April 1990, Page 25

Other People's Mail

Some letters by or to other people are as informative for our readers as anything we might write ourselves.

Financing Jewish Settlement

To the Christian Science Monitor, Feb. 22, 1990

Regarding the article "Shift for Foreign Aid?," Jan. 25: Israel argues it needs the $3 billion in yearly US aid as it prepares to absorb hundreds of thousands of Soviet Jewish immigrants.

These Jews now living in Russia are not suffering from severe religious or political persecution. Their immigration should be put off until Israel can absorb them without US aid. If they were to immigrate now, these Jews would have to settle in the West Bank and Gaza Strip. And the US would be financially contributing to greater friction in an area already torn with strife.

The US should therefore discontinue this annual allotment to Israel until that country withdraws all settlements in the West Bank and Gaza Strip and a peaceful settlement between Israel and Palestine has been negotiated.

Fran Davis, Newport Beach, CA

Aid to Israel

To the Tulsa World, Feb. 20, 1990

The 5 percent cut in foreign aid to Israel proposed by Sen. Robert Dole should be higher. The money should help the people and stabilize countries that need the money like Mexico, Brazil or El Salvador. It is a crime that the money going to Israel is used to oppress and terrorize the Palestinian people. We should be against this kind of foreign aid.

Marjorie Rorie, Tulsa, OK

A Bold Senator and an Old US Aid Story

To the Christian Science Monitor, March 8, 1990

Regarding the opinion-page column "Why Dole Proposal Stirred a Hornets' Nest," Feb. 5: It is a breath of fresh air to hear a bold senator who speaks out for real US interests without being intimidated by Israeli supporters crying the overused accusation—anti-Semitism.

Israel and Jewish people have an undeniable right to a homeland just as the Palestinian Arabs do. But Israel, regardless of its assumed role of protector of US interests in the Middle East, has a history of aggression against the United States: Israel attacked the US ship Liberty in 1967, financed and supervised the Pollard spy affair, and provided security training to Panama's former strong man, Manuel Antonio Noriega.

In this era of prospering peace, democracy and goodwill, Israel should act more responsibly. But Israel still refuses to recognize the Palestinian approach to peace, and remains antagonistic to Arabs. Prime Minister Yitzhak Shamir refuses to talk directly to any Palestinians, imprisons their local leaders, and now wants Soviet Jews to immigrate to the West Bank. And Mr. Shamir expects US taxpayers to foot the bill for these activities.

Sen. Robert Dole (R-KS), who dares to stand against Israel, is the kind of politician America needs most. His proposal seeks to put US aid to better use.

Aziz Khasawneh, Diamond Bar, CA

The Expulsion of Palestinians

To The Washington Post, March 6, 1990

Phil Baum and Ralph Danziger of the American Jewish Congress (letters, Feb. 14) miss several important points in taking The Post to task for "moral shortcomings" in its Middle East reportage. Specifically, they object to the "radically different treatment accorded the alleged expulsion of 200 Palestinians by Israel and the massacre of thousands of Iraqis by their own army." The points worth considering are:

The Palestinians are not responsible for the behavior of the bloody-minded dictator in Iraq.

We Americans, because of the tremendous amount of money and other aid we have given Israel for many years, are directly responsible for Israel's behavior. We make it possible for Israel to routinely bomb or assassinate its neighbors, be they in Tunis or the Bekaa Valley; and, in this case, to expel Palestinians from their birthplaces.

What Messrs. Baum and Danziger call the "alleged expulsion" of Palestinians has been going on for months and is extensively documented in the Hebrew press in Israel. Sometimes it is referred to as the "Invisible Transfer." Except for a rare item such as The Post report to which Messrs. Baum and Danziger object, these expulsions have gone largely unreported in the U.S. media.

Messrs. Baum and Danziger should familiarize themselves with reportage in the Hebrew press in Israel before criticizing The Post.

George J. Paduda, McLean, VA

A Vote for East Jerusalem Arabs?

To The Washington Post, Feb. 2, 1990

Eugene V. Rostow's assertion (letters, Jan. 26) that "Israel has a strong claim to sovereignty under international law" has no legal basis whatsoever.

Israel's annexation of Jerusalem has not been "tacitly" recognized by the major powers. On the contrary, the fact that all the major powers refuse to have their embassies located in Jerusalem is an express denial of the legality of Israel's annexation of the Holy City.

Who, after all, lays down international law? Is it Prof. Julius Stone and Mr. Rostow, or is it the United Nations, which repeatedly (in 1967 resolutions 2253-ES-V and 2254-ES-V and in 1968 Resolution 252) declared the measures taken by Israel to change the status of Jerusalem invalid and condemned its annexation of the Holy City?

Furthermore, Mr. Rostow's contention that "the problem of Jerusalem will have to be faced when the Arab states are ready to make peace" is an unfortunate echo of the absurd and spurious old Israeli argument that Israel's conflict is with the Arab states and not with the Palestinians.

It should also be borne in mind that the Palestinians do not demand the implementation of their rights in East Jerusalem and its holy places solely as Palestinians, but they do so equally as custodians of the Moslem holy places on behalf of the whole Muslim world.

Anwar Nashashibi, Bethesda, MD (The writer is a former Jordanian ambassador and Cabinet member.)

Palestinian Arabs Brace for Third Exodus

To the Austin American-Statesman, Feb. 24, 1990

Re: the William Safire column (Feb. 13), "Palestinian Arabs brace for 3rd Exodus." The brilliant Mr. Safire is at it again. For the second time since 1948 those Palestinians are showing their temerity again with regard to the expected large influx of Soviet Jews in to Israel, and more especially into the West Bank and Gaza. The land on which they and their forebears lived for more than a thousand years was never really their land. God, we are told, gave it to others who have backed up their claim with, among other atrocities, massacres, "surgical" air strikes in US-supplied planes, cluster bombs and various other "convincers" supplied by us American taxpayers for free. But, those Palestinians just won't leave; how stubborn can a people get? (and, how cruel and inhumane can we self-congratulatory Americans get?)

Safire says "Israel is doing its moral duty." How humane, how moral, placing Soviet Jews who had a land, homes, and jobs on the land of another people who are being treated barbarously by the Israeli government. And, we Americans are expected to foot the bill to support this new attempt to stamp out the Palestinians.

Is Shamir trying to make history repeat itself? Back in the thirties there was another rather mad European demanding more "lebensraum." I wonder what the young Safire thought then. Exclusivism did not work then; it won't work now.

William V. Kelley, Austin, TX

Pre-positioning is Dangerous

To Senator Robert C. Byrd, Feb. 15, 1990

On observing the television program "Crossfire" recently the word "pre-positioning" was used, which seemed to refer to the United States storing billions in war materials and munitions in Israel, in addition to subsidizing them with $50 billion or more in the last 20 years. Our subsidy now is nearly $10 million a day.

I can remember a period just prior to World War II when we "lend-leased" 50 ships to Great Britain. My concern is that "pre-positioning" military arms in another country may help bring on World War III. Is this the proper place to store arms without control, when the country you store them with has, on at least 30 occasions, acted exactly opposite to our interest?

Some of these arms were sold to Iran, when we were asking everyone else not to sell them arms ....

When did the voters approve "prepositioning?" Has the average voter even heard of it?

Jay Adams, South Charleston, WV

Dear Mr. Adams:

I am immediately looking into the matter brought to my attention in your correspondence.

In an effort to be responsive to your concems, I have today forwarded your correspondence to appropriate officials of the U.S. Department of Defense for comment. As soon as I receive a reply, I will contact you again.

Assuring you of my desire to be of service whenever possible, I am

Sincerely yours,

Robert C. Byrd, United States Senate (Committee on Appropriations)

Israel Needs to Become Self Supporting Nation

To The Greenville (SQ News, Jan. 28, 1990 Strange that a group of people can get together, create a flag, and identify itself as Israel, while establishing itself as a long-term welfare recipient of the United States. Stranger still that the United States has allowed such a situation like this to exist.

Furthermore, how can this group look with pride at its accomplishments when it has not been able to, or chooses not to, become a self-supporting nation during all of these 40 some odd years? This puts it in the same class as all other "least developed nations" that are always looking for a handout.

And just what does this make us: a second rate chump or a very stupid group of people? We continue to give away money we do not have to support people who do not really care what happens to us, so long as we continue to support them like so many leeches.

Perhaps a little pride in themselves and their flag would prompt them to go off our dole and become a truly independent nation that will learn to respect all other individuals and nations.

George A. Anderson, Greenville, SC

Justice for Beit Sahour

To Congressman John Dingell, Nov. 8,1989

Dear Mr. Dingell:

I just came back from a fact finding trip to the occupied West Bank. A group of 200 American citizens visited a town called Beit Sahour. Beit Sahour has been under curfew and siege by the Israeli army for the last 2 months because the Palestinian inhabitants refused to pay taxes to a foreign government. They say no taxation without representation.

The Israeli army, financed and equipped by the United States, attacked the town, beat and jailed most of its people, removed furniture and appliances from the houses, confiscated drugs from pharmacies, dismantled machinery and equipment from factories and prevented food supplies from reaching the town. They were nice enough not to take black and white TVs, but they took all the cars and trucks for auction in Tel Aviv.

According to Mayor Hana Al Atrash, more than $3 million were stolen by the Israeli gangs, 30 times more than the imposed taxes.

I join the people of Beit Sahour in asking the US government to decrease by $3 million US aid to Israel.

I would appreciate a reply to my letter.

Rafeek M. Farah, MD, Trenton, MI

Dear Dr. Farah, Feb. 9, 1990

I am enclosing the report I have received from the State Department. I hope that you find the information useful.

You can be assured that should the issue of American assistance to Israel come before the House for debate and vote, I will certainly keep your views in mind.

With every good wish,

Sincerely, John D. Dingell, Member of Congress

Dear Mr. Dingell, Feb. 25, 1990

Thank you for your Dec. 11 letter to the Secretary, to which I have been asked to reply. Your letter conveyed the correspondence from your constituent, Dr. Rafeek Farah, who expressed concern about the situation of Beit Sahour, a town in the West Bank.

The inhabitants of Beit Sahour boycotted paying taxes to protest the Israeli occupation of the West Bank. The Israeli authorities declared the town a closed military area in their efforts to collect taxes.

We acknowledge that Israel, as the occupying power, has certain rights to collect taxes in the occupied territories. We were aware of the situation in the town and sympathetic to the plight of its inhabitants. We raised this issue with the Israelis, and made clear our concern about the extensive use of curfews and property seizures against this non-violent protest. We urged that the level of confrontation be lowered and that problems be resolved by non-violent means. The Israeli authorities reopened Beit Sahour after forty-two days.

Press reports indicated that Israeli tax authorities confiscated goods worth approximately 3 million shekels (roughly $1.5 million). We are uncertain if this matches or exceeds what the residents of the town were said to owe.

Dr. Farah advocates that we deduct $3 million from U.S. aid to Israel, arguing that this was the value of property confiscated from Beit Sahour. In general, our aid over the years has reflected our commitment to Israel's security and our interest in achieving a comprehensive Middle East peace. We do not believe reducing our aid, as Dr. Farah suggests, would be an appropriate response.

I hope this information will be useful.

Sincerely, Janet G. Mullins, Asst. Sec. Legislative Affairs, US Dept. of State