Israel Not Without Responsibility

The collective weltschmerz in reaction to the massacre at Al-Khalil (Hebron) risks conflating the murderous Dr. Baruch Goldstein with the issue of Palestinian distrust of Israel and the current peace talks.

No one purports that Dr. Goldstein's horrific crime deserves anything but the harshest condemnation; such enormity as his confutes our sense of decency to the point of moral despair. Nonetheless, the argument that his insanity precludes a discussion of the national policy that permitted him to act borders on intellectual sophistry. The fact that Dr. Goldstein did not act for Israel does not wholly absolve Israel from responsibility.

The real tragedy of Al-Khalil, and one senses the larger reason behind the subsequent riots, lies less in the acts of madman sub specie aeternitatis and more in the existence of a principle that allowed such slaughter in the first place. In maintaining a policy whereby Jewish setters may be heavily armed while Palestinians in the proximate area are expressly prohibited from defending themselves, Israel belies its avowed evenhandedness in the peace process.

After two months of ignoring Palestinian requests, the Israeli government has in the light of this crisis permitted, and the United States agreed to, a renewed American presence in the peace negotiations. Hopefully, this will ensure that a bold and lasting and fair peace will hold in the Middle East, replacing the Knesset's unjust cordon sanitaire. But given the antinomian circumstance that Israel has established as the backdrop for these talks, it is a small wonder that Palestinians will look to Washington with something less that hope. If confidence is to be restored, the Jewish settlers on the West Bank must be held to an equally stringent standard and measures must be taken to assure Palestinian safety. If not, we risk furthering the tragedy of Al-Khalil with the irony of a land that fought for its right to exist--and the ignored the lesson at home. Hassen A. Sayeed '96