This week Locke and Demonthesis focus their discussion on the continued conflict in between Israelis and the Palestinians.
Locke: For the third time this month, we are in position to discuss the issues in the Middle East. I can’t help but become increasingly more frustrated with the way the whole situation is being played out.
Demonthesis: I can certainly share your annoyance with the way things are being played out, yet I am sure we are not in agreement about where the problems are. Palestine has been horribly oppressed for years. Only now are those issues coming to light. I find it unfortunate that they have resorted to the tactics they have chosen, yet they are doing what they must.
L: I think it is ludicrous to think that they are at all justified in their reaction to the supposed oppression you say they’ve experienced. In the US alone we have a huge population who has suffered far greater oppression than the Palestinians could ever contemplate.
D: If you are referring to the African-American population, I kind of see your point. They were oppressed for years, but they also fought against that and won their freedom to be treated equally.
L: The main difference however, is that the African-American population, as a majority, protested peacefully and in the end were successful in merging with the society. They did not fight to take over the South. They did not demand to have a portion of the US carved out where only they would be allowed to govern and do as they like.
D: I would not have blamed them if they had wanted such a place. They were treated terribly. They truly deserved to have a portion of land where they could be safe from bigotry.
L: That is talk of segregation, not equality and tolerance. We should not encourage Palestine to be hell bent on dislodging any amount of civil rights that may exist in the Middle East.
D: Let’s be serious, segregation is a desired thing in that region. No one has gotten along in that region for centuries. If the various religions and races could stay out of each other’s way, maybe that would be a clean start toward understanding their differences. Certainly Arafat is not Martin Luther King Jr. He is not going to lead the people in a peaceful movement for equal treatment. So, in a time where both sides suffer poor leadership, we should settle on a situation where they can live in peace.
L: That is just a short term situation. What really needs to happen is for Arafat to be exiled so the terror can stop and steps can be taken toward securing a peaceful future for the Middle East.
D: No one would deny that Arafat is muddying the waters, but Sharon is no Gandhi himself. Unfortunately, both leaders are strongly rooted in the confidence of their people. Until one of them makes a mistake that the entire world, including Middle Eastern citizens, agree is way out of line, they’ll stay in power. As long as the current power holders remain there, short term solutions are all the world can reasonably hope for.
L: So what you are saying is that until a great Middle Eastern leader emerges we are stuck with war and discontent in that region? I sorely hope that isn’t true. The track record isn’t all that good so far. It isn’t a region known for its powerful world leaders, at least not in the last century.
D: My point is that we need to stop the killing and the violence immediately. If that means placating the Palestinians by providing them segregation from Israel, let’s go for it. If neither has to directly associate with the other any violence would have clearly delineated right and wrong. That would be the end of it. The region could then stay that way until one of their own raised the public up to see a more peaceful and tolerant way of life.
L: I believe the United States can be that great leader. Now is the time to bring long lasting peace. We need to take control of the region or influence its leaders onto this path of tolerance. A permanent change for peace, now.