While I am not an expert on the dispute regarding Israel and Palestine, I find a number of points in Mr. Kaplan’s article that disturb me: First of all, he starts his article by insulting the United Nations. While the institution is not perfect, it saddens me to think that Mr. Kaplan would consider an international forum for nations to debate and take up their grievances as the “United Nothing.” One would think that “as an American,” Mr. Kaplan would give an institution based on a democratic form of world governance more credit. While the UN is far from perfect, Mr. Kaplan incorrectly assumes that the rest of the world should automatically be behind Israel’s plan for peace. Maybe the reason that the assembly did not jump to its feet in applause when they heard Ariel Sharon’s announcement of the withdrawal from the Gaza Strip was because they questioned the validity of the area being “rightfully conquered territory” as Mr. Kaplan boldly assumes. In regards to Mr. Kaplan’s statements about the “World Court”, properly known as the International Court of Justice (ICJ), making a blunder about Israel’s push for a security wall, I again, feel that I must protest. Israel’s own High Court of Justice stated that the facts provided led “the Court to decide that certain parts of the separation fence violate the rules of international law, and that other parts of the fence do not violate those rules,” at least partially affirming the opinion of the ICJ. While I don’t necessarily dispute Mr. Kaplan’s opinions about the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict, I do take offense to him insulting the integrity of the international community for simply not siding with Israel.
Coleman Donaldson III International Relations – CAS ’08 805/402-4305
This is an account occasionally used by the Daily Free Press editors to post archived posts from previous iterations of the site or otherwise for special circumstance publications. See authorship info on the byline at the top of the page.
