Jeff Yarslow and Shoshana Rosen

46

Author: 

Israel’s status as a nation has continually been threatened, contrary to what Patrick Rice claims in his article, “It’s Time for a Power Check.” The nation has faced attacks from its surrounding Arab neighbors since its creation in 1948. Since then the country has fought in self-defense to defend its livelihood.

In 1947, the UN General Assembly approved the “UN Partition Plan” which divided the territory between the Jews and Arabs. While David Ben-Gurion, Israel’s first Prime Minister, accepted the plan, the Arab League rejected it. This was followed by orders of the Arab Higher Committee to attack Jewish civilians for the next three days. Clearly, Israel’s intention was to compromise and promote peace, while the Arab League had other intentions. After Israel successfully suppressed the Arab attacks and became a sovereign nation, it was confronted with a second-phase of fighting from Iraq, Lebanon, Jordan, Egypt, and Syria.

Once again, in May 1967, Syria, Egypt, and Jordan were hinting at war with Israel. Egypt expelled UN Peacekeeping Forces, which was followed by an Egyptian blockade of Israeli vessels in the Straits of Tiran, as well as a build-up of tanks and aircraft along the Israeli border. Thus, with legitimate evidence of an imminent war, Israel responded and defeated the three nations in the “Six Day War.”

Then, of course, there was the killing of nine Israeli athletes at the 1972 Olympic Games in Munich. This attack was in cold blood and without justification, unlike Israeli military campaigns that have never intended to hurt innocent civilians of other nations. This is the difference between Arab terrorists and the Israeli military and the reason why the majority of Americans and practically all United States presidents of the second half of the twentieth century have supported Israel. One year later, Egyptian and Syrian armies launched a surprise attack on Israel on the most holy day of the Jewish calendar-Yom Kippur, “the Day of Atonement.” However, it is evident from the apathy and violence of the two countries that there was no regard of Jewish culture, nor any regard of the notion of “atonement.”

We must also not forget the attempted peace efforts between the Israeli and Palestinian Leaders in 1979 with the Israel-Egypt Peace Treaty, or in 1993 with the Oslo Accords that were signed with the Palestinian Liberation Organization. Israel is not set on war, or unjust violence. Rather, Israel has agreed to many treaties and made many compromises in their quest for peace.

This history of Israel’s military action is in essence self-defense. The state, founded by the United Nations and surrounded by Arab nations must maintain the size of its military in order to survive. As the sole democratic nation and with highest human rights standards in the Middle East, Israel can hardly be attributed to “heinous acts” and “atrocities” that Rice claims. In fact, Rice uses these severely loaded terms without adequately defining them. If he truly examined the details of his claim, Rice would find his points unsubstantiated.

Firstly, Israel has never practiced “collective punishment.” This summer’s retaliation in Lebanon was not unwarranted. Israel treats every soldier as a son or daughter of the country. They leave no soldier behind. Therefore, when Hezbollah, under Lebanese protection kidnapped two Israeli soldiers, the state of Israel took action to bring them home. Also, Rice failed to note that days before Israel bombed Lebanon, the Israeli Air Force flew over inhabited areas of Lebanon, dropping notices of when the attack would begin, providing ample time for innocent civilians to relocate.

Secondly, the state of Israel has never committed torture by “using Palestinians as ‘human shields.'” Since its inception Israel has only targeted military and terrorist sites-never civilians! And who exactly is using human shields? It was and is Hezbollah who hide themselves in civilian areas, amidst children. To our knowledge, there has never been an instance of an Israeli soldier putting a child’s life before his or her own.

Thirdly, Rice claimed that the barrier wall is “illegal under international law.” However, the wall is not a matter of keeping people and resources out, or isolating nations. Rather, the wall’s primary purpose is to protect the country from explosives and other terrorist threats. In fact, since its creation the percentage of boarder attacks has declined significantly. Furthermore, the wall is far from a permanent impediment to resources. The wall can be deconstructed and moved in a matter of hours.

Finally, we are troubled by Rice’s belief that there is “a profound sense of victim-hood prevalent in Judaism.” His obscure language leaves us only to guess his meaning. Could he be referring to our celebration for leaving slavery in Egypt? Perhaps it’s our insistence on discussing the pogroms of Eastern Europe? Maybe it’s even our tenacity in remembering the six million and more murdered in the Holocaust? But it just might be our belief that because of it all, Israel is a place of religious, physical, and political security for the Jewish people. In the struggles of its brief sixty-year history, Israel has maintained peace as its primary goal.

-Jeff Yaroslow, senior, Art History and the Visual Arts

-Shoshana Rosen, senior, ECBM/ECLS

This article has been archived, for more requests please contact us via the support system.

Loading

LEAVE A REPLY

Please enter your comment!
Please enter your name here