 |
 |
|
|
| More pressure for Mid East peace
Guardian Saturday April 6, 2002
Despite widespread international
condemnation for its policy of violent repression against the Palestinian
people in the occupied territories, the Israeli government appears impervious
to moral appeals from world leaders (Fear of wider conflict as army pushes
on, April 5). The major potential source of effective criticism, the US,
seems reluctant to act. However, there are ways of exerting pressure from
within Europe.
Odd though it may appear, many national and European cultural and research
institutions, including especially those funded from the EU and the
European Science Foundation, regard Israel as a European state for the
purposes of awarding grants and contracts. Would it not therefore be
timely if at both national and European level a moratorium was called
upon any further such support unless and until Israel abides by UN resolutions
and opens serious peace negotiations with the Palestinians along the
lines proposed in many peace plans, including most recently that sponsored
by the Saudis and the Arab League. Prof Richard Dawkins Prof Colin Blakemore Prof Steven Rose Dr Marina Lynch Prof Jean-Marc Levy-Leblond Prof Juliette Frey Prof Nora Frontali Prof Eva Jablonka Prof Per Andersen and 115 other academics
· "They would love to see me dead," says the Palestinian poet
Mahmoud Darwish in one of his poems. We writers and artists believe
in his right and the right of the Palestinian people to live free of
the nightmare that is now unfolding at their doorstep - the nightmare
of living under curfew and siege, without electricity, telephones, or
the needs of daily life, cut off from the rest of the country and the
world; of having their homes broken into, their sons rounded up, tagged,
and hauled away; of summary executions whose purpose seems to be to
incite further violence; of fear of adding yet more names to the list
of the disabled and dead.
We call on all people of good conscience to protest against the onslaught
on the Palestinian people, their institutions, and the fabric of their
society, and to demand the immediate withdrawal of the Israeli army
so that the peace process may resume. We call on the US to adopt an
evenhanded approach to justice and not to blame the victim for the crimes
of the oppressor.
It seems the policy of the government of Israel is to eradicate the
very idea of Palestine. What they have succeeded in doing instead, is
creating the grounds for vendettas for generations to come. · Yasser Arafat's cry for intervention isn't a plea for peace.
It's a plea to help save his terrorist infrastructure from destruction
- a cry President Bush must ignore (Enough is enough, April 5). The
surge of criticism of the president's supposed inaction began with Mr
Arafat and our usual critics - Belgium, the EU, "moderate" Arabs etc.
It was less than two years ago that President Clinton brought Arafat
and Ehud Barak to Camp David. Since then, September 11 has come and
most people now clearly understand that Israel is fighting the same
fight as the US - we are defending ourselves against terror. Arafat
continued with his double talk - saying one thing to the world in English
and exactly the opposite to his peo ple in Arabic. He has chosen the
path of terror and until this is brought to an end, there can be no
more talk.
It appears that Bush now believes only he can produce the peace we
so desperately desire. My concern is that he will interrupt our efforts
to destroy the terrorist infrastructure. It should be pointed out that
Israel's efforts have been done with a minimum of loss of life for the
Palestinians, while this effort has exposed our own soldiers. Since
Israel began its offensive against terror there has not been a single
suicide bombing.
Israel doesn't want or need help at this point. We certainly don't
want outside troops here. We can defend ourselves. Once the terrorist
infrastructure has been destroyed, I believe that negotiations with
US assistance might be in order. President Bush and Secretary Powell
should keep away at this delicate stage in our effort to bring the terror
to an end. · "Engagement at last"; "Bush has finally grasped that Sharon
is the problem" (Leaders, April 5)? How naive can you get? Bush got
a real shock when the Arab world united against him in opposing military
action against Iraq. What better way to cause some division among the
ranks than being seen to call Israel to order - secure in the knowledge
that Sharon will not take a bit of notice? · If Bush takes America's vast power and concomitant responsibilities
seriously, why doesn't he send soldiers in to separate the combatants?
|
 |
| |||