4A - The Michigan Daily - Tuesday, February 15, 2005 OPINION ale l[irl i Fm ttil JASON Z. PESICK Editor in Chief SUHAEL MOMIN SAM SINGER Editorial Page Editors ALISON Go Managing Editor EDITED AND MANAGED BY STUDENTS AT THE UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN SINCE 1890 420 MAYNARD STREET ANN ARBOR, MI 48109 tothedaily@michigandaily.com NOTABLE QUOTABLE We have clearly told the Europeans to tell the Americans not to play with fire." -Iranian spokesman Hamid Reza Asefi, referring to U.S. pressure on Iran to dismantle its nuclear energy pro- gram, as reported yesterday by Reuters. ALEXANDER HONKALA F:m CMLMBJcKET - f 0 0 ____j 0 Why divestment is wrong DANIEL ADAMS H)R E HOES AND HAND GRENADES ince I began my work as a colum- nist for the Daily, <>.>I've intentionally avoid- ed the subject of divest- ment from Israel. For whatever reason, naive- to or optimism perhaps, I assumed that this was a passing fad that would fizzle out long before my time at the Uni- versity expired. But here I am, in my last semester as an undergrad, and still divestment is an issue - a subject broached every now and again by the pro-Palestinian lobby on this cam- pus to catch the eye and push for University action. For the unacquainted, "divestment," at least this most recent incarnation of it, suggests that the University, in keep- ing with its goals as an institution, should divest from companies that provide mili- tary assistance to Israel. This January, the University of Wiscon- sin at Plattville took the first step in that direction, when its Faculty Senate voted to make it the first faculty governing board in the nation to call for divestment from Israel. Perhaps emboldened by the victory, a viewpoint ran yesterday on this very page, similarly pushing for divestment. Like the proposal at UW-Plattville, the authors, two officers of the pro-Palestinian group Stu- dents Allied for Freedom and Equality, contend that the University should divest the roughly $11 million it has invested in companies that sell arms to the Israeli government - companies like Raytheon, General Electric, Lockheed Martin and General Dynamics, among others. Divestment is as rare as it is radical - so rare in fact that the University has only done it twice, once in 2000 with tobacco manufacturers and the other in 1978 in pro- test of South African apartheid. With that in mind, divestment propo- nents, if they are to be successful, must make.the case that Israeli actions, and the complicity of these corporations in those actions, have been unique enough to justify divestment. Problem is - they haven't. The companies that they have targeted make, among other things, weapons for use both by the United States and for export. Lockheed Martin makes F-16 fighter air- craft. Raytheon makes military electron- ics and missiles. General Dynamics makes components and weapons systems for air- craft, as well as whole weapons systems like Atlas ICBMs and Abrams tanks. Divestment proponents can quite easily point out a number of cases in which these products were used to do a great deal of harm to the Palestinian people, often in violation of international human rights norms. F-16s and Apaches and Abrams tanks are all part of a significant Israeli military advantage that makes possible continued occupation. Fundamentally, however, this poten- tial for great evil makes them no. dif- ferent from any other weapon, and their manufacturers no different from any other weapons manufacturer. For better or for worse, these guys are in the gun business,' and their products will be abused. But that doesn't mean we don't need weapons and the companies to manufacture them. How many went after Lockheed when, in 1995, F-16s were used to help stem the slaughter in Bosnia? Where were the calls for divest- ment in 1991, when Abrams tanks formed the spearhead of the ground offensive that liberated Kuwait? It also doesn't mean that Israel doesn't need quality weapons. In both 1967 and 1973, its survival against Arab aggression hinged on the availabil- ity of U.S. arms. More importantly, Israel isn't the only nation guilty of the brutal application of U.S.-made weapons. From Indonesia's brutal suppression of East Timorean inde- pendence with U.S. M-16s, to Saddam's repression of the Iraqi Kurds, to the United State's own spotty record with its home- made toys, there are countless examples in which United States made weapons have been misused. In fact, I'd safely posit that among the client states that have used U.S. arms in combat, none can claim that those they entrusted with the weapons have acted entirely within legal or moral limits. So, if the proponents of divestment are really serious in their moral outrage - truly disgusted with the thought of a Uni- versity contributing to the oppression of people by force - they should be calling for universal divestment from any com- pany that makes any weapon or weapon component, not just Israel and its suppli- ers. Otherwise, if there is nothing about Israeli action separating its from the body of nations that have oppressed, abused or massacred with U.S.-made weapons, then why target Israel for divestment? Should"we be offended by the occupa- tion? Absolutely. Should we divest from Israel? Absolutely not. Adams can be reached at dnadams@umich.edu. LETTERS TO THE EDITOR Daily's Arthur Miller issue a great aCieveme nt To THE DAILY: I am writing to commend the Daily Staff that worked to put out the Arthur Miller issue. I knew Miller was an alum, but thought of the information as more of a selling point for the University and not necessarily relevant to Miller's development as a playwright. But your articles, specifically the article concerning Miller's pursuit of a Hopwood Award, showed that the University played an integral role in his genesis as a writer, and that Ann Arbor was, and still remains, a University open to and supportive of creative writing. Bryan Kelly LSA Freshman Editor's Note: The Arthur Miller edition has been reprinted, and can be found in Section B of todayspaper. Divestent a misguiceda solution for the Middle East selling military equipment to Israel would posses no gain to the Palestinian people. Weakening the Israeli army would not halt the Israeli fight against terrorism, for it is the latter that should be weakened and eliminated. Although Students Allied for Freedom and Equality condemns terrorism, it is unclear why it's targeting the army that fights against it. Occupation of the territo- ries is not the intention of the Israeli people. One of the most prominent right-wing poli- ticians, Ariel Sharon, is leading the cam- paign for change. During the past weeks, there has been tre- mendous progress in the efforts for peace in the Middle East - without divestment ini- tiatives. Israeli officials have been meeting with Palestinian officials on a daily basis, hundreds of Palestinian prisoners are going to be released as a sign of good faith, Israel is going to withdraw its forces from numer- ous West Bank cities and to top it all off, both leaders have publicly declared a cease- fire. After four years of suffering on both sides, there is finally a horizon for peace. We think SAFE should emphasize its commitment for freedom and equality for all people in the region, instead of trying to harm Israel. If the Palestinian kids are SAFE's main con- cern, they should support the peace process more adaniantly than divestment, as divesting would only hinder the process and let terrorists, who's sole purpose is to explode in coffee shops and hide behind innocent children, roam free. Support peace. Oppose divestment! Or Shotan LSA freshman Chair, Israeli Students Organization Orrin Pail LSA sophomore Vice chair, Israeli Students Organization Philip Azachi LSA sophomore Vice chair, Israeli Students Organization EXPRESS YOURSEL. JOIN THE DAiLY'S EDITORIALBOARDI MONDAYS, TIURSDAYS 6 P.M. 420 MAYNARDST. OPINION@MICIGAtDAILY.COM To THE DAILY: We would like divestment really Divestment from to comment on What means, (02/14/2005). American companies VIEWPOINT Animal rights in perspective 4 BY JAIME OLIN The two questions I'm most commonly asked when people find out I help run the Stu- dent Animal Legal Defense Fund at the Law School are: First, what is animal law; and sec- ond, why should we care about animal welfare when there are so many people suffering in the world? As a way to introduce the forthcoming lecture at the University by renowned animal lawyer and author Steven Wise tomorrow (7 individuals, and judges are becoming increas- ingly harsh in meting out punishment to animal abusers. Furthermore, as society continues to scorn the mistreatment of companion animals, letters to newspapers, prosecutors and judges escalate and the issue receives more atten- tion. But animal law is much, much broader than the prosecution of companion animal abuse. Stop to think for a moment about every aspect of your life that involves animals. We wear them, eat them, adore them, fear them, leads to better environmental conditions, and ensures the presence of endangered species for future generations to observe and enjoy. Furthermore, psychological studies have conclusively linked abuse toward animals with abuse toward humans. Almost all serial murderers and perpetrators of school shoot- ings have brutal acts toward animals in their childhood histories. Domestic abusers fre- quently hurt, or threaten to hurt, the family pet as a way of maintaining power over the -. :rT.o4.t~ larlt~ liomn 6 ........... ... .! I e tJWcLVL1cx1 ; to [ .z. 3-c r~nu, c iJ.F 44W i fu4- --