honestly say I would be embarrassed if such an item were in my "goody box." Thanks, but no thanks folks - that's not a "gift" I want for myself or for my residents. :; ;}%"%%%:r:i ;:: ;%:;{%%}%:':;%:{%:;;::%: %%:;;:%S %%%%::::%%::::Yt:%c%:%%::: :%%::r%."%%%i<:::%e::%:: Ii t:C:::: }%:: ?>;t::: %,^, r: Imperial flag students, I went to the Diag on Friday, Sept. 19, to discover stands tor repression To the Daily: This year's University of Michigan Festifall was peace- ful ans uneventful, to my dis- appointment. No one seemed to have noticed a particular in- sulting object which was dis- played at the Festifall, the Im- perial Japanese flag. A field of the various organizations at the University. When I arrived at the Asian Studies Department's table, I was astounded to see the Imperial Japanese flag on the table. I tried to explain to the person at the table the in- appropriateness of showing the flag in such a context as Festi- fall, and I implored him to re- move it. In response, the per- son said he understood what I was saying but he was only organizations at the Diag had there been a parallel display of the Nazi flag, with the infa- mous swastika, at the German Club's table. About an hour later I re- turned to the Asian Studies table and the person in charge had returned. I again explained the coarseness of the display and asked that it be removed. The person in charge had heard about my previous complaint from the substitute, but had obviously taken no actions ei- the flag. I did not see if she had actually removed it, since I had already left the Diag in disbelief. I The entire situation was ab- solute absurdity. the flag was brought to Festifall by a col league of the person in charge, who thought it was "cool" to display it. I just could not ra- tionalize either the insensitiv- ity shown by the representa- tives of the Asian Studies De- partment by displaying the fla- r the anathu rof the many ". .{.. ":: ::.. ,.:... .,, ": ?" :i"td.1" w . r. .:;.::.; .;:..: ". ,. ".. . ":. ":::: r:'fi".,"}.k.v. v:"}:"..{....tow n " .h,;{.}}viii........jym s g m ., .". .....-..::::...:::: ..... .v .1 ... :::. ..}. ... ...... .... ... .: "h:: .:. : !,:: 4iirrX":{...,. h....h :. i"...v. :h.:.... ....."t 1'": "": X".w: ,:. "::}."d}}:{"}:d}:{{{r{ $}: :i}°':{iY.{{::<:i}:iii :i ::::: .,. x:: r."}. ::' .: :, t:t,,.: " 'S fi.,". t.r .. '}.. . ;. r.h":: x:::s".i...: ti".i:i: :::::: }: ".,:"::: :":::.; ., ...,',::: " ::::. :........ ... ; :: ":," :..: "::1,. :. r x;..,:, k;x"r':"h" .'r '.::{.: '. " ..::.: };",; t:i.;:;.,.,r.:.,,,.;trr :k".,".+:,"x":.:, :":::{:," ">: h".".:::: }.,":: ": ": }:::::"::".,":: }," }}:: iih :i"::":. d,. {.....::"x":," : {; .kr: :; :Si:<:;:::::i':::: "...,.,. ..:.,{Sfi..,{::".i.,"."}::".:"n,{: :".L.{"x"$.d::":{x.".,. :,..v...w::.isn..:......: .v ........:. ........ ... h..............