Letters, February 4, 2011

THE latest unrest in the Arab world, namely in Tunisia and Egypt, is not just the frustration of the street about high prices and the lack of freedom, but a clash of secular vs religious dogma. US Secretary of State Hillary Clinton has called on Egypt to allow political freedom, but she has misjudged the whole situation.

If Egypt allowed so-called free elections the chances are that the outlawed Muslim Brotherhood, the forerunner to Hamas, would gain seats in parliament and even help form a government. That is the stark reality. Even though we in the West wish for the Arab world to be more democratic, there is a real danger it can backfire.

Clinton would do well to consider the old Arab Baathist regimes of the ’50s and ’60s. Even though they might seem autocratic and undemocratic, the alternative is far worse. After all, Egypt signed a peace treaty with Israel under a Nasserite regime; Syria has held talks with Israel; and while the monarchist rule of Jordan might not hold free elections, Jordan has also signed a peace treaty with Israel.

With free elections in all those Arab countries bordering Israel, the Muslim parties running in those elections and then potentially winning a majority, the future does not look bright. Using the “d” word in the Arab world can end in one letter and that is “w” for war.

CAN the Palestinian Authority please come up with a united response regarding the “Palestine papers”?

The President – Mahmoud Abbas – labels the leaked papers “shameful fabrications”, while the chief Palestinian peace negotiator – Saeb Erekat – has confirmed their authenticity.

Who do I believe?

THE Palestinian reaction to the WikiLeaks documents as a “sell-out” is easily understandable in terms of their long record of sending mixed messages in the mistaken belief that they can have the best of all worlds.

For decades, the duplicitous Yasser Arafat spoke in English of compromises and a peaceful resolution to the Middle East conflict, but preached rejectionism and violence in Arabic to his adoring masses.

Similarly, the current Palestinian leadership has been negotiating with Israel, seemingly in good faith, but at the same time assuring their constituency that nothing short of their total demands will be accepted as a resolution of conflict.

This flawed formula for dealing with people is never going to work, especially in the international arena, and explains why the Palestinians have gone into meltdown over the leaked documents. Conversely, the Israelis have calmly discovered that what was said in private by their leadership was identical to that discussed in public.

To date, the Palestinian audience has been told that the only acceptable outcome will be a state within the 1967 borders with a divided Jerusalem as its capital, and all refugees of 1948 (and their descendants) returning to what is now Israel. And with a wink to the wider Arab world, the Palestinian leadership has indicated that its ultimate goal is the removal of Israel as a sovereign Jewish state from the Middle Eastern landscape.

But what has been obvious to Israel’s supporters all along, is that until the Palestinian leaders start speaking honestly and in realistic terms to their people, any future negotiations will have little chance of success.

I SENT the following letter to the Mayor of Marrickville. I have yet to receive the courtesy of a reply:

“One cannot help wonder what the real issue is behind the Marrickville Council boycott.

“If it is ‘occupation’ why is there no boycott of China over Tibet or Turkey over Cyprus or the Arab nations, Iran or Turkey over Kurdistan?

“Israel accepted borders after the invading Arab armies were defeated in 1948, while at Arab insistence, the ceasefire lines were not to be the recognised borders. There were no settlements, when the Arab league declared the Three No’s of Khartoum: No peace, no negotiations and no recognition

of Israel. Yet terror was ongoing long before 1967.

“Neither Kurds, nor Cypriots, nor Tibetans have ever sought the destruction of China or Iran or Arab countries, while Hamas has a current ‘no peace ever and destruction of Israel’ charter, and Fatah has done nothing to disabuse their people of the promises they have made for the last 65 years, which essentially is destruction of Israel, by the back door.

“It is Fatah that is evading talks on peace and borders, not Israel, despite the UN Security Council Resolution 242 calling for negotiated borders.

“So please, what is the real issue? Because clearly neither occupation nor human suffering is the issue.”

I REFER to Rose Bellamy’s letter (AJN 28/01). I am no activist, however; it is my intention to stand outside the local polling booth on March 26 with a sign to the effect of “Australian Greens have passed a proposal to boycott Israeli goods, trading, sporting, cultural and academic events”, and I encourage others to do so. Jews and non-Jews must be warned about this insidious mob.

GEORGE Teitler argues that to promote the message that the Jewish community cares, appeals for disaster relief should be centrally organised by the ECAJ (AJN 28/01).

Perhaps predictably, I beg to differ. The critical issue in effective relief for the victims of natural disasters is to get  assistance to those who need it most as quickly as possible, and with maximum cost-effectiveness.

B’nai B’rith has been at the forefront of assistance with disaster relief across the world since its inception 168 years ago, and is able to respond immediately where needed. Through our strong network of volunteers, we absorb all overhead costs associated with our various appeals, so that all funds raised are remitted in full to the organisation best placed to provide on-the-ground assistance. The outstanding and continuing response to our Queensland Floods Relief Appeal indicates that we must be doing something right.

Mr Teitler is concerned that the message that Australian Jews care for Australia should be recognised and heard widely. I agree. What a great message it is, that the Jewish community is working with all the organisations cited by Mr Teitler – Salvos, Aboriginal communities, etc. – in providing assistance to those who have suffered. B’nai B’rith will be doing its bit to achieve maximum coverage for this message, and if ECAJ chooses to assist us in the promotion of this message, we would be delighted.

REYZL Zylberman encourages drawing a distinction between Jewish culture and Zionism (AJN 28/01). To my mind, this is a problem.

It is true that Judaism survived 1900 years of exile without a Jewish state, which makes us so unique in the world.

However, she cannot deny the centrality of Eretz Yisrael to Judaism. The Torah is heavily concerned with a group of Jewish slaves going to Eretz Yisrael, and after conquest by King David, Jerusalem became the centre of Jewish life. There is absolutely no confusion between Judaism and Eretz Yisrael, which Ms Zylberman considers “political Zionism”.

The prophet Ezekiel (chapter 37, verses 21-22) wrote, “So says the Lord God: Behold I will take the children of Israel from among the nations where they have gone, and I will gather them from every side and bring them to their country. And I will make them into one nation in the mountains of Israel.”

You can be a fervent Zionist and not be a Jew. But, in my opinion, if you respect our holy scriptures, you cannot be a full Jew without being a Zionist.

THE decision of NSW Administrative Decision Tribunal to grant a gun licence to Darryl Potts is a disgrace.

The surname of this Holocaust denier appropriately describes tribunal member Peter Molony.

FURTHER to Avril Alba’s piece “Fictional truths” (AJN 28/01), I am dead against fiction books about the Holocaust.

It is demeaning and trivialising. The Holocaust was not a fiction and it does not belong there.

Very occasionaly, some black humor emerged, springing out from a desperate situation. But that was created by inmates.

There are many different topics that writers could write about for sensation and profits.

It seems many writers do not even bother to conduct some research about life in the camps.

In John Boyne’s Boy in the Striped Pyjamas, this little boy appeared to be able to simply walk calmly under the barbered wire day in and day out, amicably chatting with another boy over the fence. And the guards never noticed him.

Life to me was anything but beautiful, despite the film of Mr Roberto Benigni, who, while in the camp, was calmly serenading his wife over the loud speaker, while making fun of a German guard standing next to him.

It’s such a pity that the German guards were not the idiotic clowns portrayed in Hogan Heroes.

Life would have been so much more beautiful then.