WE'VE MOVED! IsraPundit has relocated to Click here to go there now.
News and views on Israel, Zionism and the war on terrorism.

March 15, 2003

The call for and absurdity of "Evenhandedness" within the arab-Israeli conflict; a closer look

Those who call for "evenhandedness" in which the world reacts and treats the Arab-Israeli conflict are a large majority of the Western world more so in Europe than in the United States but even here a large number.

What is behind this frenetic call?

First let us dissect what exactly "evenhandedness" means in this respect. It seems most feel that the US favors a strategic ally, Israel, over the arab terrorists attacking them. Why would people expect evenhandedness in a situation like this? What is their motivation to request this? Clearly there is nothing even handed going on here how come people expect that sort of reaction? Israeli is a tiny country surrounded by 21 hostile countries and then some further beyond. They are clearly out moneyed, outnumbered, and outsized. The world distinctly favors the Arab terrorists over the Israeli defenders specifically since Charles De-Gaulle of France starting from the 1967 war.

Why do people call for being evenhanded when the fight isn't?

The reasons are a mixture of two things.

First, moral relativity by removed persons affords them the ability to not have to make a value judgment declaring clearly who is right and who is wrong. By calling for evenhandedness a person is saying out-loud they view both sides as equally egregious and therefore one is not better than the other. Everything is equal and therefore everything must be dealt with equally.

This is of course ridiculous to even pretend to believe.

There is nothing even between the worldwide support of the world center of Arab terrorists senior groups attacking Israel from within Israel's boundaries and Israeli defending themselves against them. There are 300 million arabs in 21 Arab countries surrounding Israel. The premier senior Arab terrorist group, the PLO, has international financial support and legitimacy as a equal and valid partner to Israel that Israel must meet their demands.

Moral relativity in this sort of obvious right and wrong situation also deserves further delving. Moral relativity as we all know is a intellectual cop-out. It allows people to not make a value judgment between two opposing sides and be free of both guilt and being seen as in cahoots with one over the other. This leads us to the second reasons for the call of evenhandedness within the Arab-Israeli conflict.

The second reason is that people around the world view this conflict from a faraway unconcerned vantage point. Two foreign groups battling each other is generally of no concern to most and they want that impartial view to remain that way from their faraway vantage point. There is also a fear among foreigners to the conflict of being targeted as compatriots to one side or another.

Of course no one would expect the United States to be evenhanded with its dealings with al-quaeda but in regards to Israel it is not only expected but required. The idea that being evenhanded will provide the terrorists a sense of hope and thus not need to murder children is fraught with disaster and clearly a removed viewpoint from the people being targeted daily.

When it comes down to it is really quite simple:
Why not throw someone else to the wolves if that is whom their blood lust is aimed at? At least it might deflect momentarily some of their blood taking from us, right!?