.jpg)
Salient. Official Newspaper of Victoria University of Wellington Students Association. Vol 40 No. 23. September 12 1977
Expanding our Boarders
Expanding our Boarders
Dear Salient,
Israel and Palestine is one subject on which I part company with what seems to be VUW student policy. Grant Simpson's article on the recent debate reminds me to make these points, as a non-Jew who has however visited Israel, Jordon, Egypt and neighbouring countries on two occasions (about five months in ail).
| 1. | Does Israel have an historical right to the place? It seems to me they have a lot better right to it than Europeans in NZ have to New Zealand. They are Semitic people, in roughly the area of their origin. Since arriving they have worked extremely hard to turn it from a rather arid, infertile, part-swampy area into an economically viable state with orchards and fishponds and factories and towns and so on (in marked contrast to its Arab neighbours). They didn't shove the Palestinians out—Israel still has lots of Arabs living there (quite an achievement when one considers that any Arab is a potential enemy if at any time the Arabs should try another attack). It is a successful milti-cultural society, with notices printed in Hebrew alongside the Arabic. |
| 2. | Has Israel "increased her territory by use of military force"? Not quite. Israel had been forced to defend her territory by use of military force—from the first days of the state of Israel. What was she supposed to do—keep putting up with Arab aggression and merely defending existing borders no matter how little this deterred the Arabs? It may be noted here that the borders Israel had before she took over the Golan Heights, the West Bank, the Sinai Desert and part of Jerusalem were very difficult and impractical to defend. The Golan Heights when held by the Syrians were a perfect place to look down on Israel settlements and take pot shots at them—which is what happened. Or to make night raids from. The West Bank replaced a long and strategically difficult border with a shorter and easier one. So did Sinai. In the case of Sinai, it may be remembered by people like me (a little older than most students) that it was the use of Sharm el Sheikh (at the entrance to the Gulf of Aquaba/Eilat, Israel's southern sea frontier) by the Arabs to attack Israeli shipping that sparked off one bout of the fighting. |
The Palestinians are on the surface an attractive lot—a noble people fighting for their heritage. One has to respect them. Unfortunately, there is also a lot of whinging and sitting on backsides hoping for help going on when you actually get over there and take a look.
Yours sincerely,
Lindy Milnes.
(This is a brief reply to the two points Lindy Milnes raises in her letter.
| 1. | No matter how hard people might work, that fact does not give the Jews historical right to Palestine. Many Jews are not Semitic—by and large, their racial characteristics conform to the predominant characteristics of the countries they come from. If the Arab states had been in injected with as much foreign capital as Israel has been, their economies, too, would have been flourishing. I grant that there are some Palestinains living with in the borders of Israel—but there are a hell of a lot more living in refugee camps in neighbouring states. Have you been to see these? Finally, South Africa also has public notices printed in languages of the different races—and that doesn't mean that the races are equal, just like in Israel the Palestinains rights are considerably less than those of Jewish people. (See Middle East Broadsheet for more on this). |
| 2. | It sounds like you, Lindy, imbibed a lot of official Israeli propaganda as to why Israel 'needed' to take over the Golan Heights, the West Bank and the Sinai. Since when did having "a long and strategically difficult border" mean that a country had the right to invade and annex part of neighbouring countries? No amount of justification can hide the plain truth that Israel has increased its territory considerably by use of military force—nor is it prepared to give back this illegally-gained land. Nor can the truth be hidden that in each of the 1948. 1956 and 1967 wars it was Israel that actually attacked first, each time invading land that did not belong to it. |
Lindy, the logic in your letter is appalling. While we appreciate your rationality (often unusual on this issue) we really do suggest that your points are confined to the facts - not to justifications of pleasant and illegal actions.
—Ed.)