Campus Hypocrisy
Tom Friedman points out that campus anti-Israel gatherings may not be anti-semitic, but singling out Israel is hypocritical and dishonest because there are two parties required for negotiations for a peace accord. Friedman then raises the demographic issue--one man, one vote--noting that if Israel holds on to the territories and Arabs in a few years outnumber Jews, college students in America will have a real issue.
Tom Friedman points out that campus anti-Israel gatherings may not be anti-semitic, but singling out Israel is hypocritical and dishonest because there are two parties required for negotiations for a peace accord. Friedman then raises the demographic issue--one man, one vote--noting that if Israel holds on to the territories and Arabs in a few years outnumber Jews, college students in America will have a real issue.
FRIEDMAN
The Washington Post recently reported that students and faculty at a growing number of universities are pressuring their schools "into selling their holdings in companies that do business with Israel, prompting a counter-campaign among Jewish groups that consider the effort part of a creeping tide of anti-Semitism on campus." Here's what I would say to both sides on this issue:
Memo to professors and students leading the divestiture campaign: Your campaign for divestiture from Israel is deeply dishonest and hypocritical, and any university that goes along with it does not deserve the title of institution of higher learning.
You are dishonest because to single out Israel as the only party to blame for the current impasse is to perpetrate a lie. Historians can debate whether the Camp David and Clinton peace proposals for a Palestinian state were for 85, 90, or 97 percent of the West Bank and Gaza. But what is not debatable is what the proper Palestinian response should have been. It should have been to tell Israel and America that their peace proposals were the first fair offer they had ever put forth, and although they still fell short of what Palestinians feel is a just two-state solution, Palestinians were now prepared to work with Israel and America to achieve that end. The proper response was not a Palestinian intifada and 100 suicide bombers, which are what brought Ariel Sharon to power.
It is shameful that at a time when some Palestinians are writing that they made a historic mistake in not nurturing the Clinton peace offer, pro-Palestinian professors and students in America and Europe pretend that the only reason the occupation persists is because of Israeli obstinacy. This approach will never gain the Palestinians a state, and those who dabble in it are simply prolonging Palestinian misery.
[reg req'd]

<< Home