4 - The Michigan Daily - Tuesday, October 8, 2002 OP/ED abl r irbiguu &zailii 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 letters@michigandaily.com EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 JON SCHWARTZ Editor in Chief JOHANNA HANINK Editorial Page Editor Unless otherwise noted, unsigned editorials reflect the opinion of the majority of the Daily's editorial board. All other articles, letters and cartoons do not necessarily reflect the opinion of The Michigan Daily. A LETTERS TO THE EDITOR NOTABLE QUOTABLE BONNIE KELLMAN MIXED NUTS ___________________________9. i r Brater clarifies position on prisons To THE DAILY: Thank you very much for your coverage of the 18th Dis- trict state Senate race. I would like to clarify one point that appeared in your story on Oct. 3: I did not suggest "releasing" prisoners as a way of reducing the corrections budget. My point, rather, was this. Over the past decade, 15 out of 21 of Michigan's mental hospitals have been closed, and many former patients have ended up in the criminal justice system. Meanwhile, the 650 lifer law has meant that many drug addicts have swelled our prison population, without catching kingpins. Both people with mental illness, and substance abusers, if nonviolent, more appropriately belong in treat- ment in the mental health sys- tem. This would result in savings in the corrections sys- tem, where we are spending $20,000 per medium-security prisoner a year, plus billions in prison building. Liz BRATER Democratic nominee for the state Senate in the 18th District Rationale for anti- Zionism matters To THE DAILY: The recent column on the divestment conference (Divest- ment Conference not about divestment, 10 /07/02) makes a critically incomplete deduction about the relationship between 'anti-Zionism' and anti-Semi- tism, beating the by-now tired rhythm that opposition to Israel (or more accurately, Israeli pol icy) means opposition to Jews and anti-Semitism. What is key is not simply that someone thinks Zionism is a doctrine that is less than just or morally praiseworthy; what matters is - why - someone thinks that is the case. People draw issue with Zionism/Israel not because they dislike Jews, but because they reject the idea of racially or ethnically exclu- sive states. Showing displea- sure through divestment campaigns (which are, as the article correctly notes, exercises in discussion and debate rather than practical implementation) is simply another means for showing displeasure with-a sit- uation and style of policy, including (but certainly not lim- ited to) the policies of various Israeli governments, that have led to clearly unjust outcomes. To put it differently, sup- porting discussion about divest- ment (or even if you wish to accept the piece's argument, being critical of Zionism) isn't about wanting to reverse histo- ry, but about seeking to amelio- rate its injustices. The declaration that helped start it all, Balfour, didn't simply call for 'the establishment in Pales- tine of a national home for the Jewish people;' a national home was premised on the idea that "nothing shall be done which may prejudice the civil and religious rights of existing non-Jewish communities in Palestine." And it's that second part that remains unfulfilled and demands continued focus and discussion. ALl IJAZ AHMAD Law School "Why Israel occupies the West Bank To THE DAILY: The article Palestinians dis- cuss effects of occupation (10/07/02) in the Daily, though eloquently written, forgets to mention why Israel is occupy- ing the West Bank and why Palestinian houses are being demolished. The "why" is usu- ally considered a pretty impor- tant question in America. The first answer is easy, in 1967 (19 years after Israel's independence), in what is called the Six-Day War, Israel was forced to defend itself in a pre- emptive strike. Israel won and significantly increased its land. However, practically the day after the war, Israel began try- ing to negotiate the land back for peace. This culminated at the Camp David negotiations in 2000, when Israel offered the Palestinians over 95 percent of West Bank and Gaza. Palestini- ans rejected, no counter-offer made. Ask why! The second answer I had to look up to get the details. I wanted to make sure Israel isn't demolishing houses ran domly like Palestinian suicide bombers blowing up civilians on the street, randomly. The first result I got from Google by typing in"Israel house demolition" was representa- tive and explained, "Israel's policy of demolishing the fam- ily homes of Palestinians who carry out attacks on Israelis is beginning to have a deterrent effect, Defense Minister Binyamin Ben-Eliezer said," reported the Manila Times. Hmmm. So when Palestinians complain their homes have been demolished ... you should ask why. Israel also sometimes demolishes the homes of both Palestinians and Israelis who build houses without a permit in the West Bank. Regardless of what the reason, there usually is one and it's important. So ask! MK GIVENTAL LSA senior Minority groups and Daily should collaborate To THE DAILY: I am writing in regard to the recent rumors surrounding vari- ous boycotts of the Daily, but in particular those brought about by the various minority com- munities on campus. While I am by no means speaking on the behalf of anyone but myself, I believe that such boy- cotts are in haste and possibly even m error. As a minority stu- dent, I believe that while it is the Daily's responsibility as a newspaper that has opted to represent the greater campus community and thus must be more cross-culturally conscious and inclusive in its selection of newsworthy events, it is also the responsibility of said minorities to bring occurrences in their respective communities to the Daily's attention. The minorities who have made accusations to the Daily on the basis of its seemingly occasional "racist" bias are not necessarily completely wrong, but they must realize that boy- cotting the Daily by not reading it, or even worse, by not provid- ing quotes for articles, will not solve the problem. Instead, they will force the Daily to go to sec- ondary sources for their articles surrounding the minority com- munity, and therefore decrease the quality of the paper. In short, by refusing the Daily our quotes, we are simply adding to the problem we set out to protest in the first place. On the other hand, the Daily must be aware that there are more things surrounding the minorities on this campus than racist remarks and discrimination. Although by choosing to represent the minority commu- nity as disadvantaged and dis- criminated against, the Daily does bring to lightseveral nega- tive circumstances that mmnori- ties must constantly face. It also doesn't hurt that racial problems are always fodder for interest- ing reading. But, in doing so, they are also boxing us into the stereotypes that we are forced to fight (i.e., that we are only disadvantaged and discriminat- ed against and nothing else). The Daily does little to fairly and consistently represent the rich and varying culture that the minorities of University bring to campus. If the minority com- munities wish to change things, we need to re-evaluate the ways in which we have chosen to do so. At the same time, the Daily must recognize that there is more that goes into being a minority than discrimination and disadvantage. SARA ALLOY LSA sophomore Altarm "cloIomJ. with "supea loud. GtLarwm2) Wcater tobe poured over 43A e., "We need a little more sin." ".s" ' ""i'; "iY:' "ylpT"\" "s a .99."' be'xtexN o ve.r waA-A vup t - nV 3 m ;u ash :, 0 49 . 9.9.9 . .. : - Doug Kelbaugh speaking of the plans to improve students' quality of life on North Campus by adding more entertainment, retail and dining options, as quoted in today's Daily. Jl mot. - VIEWPOINT India shares culpability for South Asia's troubles 0 BY SABIR IBRAHIM In his viewpoint about the crisis in South Asia, Democracy, not Kashmir, core issue in South Asia, (10/07/02), Utpal Mun- shi seeks to attribute the poverty and tur- moil plaguing the region solely to the "militarization of Pakistan" and its inabili- ty to sustain a functioning democracy.' While political instability and military dic- tatorship in Pakistan are indeed among the causes of South Asia's problems, Munshi's analysis is an oversimplification of a com- plex situation that cannot be described in terms of one factor to the exclusion of all others. In seeking to place the blame for the turmoil solely on Pakistan and its histo- ry of autocracy and dictatorship, Munshi seems to have ignored a whole range of contributing issues and problems (particu- larly those in which India is implicated), each of which plays an equal part in prolif- erating the crisis. Among these is the disturbing rise of Hindu fundamentalism in India, whose horrific consequences became evident this past spring when angry Hindu fundamen- talist-led mobs slaughtered up to 5,000 Muslims in Gujarat and destroyed the homes and businesses of thousands more, leaving them confined to relief camps and shelters across the state. Evidence indicates state and police officials may have been complicit in the violence, which comes amidst growing support for Hindu funda- mentalist movements who seek to trans- form India into a Hindu nationalist state and whose adherents occupy key positions in state and central governments as well as in the army and police. Also not addressed by Munshi is India's role in the Kashmir conflict. While it is true that Pakistan's interests in Kashmir are most lilely not motivated by a sense of compas- sion or sympathy for the Kashmiri people, India has repeatedly refused to allow Kash- miris the self-determination guaranteed to them by U.N. Resolutions and international law. This, coupled with the numerous, well- documented atrocities and human rights abuses - including widespread rape and kidnapping - committed by its occupation force of 600,000 indicates that India seems to be imposing its vision of Kashmir as an "integral, inseparable part of India" at least in part by force. I am not attempting to play the tired old blame game in which supporters of India and Pakistan trade accusations and insults. The above-mentioned issues are just two of a plethora of economic and political problems plaguing the subconti- nent; consequences of colonialism and partition for which India, Pakistan and others share the blame. However, Munshi's effort to gloss over one side's role in prolonging the crisis and attribute it entirely to the other contributes neither to building a constructive dialogue nor to a resolution of hostilities. Ibrahim is an Engineering senior and chair of the Muslim Students Association South Asia Task Force. VIEWPOINT Invest in peace, invest in Israel BY DAVID POST The upcoming Second National Student Conference on the Palestinian Solidarity Con- ference is a primary example of why peace in the Middle East has not yet been achieved. Unfortunately, in similarity to what is currently occurring in the Middle East, one of the sides in the dialogue on this campus refuses to work toward peace. The mission statement of the Palestinian Solidarity Conference does not advocate peace or suggest ways to improve the lives of Palestinians. In fact, the three central campaigns advanced by the organizers of the conference are: 1) divestment from Israel, 2) ending the United States' aid to Israel, and 3) the Right of Return. Notice that all three cam- paigns are aimed at destroying Israel through both internal and external methods. If the organizers of the conference wanted to be constructive they would concentrate on policies that improve the prospects for peace and conditions for the Palestinian people. As you may know, one of the main goals of the -... r ..-+ . . ra r .it-c o defend itself. If this conference was focused on improving the lives of Palestinians the organiz- ers would have developed a plan for a wide spread investment campaign in the Palestinian economy and political infrastructure-not pro- moted a policy that attempts to undermine Israel's ability to exist. In addition to undermining Israel's right to exist through the promotion of divestment, the conference also rejects the continuation of the Jewish State through its support of the right of return of Palestinian refugees. The influx of millions of hostile Palestinian refugees into Israel would certainly under- mine the Jewish character of the nation, effectively turning Israel into another Arab state. Although most experts on both sides -acknowledge the impossibility of the right of return as part of any two-state solution, the conference supports this policy in hopes of destroying the Jewish State. If the conference organizers' main focus was the creation of a Palestinian State, and not the destruction of Israel, would have used 'the conference to for liberation." Through the current uprising suicide bombings have not resulted in any political gains for the Palestinians-violence has only resulted in checkpoints and continu- ing hardships for innocent civilians. If the members of Students Allied for Freedom and Equality wanted to improve the lives of Pales- tinians they would certainly take a stance against suicide bombings and violence that continues to hinder the peace process and instead advocate a two-state solution based on peaceful political negotiations. I am just as troubled with the messages pro- moted by SAFE as the ideals that they choose to ignore. The conference does not promote constructive dialogue; it does advocate destruc- tive propaganda that prevents mutual under- standing. The conference does not propose constructive ways to alleviate the suffering of the Palestinian people; it does provide many recommendations for ways to destroy the only state in the Middle East that allows freedom of speech and protects civil rights. The conference is not concerned with constructively promoting solidarity with the Palestinian people by 4 A