March 1990, Page 4

Letters To (and From) The Editors

Archie Roosevelt Responds

Just a word to thank you for Andrew Killgore's review of my book in the Washington Report, which I have just received. I think it is the best review I have had to date because it is more perceptive than all the others about the book, and my reason for writing it as I did.

While it is true that I was not expansive about my years with the CIA or with David Rockefeller, one of my principal purposes in writing the book was to show how the Soviets began the Cold War in the Middle East, encouraged by their success at the Tehran Conference. There has been so much revisionist nonsense written about this that I wanted to set the exact record straight, including a great many facts which have never before come to light in book form. For instance, I was infuriated to read in a respectable Middle East studies magazine an article by an author who had obviously read none of the basic material about the Soviet occupation of Azerbaijan, who insisted that Soviet actions were dictated by fear of our small-scale construction of a base in Dhahran. What pleased me most was that your reviewer found my book fun to read. I had a certain amount of fun writing it.

Archibald B. Roosevelt, Jr., Washington, DC

Lack of Objectivity?

I have been a reader of your magazine over several years. It is informative and I welcome receiving it. However, I was saddened to read one of the photo captions on the inside cover of the January issue. It showed your biases and lack of objectivity.

You have written, "A fundamentalist distributes campaign literature. . ." Let me first say that there is no such thing as a fundamentalist party which is universal to the Islamic, Christian and Jewish world. Secondly, if the Arab countries are not tolerant of the different views in their countries I think that the chances for democracy are rare. King Hussein himself welcomed the result of the elections as the voice of the Jordanian people. He did not point fingers at anybody. Your caption indicates you have the same questions as the US media about the role of Muslims in the politics of the Muslim countries. All winners are Jordanian except the Muslims who are "fundamentalist." May I know to what country do the "fundamentalists" belong so that they can go and voice their opinions there? Thirdly, your labeling the Muslims of a particular Muslim political opinion as fundamentalist is no different than calling a particular Jewish opinion as Zionist. I was sorry to learn that from a magazine like yours.

I hope you will publish this letter. Imtiyaz Yusuf, Philadelphia, PA

Our caption was based upon the report from our correspondent in Amman, and the caption from the agency (Agence France Presse) that supplied the photo. Our use of the term "fundamentalist" is not meant to be pejorative, but descriptive. Pat Robertson, a former Republican party presidential candidate, is a Christian fundamentalist. We are not being judgmental in so describing him. Nor do we think it is judgmental to call some Jews "Zionist," and others "anti-Zionist."

It's useful for readers in evaluating their comments and actions. We think what you're really saying is that our editorial 'policy is consistently critical of the Islamic Revolutionary regime in Iran, and those who march to its drum—and cash its checks—in Lebanon (Hezbollah) and, very likely, Syria (Ahmad Jibril) and Gaza (Hamas). You're right. If that Iranian regime, like the current regime in Israel, would stop using religion to justify conducting or subsidizing policies of repression, torture, murder and state sponsored terrorism, we would stop being judgmental about them both.

European Role in Resolving Israeli-Palestinian Dispute

Robert K. Olson (Washington Report, January 1990) is right to remind Americans of the crucial role Europe has played, and will continue to play, in the Israeli-Palestinian equation. The fact that Americans don't have a clue about European peace initiatives in the Middle East is a product of both sheer neglect on the part of American mass media as well as traditional ethnocentrism. Strangely enough, Mr. Olson seems to fall into the same trap in his discussion of this topic: "Muslim populations are invading Europe as relentlessly as are Latin Americans the us."

I am dismayed that he would write such a thing, and doubly surprised that the Washington Report would allow such a phrase to enter its pages.

I also take exception to the omission of the important role played by one European country in helping to facilitate Middle East peace negotiations. I refer here to Sweden. It was, after all, Sweden which gave Yasser Arafat the red carpet treatment after the US State Department decided not to permit him to address the UN General Assembly in New York. It was also Sweden that played an important part in behind-the-scenes negotiations concerning the Iran-Iraq war. Perhaps the US should be looking more to European countries not only for their strategies but also for the way they go about their diplomacy. Sensitivity to language and the words we use to describe people and situations is not a bad place to begin.

Laura Cooley, Uppsala, Sweden

Palestinian Collaborators

Frank Collins ("Why Palestinians Kill Palestinians in Israeli-Occupied Territories, (November 1989) says the killings reflect "awareness that the collaborators are a deadly danger" corresponding to the "killing of collaborators by the Resistance in France in World War II."

Bassam Eid of East Jerusalem, a PLO supporter who works for B'Tselem, says the uprising's leadership erred in allowing the killing of "collaborators" to become an accepted part of the intifada (in "Jerusalem," Jerusalem Post insert, Friday, Dec. 5, 1989, p. 2). He says many of the killings were not associated with Israel. Some were for "moral offenses," others because of feuds or as a result of rival Palestinian organizations settling accounts and because killing of "collaborators" became a way for new organizations to establish themselves. He concludes: "For the intifada to succeed, our first priority must be to stop these killings. They have nothing to do with achieving freedom."

Friends of justice and Palestinian rights will better serve justice and Palestinian rights by public condemnation of the evil of the intafada. The obligation is particularly urgent and relevant for those who reside in the security of the United States.

Joseph Lerner, Jerusalem, Israel

It is our understanding that the mainstream (Al Fatah) leadership of the PLO has denounced any killings that have taken place without an initial warning enabling a "collaborator" to change his ways; and without confirmation from Tunis of the "death sentencc" imposed upon the collaborator by intifada leadership inside the occupied territories. It is also our understanding that some killings have been to settle personal scores or rivalries without authorization from anyone. Every underground, whether fighting the Nazi occupation in France, Norway, Yugoslavia, Greece and the Warsaw ghetto in World War II, or the Jewish underground against the British and the Arabs in Palestine prior to 1947, is replete with such examples. Killing of collaborators with the enemy is the only defense people suffering armed oppression have against betrayal and being killed themselves. Killing of innocents, however, ultimately defeats the cause in whose name the killings are committed.

Abu Nidal Clarification

Thank you for your effort to present a balanced view on issues concerning the Middle East. In reference to the special report on Abu Nidal, "Portrait of a Renegade" (the Washington Report, February 1990):

1. The author's information on Imam A Banna, the founder of the Muslim Brotherhood in Egypt, is inaccurate. The Muslim Brotherhood was founded in the 1930s during the reign of the late King Farouq. Imam Hasan Al-Banna was assassinated in 1949. Gamal Abdul Nasser came to power in 1952. Therefore, Hasan Al-Banna is not a contemporary of the Abdul Nasser regime.
   
   
2. While this piece of information is irrelevant to the subject of the report, it suggests to the reader a possible connection between the Brotherhood movement and Abu Nidal group. There is no connection between the two. Would it be appropriate to drag Mr. James Baker's name into reporting the doings of Mr. Jim Bakker because their last names sound the same? Thank you again for a good job on the Washington Report.

Wael el-Yahya, Herndon, VA

We stand corrected.

Environmental Repercussions of Israeli Occupation

Thank you for providing us with a copy of the July 1988 issue of your magazine. The three photos showing the destruction and forest-planting on the site of the Palestinian city of Emmaus are a startling discovery.

We have done a number of short items on the environment in Israel over the years, some in praise, some in criticism. Each time we have received letters accusing us of being biased either toward the Palestinian or the Israeli cause.

I expected to see letters responding to our report on the Israeli Army's use of dogs as remote-controlled bombs. To my surprise, it was the item about reforesting the burned forests of Mount Carmel that prompted a letter of complaint.

Walter Epp followed up on my request to substantiate his claim that many of Israel's forests were built on the sites of towns the Palestinian people had been driven from.

I would be interested in any further light you can shed on this matter. Meanwhile, the series of three photos will illustrate vividly why not all forests bring joy to the human heart.

On the off-chance that the original unscreened prints of the photos might be available, they would be best for reproduction. I understand that these may no longer be on hand and believe we can work with the images in the magazine.

Gar Smith, Editor, Earth Island Journal, 300 Broadway, Suite 28, San Francisco, CA 94133

We've returned the original photos to the Association for the Reconstruction of Emmaus in Geneva, Switzerland. You are welcome to work from the copies in the Washington Report. We are also sending you a booklet with a list of more than 400 destroyed Palestinian towns and villages, constituting some of the "desert" that Zionism made "bloom." The citrus and olive groves planted by vanished villagers compose an even larger part of that "desert," now under new, Jewish ownership.

Fundraising for Middle East Organizations

I support your efforts and constantly echo the information found among the pages of the Washington Report in my letters to politicians, journalists and editors. Recently I was able to purchase subscriptions and books and will do so again when possible.

The Council for the National Interest (CNI) may be the source of truth that will make Americans more informed voters. I will help CNI whenever I can.

I received a solicitation for the Jewish Committee on the Middle East (JCOME) using AET's letterhead. Allowing JCOME to use your mailing list will siphon off donations that would have gone to AET, Washington Report, CNI, etc. The Jewish community is very late with its condemnation of Israel. I suspect JCOME's late arrival is an effort to counter the rising tide of anti-Jewish sentiment resulting from Israel's treatment of the Palestinians.

Mike Paproski, Omaha, NE

Thanks for your concern for our finances, which, unfortunately, is well-founded. We have more to say about ourselves and like minded organizations on the publishers' page at the back of this issue. The principal organizer of JCOME, as an individual, has been speaking out in defense of Palestinian human rights for a long time. JCOME is the very first national Jewish organization to call for putting strings on US aid to Israel. Since the directors of AET believe that is the only way Americans can contribute to peace in the Middle East, AET should call to the attention of Washington Report readers the existence of new but important organizations like CNI and JCOME. Names of Washington Report subscribers and AET supporters are never sold, rented or even loaned to other organizations, however. When we mail literature for another organization to subscribers, it is because we be lieve that group is doing something worthwhile, and, for some reason, it was not possible to make advertising space available for it in the Washington Report. Our subscription list never leaves our own control.

Flippant Editorial Reply

I was shocked and disappointed in the flippant editorial reply to the letter from Robert Dolaw which accompanied the reprint of the Charley Reese column (February 1990). Your reply, "It just shows what can happen when rednecks, like the publisher and editor of this magazine, read a book" makes use of negative stereotyping of the very kind your publication decries. It implies that people who disagree with you do so because they are ignorant. I think we can count on it ending any hope that Mr. Reese "is coming around" and who knows how many points of light in the South just winked out.

I think you owe your readers an apology for this rare slip.

John J. Geyer, Piscataway, NJ

We thought by including ourselves we weren't being offensive. Obviously we were wrong and, to all offended, we apologize. As for the points of light, if a lot more don't wink on very soon, we'll sputter out. We're carrying a debt of nearly $100,000 to publish this magazine, and that's too much for an unpaid publisher from southern Alabama and an unpaid editor from southern California.