Israel Deserves Defense

Let me put my cards on the table: I am, as Michael Figa so eloquently put it, “an assumedly educated American with a high standard of living.” I learned the tenets of liberalism, and I listened well. I believe in the sanctity of all human life. And I have never been as frightened or disgusted by something I read in the newspaper as I was when I read Figa’s claim that “the suicide bombers … have a respect for human life.” How can Figa claim that a person who blows himself up respects human life when that person does not even respect his own life? Figa would like us to believe that the fact that more Palestinians than Israelis have died in their war against Israel justifies a Palestinian sniper shooting a baby girl, Shalhevet Pas, as she sat in her stroller outside her home, or a gunman opening fire on a wedding party in Tel Aviv. Such a view is indefensible. There can be no justification for the targeted killing of civilians.

Figa claims that American support for Israel brought about Sept. 11. The idea is simply preposterous; while Osama bin Laden directed his terrorist attacks at America for years before Sept. 11, his only statement connecting his actions with the violence in Israel came near the end of the war in Afghanistan. If Sept. 11 was really only about American support for Israel, why did bin Laden wait so many years to comment on the issue? It seems much more plausible that, as countless people, including The Daily Free Press’ Danny Baram, have proposed, the terrorists hate democracy and thus target both Israel and America.

Furthermore, Figa’s references to the Holocaust are reprehensible. His admission of Jewish lineage only makes me wonder if he has considered how his murdered ancestors might feel about his callous and shameless manipulation of their memory. To compare Sharon, a freely elected head of state defending his constituents against a threat to their lives, with Hitler, a totalitarian dictator who masterminded the systematic murder of 12 million innocent civilians — not only Jews, but homosexuals, gypsies and others — is to disgrace the memory of those who were murdered by Nazi Germany. The accusation that Israel is a racist state is simply a lie; Israeli Arabs are full citizens, enjoying all of the privileges of citizenship. In its 54-year history, Israel has absorbed thousands of refugees from countries such as Ethiopia, Yemen and Iraq, and during the war in Yugoslavia, hundreds of Bosnian Muslims found safe haven in Israel while no Arab Muslim country would take them in. These actions could hardly be motivated by racism.

Figa also quotes a news item in which Israeli forces accidentally shelled a truck carrying a Palestinian terrorist’s wife and children. He fails to mention, however, that the Israeli government immediately acknowledged the mistake and apologized. While this does not change the fact of their deaths, it certainly indicates remorse that is entirely absent from Palestinians who murder Israeli civilians. I am surprised that Figa, who by his own articulation betrays an excellent education, would attempt to manipulate the press so blatantly. Could it be that the only way to make that point was through distortion and half-truth?

I agree with Figa that the just solution would be a Jewish State in Israel and an autonomous Palestinian state next to it. This solution can only work, however, if the Palestinian state renounces any desire to destroy Israel. I can not believe that the current Palestinian regime meets this requirement when it insists that “Palestine, with the boundaries it had during the British Mandate, is an indivisible territorial unit” (The Palestinian National Charter, Article 2), “The partition of Palestine in 1947 and the establishment of the state of Israel are entirely illegal” (PNC, Article 19) and “Armed struggle is the only way to liberate Palestine” (PNC, Article 9). Could we reasonably expect the Israeli government to believe in a negotiated solution when the Palestinians “reject all solutions which are substitutes for the total liberation of Palestine” (PNC, Article 21)?

Figa would like Israel to return to Jordan, Syria and Egypt land captured in wars of self-defense. Where is there a precedent for this in history? Syria would like control over the Golan Heights. Had Syria not attacked Israel twice, it would have control over the Golan. I find it hard to understand Figa’s inclusion of Egypt and Jordan in this statement, however. Both countries have negotiated lasting peace treaties with Israel, so I am not sure how Figa sees a bequest of territory to those countries helping anything.

I hope for a diplomatic solution to the violence in Israel. I believe the Palestinian people should have an autonomous state. But until the Palestinians end their campaign of terror against Israeli civilians and amend the parts of the Palestinian National Charter that call for Israel’s destruction, I fear that a diplomatic solution is not possible. In the meantime, then, I affirm Israel’s right to defend her citizens in the face of terrorism and murder.