I Don’t Know Where to Begin

Okay, okay, so the D has an article this morning on a pro-Israel petition that’s being circulated at Dartmouth. Great news, you say, as do I. (In fact, I wish it were online, so I could sign it myself.) But some pro-Arab students are getting their keffiyahs in a bunch over it. Why? Here are some quotes:

“Expressions like ‘strong relationship’ and ‘battle against terrorism’ ring bells of discomfort in the ears of many Arabs, because to them, ‘strong relationship’ inevitably connotes such things as unfounded IDF [Israel Defense Forces] violence and a U.S. foreign policy unfavorable to Arabs,” [Zosia Krusberg ’04] wrote.

Now, I know Zosia, and she’s very nice. But frankly, I don’t see why American support for the only democracy in the region should trouble Arabs so much. Perhaps if the Arab world provided us with a model of successful Arab democracy, this justification would be weakened somewhat. But Israel is the bulkhead of democracy, human rights, and prosperity in the region. Indeed, the Arabs who live in Israel are the freest Arabs in the Middle East. (What other country in the region actually gives them the vote?) Alas, the prospects of successful democracy in an Arab nation seem pale — indeed, perhaps the best shot-in-the-arm for Arab democracy would be an American invasion of Iraq.

Furthermore, why would a pledge to “battle against terrorism” be so “discomfort[ing]” to Arabs? This is a very shocking insinuation. Is Zosia trying to say that Arabs actually support terrorism, and are troubled by our attempts to battle it? (Sadly, if this were what she were saying, she would be right; the lack of moral outrage over the atrocities that are committed in their name is a black mark for Arabs. Though it took them forever to do it, even Amnesty International now recognizes the intifada as a violation of human rights.)

“I can picture an Arab family reading the newspaper one evening, and in response to this type of statement saying, ‘See, I told you the U.S. doesn’t like us,” Krusberg added.

Well, it’s really only when they launch attacks on civilians eighty-four times in the past two years that we turn cool towards Arabs.

[Adil Ahmad ’05, former president of Al-Nur,] questioned “why it’s necessary to stand by Israel, one particular democracy” in order to support the broader goal of democracy in the Middle East.

What do you suggest, Mr. Ahmad? That we be best buds with Syria?

Ahmad said that the phrase “as registered voters of the United States of America” was “a pressure tactic” and a “way to pressure U.S. authorities to side with Israel.”

Heaven forbid they should try to actually have an impact!

Ahmad also said that the phrase “struggle against terrorism” in effect compared “the Palestinian struggle against Israeli oppression with Al-Qaeda, thus denigrating the Palestinian effort to terrorism.”

Yes, and rightly so, Mr. Ahmad. The Palestinian “effort” is terrorism, plain and simple. Blowing up innocent civilians — women, children, the elderly — is not a courageous struggle of liberation. It is cowardly, it is cruel, it is evil, and it is terrorism. What a disgrace that Mr. Ahmad doesn’t recognize that — but no one ever accused the PLO or its supporters of having moral clarity.

That being said, a sponsor of the resolution said this:

[Arielle] Farber [’03] also said that the phrase “struggle against terrorism” is meant to condemn the suicide bombings which have harmed or killed American citizens visiting Israel.

And what about the suicide bombings that have harmed or killed Israelis? Does the resolution condemn that? Do their murderers not deserve condemnation as much as the murderers of Americans do? All people are equal, you see; but — even for the sponsors of a pro-Israel petition — all people are more equal than the Israelis.