OPINION Monday, March 13, 1989 Page 4 The Michigan Daily -br £ idijau flailjj Edited and managed by students at The University of Michigan I Threats then and now 420 Maynard St. Ann Arbor, MI 48109 Vol. IC, No. 110 * THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN REGENTS COMMUNICATION * ITEMI FOR INFORMATION 4 "' /?70 A4 e4,, Unsigned editorials represent a majority of the Daily's Editorial Board. All oti ar cartoons, signed articles, and letters do not necessarily represent the opinion of the Daily. Prez should apologize UNIVERSITY PRESIDENT James Duderstadt owes the Daily an apology for his letter last week (March 6), in which he implied that the Daily was guilty of anti-Semitism. Attempts by administrators to interfere with the in- ternal functioning of the Daily are al- ways objectionable, but such un- fo,:nded allegations are truly unworthy of the office Duderstadt holds. Duderstadt's letter to the editor, while vaguely worded and relying on innunendo rather than direct accusa- tion, strongly implies that the Daily has published anti-Semitic material. These are very serious charges which Duderstadt does not attempt to substantiate in any way. To his credit, he notes that there is "of course a fundamental distinction between criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism." Blit he does not state why, when, or how the Daily might have been guilty of the latter rather than the former. To make such serious charges with- out offering even a shred of evidence is irresponsible and smacks of cheap po- litical opportunism. It is worth noting how different this kind of criticism is from that which has been directed to- ward the University administration. For example, when students demanded LSA Dean Peter Steiner's resignation last year, for refusing to retract racist remarks he had made, they were very explicit in their accusations. The stu- dents documented his exact words and patiently explained why they were in fact racist, and why the Black commu- nity was rightly offended by them. Unfortunately, Duderstadt was not "deeply concerned" enough about that incident to write to the Daily about it. While it is certainly possible that Duderstadt wrote this letter merely to express his personal beliefs, it can eas- ily be interpreted as a veiled threat to the Daily's editorial independence. When the President of the University states that such independence carries with it "the traditional responsibility of the press in a free society," and then implies that this independence has been abused, such words can not be taken lightly. This is especially true in view of former President Fleming's attitudes toward the Daily in the 1970s, when the paper was considered "a thorn" for its support of the anti-war movement (see Flemming and Duderstadt letters to the right). President Duderstadt should apolo- gize for abusing the powers of his of- fice to malign the Daily, and for at- tempting to interfere in its internal af- fairs. Subject" The Daily You have repeatedly asked that we discuss the Daily and wilat might be done about it. We have devoted a good deal of time to discussion of this topic among the IDecutive Officers without very conclusive results. Never- theless, I can tell you the nature of our thinking. In the first place, one has to recognize that this is botha historic problem and one that is in no way unique with u;. Not long ago Bob Warner told me of a new thesis on the presidency of Dr. Ituthven that he thought!I might find of interest. In reading itl discovered his. battles with the Daily I have already sent to you the pages that.relate to that subject. Nor is there anything unique to our campus about the paper. College newspapers everywhere have always been, and probably always will be, a thorn. They are inaccurate, biased, often in poor taste, inflammatory and usually staffed by people who are consdeably more radical than the student body. In most of these characteristics they find their parallel in commercial newspapers. Perhaps this is the ieason the Daly1,is so vigorously defended by the public press anytime any effort is made "to db something about it." Whenever the possibilities for "doing something about'tte Daily: are discussed three suggestions usually come to the fore. They are: , . 1. Disassociate the Daily from the University and make it wholly independent. The trouble with this solution is that it is not readily apparent what making it independent means. We do not subsidize it now. It operates out of -a- building constructed with the profits from the newspaper~, the aeinusLanthiI humor magazine. , It makes enough on advertisingtosurvive. We could charge the Daily rent for the space it occupies in the building, but this would probably seem inequitable to both students and faculty in view of the way the construction was financed. We could withdraw the potential for subscriptions purchased by departments out of funds available to them, but there is no reason to believq that this woui change the result. Wisconsin did both things this past year, and-the paper is worse then ever and surviving nicely on advertising revenue. A further danger in pressing theail into totally independent status, Amnes t Dde ,Udt. Prnid.,t March 6, 1989 To: The Editor I am deeply concerned by the recent editorials and news stories in The Michigan Daily that have been widely regarded as anti-Semitic. The University of Michigan is proud to have a student newspaper whose masthead can proclaim a 99-year tradition of independence. With that independence, however, comes the traditional responsibility of the press in a free society to report the news accurately and thoroughly. At times many of us may have disagreed with particular editorial positions, but we have always respected the Daily's right to express its views. A university should be a place of enlightened political debate, and there is of course a fundamental distinction between criticism of Israel and anti-Semitism. However, recent incidents have made me feel it is important to state once again that'racism, anti-Semitism, and all other forms of bigotry have no place at the University of Michigan or anywhere else. Words, as well as actions, often have unintended effects, and it behooves all of us to be particularly sensitive to the potential interpretations of expressions of our views and values. I was heartened that the outcome of the recent protest of the Daily's stance was an agreement that the editors would meet with a group of the concerned students. I hope this meeting will lead to enhanced understanding and sensitivity. Moreover, I call upon the Daily to play a constructive role in helping to create a campus environment in which all members of the University of Michigan community are treated with dignity and respect. ..1 - whatever that means, is that we may then simply find ourselves with an underground newspaper which is much worse. 2. Appoint a professional editor to preside over the Daily. If such an editor were given genuine power we would precipitate a major fight, not only with the Daily, but probably with the entire press of the State on the grounds that we were censoring the paper. If he did not have power, it is hard to see what useful function he could fulfill. Schools which have tried this approach have no experience we know of which suggests any success. The job'is a thankless one, and few people of worth are willing to consider it. 3. Replace the present Board of Student Publications with a Board which will exercise more power. It may be that the nature of the Board ought to be changed, but it is an illusion to suppose that such a Board will stop the pre sent difficulties. The same question of cenporship will arise, and there is simply no basis for thinking that the Beard will exercise effective control. It none of these alternatives offer any chance of success, what can we do? Two possibilities occur to us: 1. Start publishing our own weekly newspaper this fall so that we at least get accurate information out to the University community on key questions. Some other schools have tried this, and it appears to meet with at least some success. It would cost us some money (we will have figures at the Regents' meeting), but we could do it.and we believe it would bb'a positive step. 2. See whether we could establish for the Daily an ombu4oman concept like the one reported In the Louisville Courier in a recent issue of TimeHart, Wright has made Some further inquiries into this and will have more information on it. The Time excerpt is attached. . We have arranged to have Hart Wright and Martin Hirschman, the current editor, meet with theRegents for a discussion of the problems of the, Dailyon..-. Thursday afternoon right after lunch.. +a * h 6 t . /i+ I ^ r i R. W. Fleming President July 8, 1970 While the people occupying positions of power in the University change, their values do not. In response to criticism of the Vietnam was, then University President Robben Fleming sent the memo reprinted above to the board of Regents. In response to allegations of anti-Semitism, President Duderstadt sent the letter reprinted at right to the Editor of the Daily. Fleming was open in his desire to exercise editorial control over the Daily; Duderstadt is more subtle. In his memo, President Fleming stated that the Daily and other student newspapers have been and always will be thorns in the side of University ad- ministrators. He then outlines different possibilities for gaining control of the Daily, including appointing a professional editor. In his letter, President Duderstadt states that freedom of the press carries heavy responsibility and implies that the Daily has abused this freedom, all without substantiating his charges. 7 i Cultural freedom denied. THE ISRAELI border policeman scrutinized carefully the traveller's walkman and tapes. Beethoven', Mozart, Schubert. "You know," he said earnestly leaning across the counter and touching his olive-drab reservist uniform, "this is not my real job. I'm a musician. I play the violin." That chance encounter suggests an irony of the Israeli state, in which ser- vants to the arts may also be servants of a state that suppresses the culture of its indigenous Palestinian inhabitants. The border policeman wanted to assert his non-military identity as a musician, yet if one of those cassette tapes had contained Palestinian native songs he would have been duty-bound to confiscate it, regardless of his personal commitment to artistic freedom. Since art effectively expresses the desires, dreams, and dissatisfactions of its creators, who are responsible to their communities, it is not surprising that Palestinian art is heavily censored or suppressed. "You will never paint again," Israeli soldiers told a Pales- tinian nationalist painter and broke his hands to make sure of it. Israelis deny Palestinians the right to sing national songs and recite national poetry. Painters are imprisoned for composi- tions displaying the colors of the Palestinian flag. The Israelis closed the only Palestinian art exhibition in the West Bank within days of its opening, and its director, Hisham, was impris- oned for years although he had a seri- ous heart condition. Denying a people's culture also de- nies their humanity. Most Americans can not identify George Kirmiz, Ghas- san Ranafani, or Kamal Boullatta - II rA n , . James J. Duderstadt Critics: stop silencing debate. Palistinian boy is arrested after being beaten by Israeli soldiers in Ramallah. famous and talented Palestinian artists - because American ideas about cul- ture are Western-biased. Some people even argue that Palestinians have no culture since they lack a symphony or- chestra. Conversely, the Israeli Phil- harmonic symbolizes that state's cul- ture and humanity. Zubin Mehta will conduct the Israeli Philharmonic in Hill Auditorium on Tuesday, March 21st. A candlelight vigil with Palestinian music will be held outside Hill from 7 p.m. to 8 p.m. Rather than attending the concert, at- tend the vigil to show solidarity with Palestinians whose culture is denied. If you decide you must hear the Israeli Philharmonic, consider attending the vigil also in order to support both cul- tures. If you speak for Salman Rushdie's freedom, you must speak for that of the Palestinians. By Randy Schwartz A year ago this week, I travelled to Washington, D.C. to march with 5,000 other people in support of the indifada, the heroic uprising of the Palestinian people. I met an American Jew there who had lived in Israel for twelve years until 1982, when he refused a draft notice to invade Lebanon. He left, disgusted with the idea of a "Jewish state" in the Middle East. At the rally following that march, we heard several members of Neturei Karta, a group of orthodox Jews who consider Zionism a betrayal of the Torah and refuse to recognize the "state of Israel." Their placards demanded that "Israel" (they al- ways place the name in quotes) cease to exist, that it be replaced with a secular state called Palestine. These are some of the images that have flashed through my mind recently while listening to the claims being aired on campus to the effect that criticism of Israel in the Daily has been "anti-Semitic." As a Jewish person, I denounce the at- tempts that are being made to use the Jewish presence in this community as an- other way to silence criticism of Israel or to limit the "acceptable bounds" within which such criticism will be tolerated. At the rally on February 21, students criticized the Daily editorial board for "anti-Jewish racism" (Daily, 2/22) and "Jew baiting" (New York Times, 2/22). I hereby challenge anyone to show - not merely assert but demonstrate - that any of the Daily editorials in question are guilty of anti-Semitism or Jew baiting. One student let the cat out of the bag when he stated more recently, "Criticism of the policies of the state of Israel is le- gitimate, but to question the existence of Israel and to say it is racist can be anti- Jewish" (Daily, 3/9). What is this but an attetnnt i imnc nrtifricinl hcnintarie on Daily have cited the Nov. 1 editorial on Meir Kahane because of its assertion that Zionism is "from its inception a racist construct." How is it "anti-Semitic" to assert this? Zionism is a particular politi- cal movement and ideology, while Semites comprise an ethnic group. These critics are confounding politics with eth- nicity. Zionism is indeed racist. To take just one example, consider the original pro- posal offered in the late 1800s by Theodor Herzl (one of the chief founders of the Zionist movement) for the Ottoman Em- pire to relinquish control of Palestine: "If His Majesty the Sultan were to give up Palestine, we would undertake to regulate Turkey's finances. For Europe, we would constitute a bulwark against Asia down there, we would be the advance post of civilization against barbarism" (Maxime Rodinson, Israel: A Colonial-Settler State?, p.43). Is it "anti-Semitic" to learn this? (Ann Arbor News, 2/22). But the thrust of the Daily's editorial policy has been, not to support nationalism for the sake of na- tionalism, but rather to support national- } ism of oppressed nations. The "white' power" of the Klan and Nazis and white Afrikaner nationalism in South Africa are nationalisms of the oppressor, not nation- alisms of the oppressed. Israel throughout its history has tried to'. deny the very existence of the people and nation of Palestine. Consider these words-,, from "liberal" Israeli Prime Minister Golda Meir, herself a transplant to the Middle East from Milwaukee, Wisconsin: r "It was not as though there was a Pales-> tinian people and we came and threw them out and took their country away from,, them. They did not exist " (London Sun- day Times 6/15/69). Tell that to the thou- sands of Palestinians who fled from Zion- ist rifles in 1948 and whose houses today are occupied by Jewish Israeli citizens! As for Jewish nationalism, millions of I- ki4 'As a Jewish person, I denounce the attempts that are being made to use the Jewish presence in this community as another way to silence criticism of Israel or to limit the "acceptable bounds" within which such criticism will be tolerated.' VfWiJ ToIA "ISR EL 'f . rLs WEST 8 li,1 GoVVOVT { 'X7 JrffMS o.JD SAN4K PAL J I17JjRlM? -Is1 IT BE CAU5I.: Others have taken the Daily to task for its 2/14 editorial on the crash of Pan Am 103, alleging that the paper made "the outrageous and unsupported assertion that Israel was responsible for the bombing" (Detroit Free Press, 3/1). But the editorial made no such assertion. What it asserted (and correctly, in my opinion) is that car- rying out such a bombing would have been in Israel's interests at this time. The editorial specifically qualified that at this point, Israel's involvement in the explo- sion is "speculation lacking hard proof." It Jewish people who speak of it deny that Zionism is a legitimate expression of it. Other Jews deny the concept of a "Jewish nation" and say Israel is just an outpost of Western imperialism. Prof. Endelman et. al.: you are free to disagree with us on this, but you should not be free to slander these beliefs as "anti-Semitic" nor to dis- miss those Jews with whom you disagree as "Jews who separate themselves from their people...turncoats and renegades" (University Record, 3/6). i ,- r ,A 1 . '4 . 6-' i. G t r "^cy t Anl NI;SANG A ?ALFS'rlJAT'JM NAIIOPAL SON~G $F1 He out1JD A 'VAi7F.5TN/AI\ b ,OOK OF' ?o6-rRY