LETTERS TO THE EDITOR: Arguments don't hold up under scrutiny

To the Editor: The clearly misguided Crystal wishes that the strategies for peace in the Middle East be reformed, and, not completely unwilling to lend his pen, mouth and mind to the cause, makes a few suggestions on exactly how this should be done. Crystal was quoted as saying, "We must set up a system where there is true peace through mutual fear. If the Arabs fear attacking us, they won't." What kind of a "true peace" is that? Crystal then elaborates, "If there is a terrorist from Gaza, we should bomb his house and all houses adjacent to it. That way, the community takes responsibility for its terrorists." Excuse me? I'm not particularly in favor of bombing anyone's house, but if it were to become necessary, then I suppose that bombing the terrorist's house could be a last resort. However, to bomb all of the adjacent homes as well? Would Crystal enjoyed being summarily judged for the actions of his neighbors? In an interesting side note, Crystal's column states the importance of free speech ("It's our country, too," DP, 2/29/96). Is the esteemed Crystal saying that it's OK to for bystanders to talk, but should their neighbors commit a terrorist action, then it's OK to kill them? Does this make any sense to anyone else? Additionally, in the news story, Crystal also says. "Bibi Netanyahu must be elected as prime minister because, unlike Peres, he has the courage to be a tough bargainer in the peace talks." However, an Associated Press dispatch printed on the DP's World Page the same day states, "[Netanyahu] would freeze or slow the peace process." Well, Crystal, which is it? Freeze the peace process or tough bargainer? Or, are they equivalent in your opinion? As has been pointed out by better people than myself, Crystal tends to just speak his mind without thinking his arguments through. I had no wish to add myself to that list of detractors, but Crystal's comments, while already absurd, now tend toward the lunatic fringe. It is a basic premise of prejudice that you allow one small group of people to create an image of an entire people. Crystal attempts to use that to defend the right-wing groups in Israeli politics; however, he then turns around and makes a statement that implies that all Palestinians who live in the West Bank or Gaza Strip are terrorists. If not, they why would Crystal advise bombing all adjacent homes of terrorists? Government-sanctioned retaliation bombings. Frozen peace process. "True peace" through mutual fear. Are these the types of ideas that will define the future of politics in Israel? Are these the type of politics that we should use around the world to stifle the stem of terrorism? In Cuba? In Bosnia? I hope not. Indeed, Crystal may be Jewish, but he has forgotten one of the most important concepts in Judaism: "And they will beat their swords into plowshares, and nation shall not rise up against nation, and man shall learn war no more." Eric Bycer Engineering and Wharton '98 n To the Editor: In his column "It's our country, too" (DP, 2/29/96), Dave Crystal's critiques of the Labor-led Israeli government are laced with anti-Arab bias and fallacy. Crystal may maintain the right to criticize Israeli policies and procedures. However, that right does not allow him to take liberties with the realities of the Middle East. Through numerous misrepresentations and conveniently omitted facts, Crystal paints a completely biased and faulty portrayal of the Israeli-Palestinian question. Crystal states that he is concerned, as a Jew, that "hundreds of Arab terrorists are being released to appease Yasser Arafat," while fellow Jews are imprisoned. I object to the labeling of Palestinians as terrorists. While there have been atrocities committed by both sides of this conflict, it would be unfair to generalize such a derogatory term to an entire population of people who yearn for the same peace that many Israelis do. Arafat is not looking to strengthen his "terrorist" state, as Crystal would lead us to believe, but rather, he is simply asking that these incarcerated Arabs, many jailed without due process of law, be granted their basic human rights. Crystal rather conveniently limits his demands for freedom and justice to Israeli Jews. Crystal goes on to bias his arguments further by dismissing the Palestinian state as a terrorist one, claiming that there have been "no tangible signs of peace." I find it rather unfortunate that Crystal can so easily undermine the progress that has been made toward peace. The dedication exhibited by both Arafat and the Israeli government toward peace is too easily ignored by Crystal in his attempts to sway opinion. Finally, Crystal is concerned, as an American, about $600 million in aid the U.S. provides to the Palestine Liberation Organization. Crystal has once again conveniently omitted the billions of U.S. taxpayer dollars that are funneled directly to Israel, dwarfing the sums granted for the resurrection of the Palestinian state and for a people ravaged by years of strife. If Crystal were truly concerned about where his taxpayer dollars were going, then he ought to start with Israel. Kareem Zaghloul Medicine '99