Washington Report, January/February 2006, pages 5-6

Letters to the Editor

Coordinated Coverage

I am happy to renew my subscription to your magazine, the Washington Report on Middle East Affairs, whose message should be heard by everybody.

I feel that our unconditional support of Israel is harmful to our national interest and permits an inhuman and oppressive Israeli behavior toward the Palestinian population. To increase the chance of correcting this nasty situation, I would recommend that many separate organizations sharing your interest, listed below, closely coordinate their activities to help raise the impact and effectiveness of your message.

• Journal of Palestine Studies, a quarterly on Palestine Affairs, University of California Press, 2120, Berkeley Way, Berkeley, CA 94704-9899.
• Council for the National Interest Foundation, 1250 4th St. SW, Suite WG-1, Washington, DC 20024.
• Coalition for a Realistic Foreign Policy, 1200 L St. NW, Suite 100-221, Washington, DC 20005-4018.
• Middle East Policy Council, 1730 M St. NW, Suite 512, Washington, DC 20036-4505.
• Etc.

If the above coordination does not already exist, I sincerely hope that such would be implemented.‘

Denis W. Grisel, La Jolla, CA

Our “Activisms” section (pp. 64-75 in this issue) is filled with coverage of events organized by the groups you cite above—with the exception, of course, of the Journal of Palestine Studies, which, along with Middle East Policy, is an academic journal rather than a political magazine like the Washington Report. And, alas, we’re more unique then ever, since the London-based Middle East International and online Palestine Report recently folded. Since the mainstream media in this country refuse to cover these speeches, film screenings and conferences—not to mention the facts and ideas they address—the Washington Report represents virtually the only outlet whereby Americans can learn about the activities of their fellow citizens who are committed to justice and peace in the Middle East. Were our financial and personnel resources greater, we’d like to expand our Web site, <www.wrmea.com>, to serve as an online resource for activities across the country. As it is, however, we’re hoping we’ll be around to celebrate our 25th anniversary in 2007.

Zionism or Judaism?

I wanted to thank you for the article on religious Zionism by Allen Brownfeld in the December 2005 issue. In the article, it mentions some groups that oppose the State of Israel on religious grounds, including the Satmar Hasidim. Anyone who knows the Satmar Hasidim knows that they are the most orthodox of Orthodox Jews. Their scrupulosity in observing the Torah is renowned among Jews and non-Jews. And they vehemently opposed the State of Israel from the beginning. Certainly if the strictest religious Jews are so against Zionism, it should cause both Jews and Muslims, as well as Christians, to reconsider what is truly a Jewish view of the situation in Palestine.

Abdullah Ibrahim Ali, Jeremy S., Pine Bush, NY

Also cited by columnist Brownfeld and admired by us is “the tiny—but vocal [and, we would add, courageous]—Naturei Karta,” whose presence at pro-Israel demonstrations we frequently report. It’s certainly an historical irony that so many founders of Zionism and Israel were atheists—yet another indication that it’s not and never was about religion.

Elaboration Requested

Thanks to John Cornelius for his fascinating work on the Balfour Declaration. It would be interesting to see him elaborate both on Morgenthau’s aborted trip to Istanbul and on the American side of the deal: how far were Zionists like Bernard Baruch in a position to deliver on this quid pro quo, and is there evidence that they did? To what extent were outstanding loans to Great Britain a factor?

Perge fortiter with your outstanding publication, so important for U.S. security and world peace at this critical juncture.

Christopher Brown, via e-mail

Cornelius’ account was based on Chaim Weizmann’s autobiography, Trial and Error. (In fact, if space permits—which it hasn’t yet—we’re contemplated publishing his five-page chapter on the mission, “Opera Bouffe Intermezzo.”) Morgenthau, by the way, was one of many American Jews—including New York Times publisher Adolph Ochs—who opposed Zionism in the 1920s and ‘30s, having stated, “America is our Zion.”

Depleted Uranium Use

Re. “An Arab-American Priest, Depleted Uranium, and Iraq,” November 2005, p. 29.

In your November edition you attribute, in an article by Robert Hirschfield, to the Rev. Simon Harak the estimate that “U.S. forces deployed more than 1,000 tons [of depleted uranium munitions] during the 2003 invasion.”

On Nov. 27, The New York Times claimed without attribution in an Associated Press story that, “since 2003, [U.S.] forces have fired at least 120 tons of shells packed with depleted uranium, an extremely dense material used by the U.S. and British militaries to penetrate tank armor.”

Which is more accurate?

John LaForge, Luke, WI

We contacted author Hirschfield, who contacted Reverend Harak, who checked his figure against that used in the authoritative Janes Defense News—only to discover that the figure in Janes, taken from the Uranium Medical Research Center, was 1,700 tons. Reverend Harak thanks Mr. LaForge for forcing him to further research the matter and correct his error.

Fallen Jewish Soldiers Web Site

Now there is a Web site designed to honor those Jewish troops who have fallen while serving in Operation Enduring Freedom (Afghanistan) or Operation Iraqi Freedom: <www.Jewishsoldier.org>.

According to the site, as of Dec. 11, 2005 there were 4 Jewish American soldiers out of 2,135 American soldiers fallen in Iraq alone. None of them are sons or daughters of the neocons who wanted this war or who got us into this war for Israel, for oil, or for any other reason.

While Jews account for 2 percent of the population, they account for less than one-fifth of one percent of the American casualties.

The Web site states: “A Jewish soldier in the United States armed forces faces difficulties beyond the peril and demand of the military. Having a higher commander-in-chief than his comrades, a Jewish Soldier requires kosher food, time to daven, reverence of shabbos and yomtov, and protection from blatant and subtle anti-Semitism.

“The JSF has been established to provide support, services and advocacy for and on behalf of our Jewish brethren who have committed themselves to defending freedom, democracy, and other G-dly values.”

Although these fallen Jewish soldiers should be honored like all others, regarding their consideration as “Righteous Jews” (<www.RighteousJews.org>) Jewish Soldier Foundation founder Spc. Joe Kashnow replied to my inquiry, “I don’t think these Jews fit the criteria.”

Daniel McGowan, via e-mail

Objective and Truthful

This is one of the few publications—perhaps the only one—where objective and truthful knowledge is given. The newspapers and TV certainly are limited and biased to one side, with half-truths and lies most of the time. I give my copy to interested readers, to inform them that there is another side to the issues.

Thank you for giving the public and readers this magazine. I look forward to receiving my issues!

Teresa A. Anthony, West Seneca, NY

Information and Influence

Always, as I read the Washington Report, I marvel at the excellence, fairness and thoroughness of your reporting!

You bring out the details of the wretched attitude which prevails in Israel toward the Palestinians, and yet I always hope that your influence and the progress of international relations will make more people actively aware of how much Americans must try to do to set the course of Middle East politics on a more stable, just and peaceful course. The accumulated anger and despair the Palestinians feel is one of the chief sources of the dangerous violence their unjust treatment creates.

More power to you for your noble efforts to set the record straight.

Margaret Anthon, Washington, DC

Coincidence or Not?

I am writing this letter to suggest a good subject for a Washington Report article.

In the past month, the Republican leaders (reacting to their fall in the polls) have made much out of the Democrat role in the Iraq invasion. The Senate Democrats voted overwhelmingly in favor of the aggressive war. The president points out that they have no right to criticize—as wrong as he was in launching the war, the senators were just as bad in approving it.

My suggestion is for the Washington Report to 1) Go to its records of AIPAC donations in the year 2002. 2) Match each senator’s vote to his donation. 3) Note the coincidence of donations to pro-war votes.

A tantalizing appendage to this search is the Senate’s six-year term. Senators who were a year or two away from election voted yay. Only the ones who were four or five years away from election voted nay. I wonder why.

Scott Nicholson, Bradenton, FL

Since we don’t have a research staff, we decided to focus on the 23 senators who, on Oct. 11, 2002, voted against authorizing the president to wage war on Iraq. They were: Daniel Akaka (D-HI), Jeff Bingaman (D-NM), Barbara Boxer (D-CA), Robert Byrd (D-WV), Lincoln Chaffee (R-RI), Kent Conrad (D-ND), Jon Corzine (D-NJ), Mark Dayton (D-MN), Dick Durbin (D-IL), Russ Feingold (D-WI), Bob Graham (D-FL), Daniel Inouye (D-HI), Jim Jeffords (I-VT), Ted Kennedy (D-MA), Patrick Leahy (D-VT), Carl Levin (D-MI), Barbara Mikulski (D-MD), Patty Murray (D-WA), Jack Reed (D-RI), Paul Sarbanes (D-MD), Debbie Stabenow (D-MI), the late Paul Wellstone (D-MN) Ron Wyden (D-OR). Among them are such pro-Israel PAC favorites as Boxer, Durbin, Graham, Inouye, Levin, Mikulski, Stabenow and Wyden. Perhaps, in addition to their not facing an imminent re-election campaign, AIPAC knew they could be trusted not to make the link between Iraq and Israel.

A Pollard Surprise

How many resolutions were introduced in congress to free Jonathan Jay Pollard? And what are the no’s and years of these resolutions?

Naim, via e-mail

Since we don’t have a research staff, this time we passed the buck to our congressional correspondent, Shirl McArthur. He informed us that, since 1982, there have been no such resolutions. There were, however, two resolutions introduced the same day—Jan. 19, 1999. Perhaps not coincidentally, at the Wye conference in October 1998, Israel again had pressured for Pollard’s release. CIA Director George Tenet threatened to resign if President Bill Clinton—known for his desire to please—acceded to the Israeli demand, and Pollard remains in prison.