Locke and Demonthesis are friends brought together in a forum of discussion. Both are strongly opinionated on their subjects, yet strive to be civil and understanding in their shown practice of free speech and debate. They ardently feel this is the corner stone of our society. This week their discussion focuses on the continued conflict in between Israel and the Palestinians.
Demonthesis: Above all else, we need to seek peace in the Middle East. This should be the ultimate goal. The only involvement our government should have is in helping to facilitate that goal.
Locke: If only it were that simple. The Israelis have wanted peace for years, but repeatedly are forced to wage war against the terrorist attacks within their borders. These attacks have been led by the Palestinians, and specifically Yassar Arafat.
D: It seems unlikely to me that Arafat, a winner of the Nobel Peace Prize and leader of Palestine, would be behind the repeated attacks on Israel. In fact, he has adamantly denied these allegations on many occasions.
L: We’ve setup a meeting with Arafat and Sharon, with the intent to architect a peace proposal and agreement. With your desires for peace, this is what you were hoping for, correct?
D: Well, yeah. This is a great first step. If Arafat agrees to a peace proposal, this will reduce, or eliminate the violence being put forth by the Palestinians.
L: That just doesn’t add up. If Arafat has the power to make the Palestinians stop performing terrorist attacks, why has he not stopped them previously? There are two possible answers to that question. First, That Arafat has never had control over these attacks and therefore any agreement with him is completely meaningless.
D: That seems unlikely. What’s the second possibility?
L: He may not want these attacks to end. If this is the case, I’m not sure we want to deal with a man who has repeatedly lied about his involvement in the attacks especially when many are targeted at civilians.
D: I think you are forgetting that both sides here have committed atrocities. The Israelis are not exactly angels.
L: True, but most of there actions have been under the guise of military actions. For instance, they move troops into areas occupied by Palestinians with the intent to reduce the suicide bombings and what not. When they manage to reduce the violence, they move on to new objectives.
D: I think this “guise” has given them too much opportunity to justify their actions. Do you realize that since September of 2000, over 1000 Palestinians have been killed? That’s an average of more than one death a day. How could that possibly be all due to justifiable military operations? President Bush has taken a good stance in trying to get the Israeli military to back off of the Palestinians to allow for peace talks.
L: From the perspective of Israel, they are fighting off terrorists within their borders. This was also requested by President Bush after September 11. The United States created a policy of not being friendly with nations who harbor terrorist organizations. Israel, in that effect, should be receiving our full support in trying to end terror.
D: This isn’t as simple as abolishing the Al Qaeda. The Palestinians are at least partially justified in their claims to rights for areas of Israel. They were in fact in possession of the land fairly recently.
L: Do to agreements and accords, this land was taken away from them.
D: True, but should it have been? Clearly in 1993 when Israel agreed to recognize the Palestine Liberation Organization as a viable entity. They also allowed them to self rule certain areas. They cannot just change their minds about these agreements.
L: They certainly can if the PLO has begun performing terror attacks on innocent Israeli civilians. I think that justifies a breaking of those agreements. It seems unlikely that those peace agreements left the Palestinians with the right to attack the Israeli people without cause.
D: In the long run it seems that both sides have performed questionable actions and neither side is completely in the right. Hopefully, civilized peace talks can bring these issues to light and begin to bring an amount of stability back to this segment of the Middle East.
L: For centuries war has raged on in the Middle East. It seems unlikely that the current Israeli government will be able to bring an end to that. However, they are attempting to eradicate forms of terrorism within their borders and should be recognized and congratulated for that. It would be a great shame for the United States to condemn them for this act, while continuing to ask other countries all over the world to evict terrorists. It sets up a bad precedent of how we will support those actions. In a time when America’s motives are being questioned, it will not pay off in the long run to be hypocritical on this major international issue.
Let us know where you stand on this or other issues by dropping an email to different@clock.plymouth.edu. If you don’t like email, take the time to write a letter to the editor. We just want to hear from you.