NATION
TTALION
irial
6 million
jpenedlo
iy29.
ITUTIONAVE
/Vashington
Monument
L L
1/8 ton
Opinion
The Battalion
Page 11 • Friday, April 30, 2004
A policy worth backing
Bush administration’s support of Sharon’s withdrawal plan an overdue move
NICHOLAS
DAVIS
>put thefm-
e memona!
t number of
rans could
as possible,
are dying a
ihe Veterans
estimates
i of the If
II be aka
l dedication,
Rockville,
Amy Ait
oecame the
e memorial
here are an
ho I kneu
, but the;
s,” he said,
n, Henry
ize of the
retches the
teld — u
lore than I
ingtodo,'
mer Army I
Concord,
ivould be a
ey’ve gone
depths thai
in line on
undreds of
Newtov,n.
Ohio -
-jndfafbtn
r.
memorial
ides in the
iroducedin
Kaptur, D-
pted by an
Id War D
n. In from
deal event,
why there
memorial.
;ed to get
the memo-
approval in
allowed by
critics who
ent would
erfere with
enjoyed by
began in
n April 14 President Bush embarked on a
major shift in U.S. policy by formally
backing Israeli Prime Minister Ariel
Sharon’s plan for withdrawing Israeli forces from
Gaza and all but five settlements of the West
Bank. This shift was long overdue.
“1 reiterate our steadfast commitment to
Israel’s security and to preserving and strength
ening Israel’s self-defense capabilities,” the pres
ident said, “including its right to defend itself
against terror.”
Bush’s words are right on the money. The United States can no
longer remain on the fence regarding the Israeli/ Palestinian conflict.
It seems that not a week goes by without images of debris,
ambulances and blood-stained streets gracing our television
screens, as the daily news reports that another terrorist attack, tar
geting innocent Israeli citizens, has occurred.
It’s time to be blunt. The reason the Road Map for Peace, a
Iti-national plan for achieving peace in the region, will never
lake hold is that the Palestinians are not willing to compromise.
Many people remain frustrated about the whole dilem
ma, throwing up their hands and spouting off, “it’s just too
complicated." True, but frankly, many people really don’t
understand the background of the conflict and thus wish
loremain neutral.
However, the history is crucial to understanding the
significance of Sharon’s plan.
In 1948. the United Nations voted to give Israel state-
liood neighboring a Palestinian state. Israelis were
delighted, but the Arabs had nothing to celebrate. They
viewed the United Nations as biased and rejected the
decision since the Palestinian people claimed all the land
was theirs.
Subsequently, the newly-formed Israel state received an
mannounced visit by many disgruntled Arab states including
Syria. Jordan. Egypt. Lebanon and Iraq. Their goal was not to
amply intimidate Israelis but to “push the Jews into the sea.”
Israel defeated the attackers, and many Palestinians fled their
domes to reside in the territories captured by Jordan and Egypt:
Gaza and the West Bank. Follow ing the battle, Jordan and Egypt
murdered and expelled every Jew in their areas and other Arab
muntries did the same.
Several elements merit attention here. First, contrary to popular
Palestinian myth. Israel didn’t treat Arabs in the brutal fashion that
MAIL CALL
Arab states treated Jews. Second, Egypt and Jordan maintained
Gaza and the West Bank for 19 years and never once proposed
making the area, inhabited mostly by Palestinian refugees, a
Palestinian state.
Flash forward to 1967. Egypt and Syria mobilized troops along
the border of Israel and terrorist attacks on Israelis increased as the
annies grew. All the while, Iraq, Kuwait, Saudi Arabia, Sudan and
Algeria supplied the mobilizing Arab countries. Recognizing the
writing on the wall, Israel launched a preemptive attack on Egypt,
marking the beginning of what became known as the Six Days War.
udgment,
isday his
■orists as
of 2001.
itroversial
id attacks
d after he
)-member
esidential
iew,” said
•, but he
jestioning
r to make
bcuss the
i>
Israel was victorious and increased its territory, encompassing
the West Bank and Gaza.
Now Sharon’s plan grants the land to the Palestinians to foster
the development of an independent state and peace. Still,
Palestinians and Arab leaders scoff at the proposal. Why?
It’s because Palestinians still wish to reclaim all property lost in
the 1948 war and gain all the territory in the West Bank.
Again, this only shows how irrational and hardnosed the
Palestinians are. Israel gained the lands through self-defense and
improved them. They have no moral obligation to give any of them
back, even though the United Nations claims it has legal obliga
tions to do so. Either way, one must not disregard the fact that had
the Arabs been a little more tolerant, perhaps things would have
turned out differently.
Here’s the question people should ask themselves: Had Egypt,
Jordan and Syria succeeded in the Six Days War, would they have
given back the land or, at the very least, conceded a portion to the
Israeli’s? Absolutely not.
Regardless, the Palestinian opposition to the plan isn’t
surprising and neither is the Arab world’s chiding of the
United States.
Palestinian Prime Minister Ahmed Qurei stated, “He is
the first president who has legitimized the settlements in
the Palestinian territories, we as Palestinians reject it,
we refuse it.”
Yassar Arafat, a known terrorist, claimed the peace
process would be dead if the United States assured that
Israel could keep key West Bank settlements. And the
Jordanian King, Abdullah II, cancelled a meeting at the
White House.
Nevertheless, this opposition shouldn’t sway
Americans from taking a definitive stance on the issue.
Israel should be commended for its efforts to reach peace
and Bush made the right decisions of breaking from the
precedence set by past administrations of simply keeping
quiet. A clear message must be sent, especially during the
war on terror, that obtaining peace in the region is clearly up
to the Palestinians, for at this point Israel is pulling its weight
and the United States must ensure it remains protected.
Nicholas Davis is a senior
political science major.
Graphic by Will Lloyd
Assassinating terrorists
could save American lives
In response to an April 28 mail call:
Wake up, Tim. Terrorists don’t care what
lights" we give them. Do you really think they
bke into consideration what the U.N. does or
foes not allow before they act? They operate
wthout regard for whatever pipe-dream interna-
fonal law the U.N. concocts. 1 guarantee you
given the opportunity, Islamic terrorists
wouldn't hesitate to pull the trigger on anyone
they feel is causing them trouble, be it a foreign
feeder or a religious figure. The only thing keep-
rig President Bush safe from harm is the fact
fiat he has one of the best security forces in the
world. I suppose the terrorists are welcome to try
whatever tricks they have up their sleeve to harm
country, but we can't handicap ourselves in
oor response to their attempts. I in no way sup
port a terrorist's "right" to harm our President,
fot, unlike you, I'm also not blind enough to think
fiat they need someone's permission to try it. I
say level the playing field on the assassination
®je, and save some American lives.
Paul Sims
Class of 2006
Tuition, fee increases don't
benefit current students
The administration of this school has some
lofty and admirable goals for the future. But, as
a current student, I feel a bit neglected with the
state of things. The tuition and fee increases
are all said to be necessary for growth and
improvements, but which of those improve
ments can the students paying those fees now
expect? Hiring 400 more faculty members will
not have an impact on current students.
The administration could really make an
attempt to improve to quality of everyday life on
this campus. One way to do this would be to
improve the railroad situation. No, moving the
tracks does not seem possible right now, but
some of you may have noticed that some trains
move on through at 45 mph while others crawl by
at 2 mph. This is because the trains are either
stopping to let another train pass or are starting
from a stop. The University could push for the
double track to be moved north or south or both
and we would never have to see a 2 mph train
again. 1 said “quick,” because if we can lay tracks
across the country in a couple of years, why can
we not lay one mile in a couple of weeks?
Another do-it-now idea would be to fix the ulti
mate campus eye-sore, Ross St. Fix Ross and
make all of it one-way with the right lane buses
only. Any driver will tell you that it can take up to
15 minutes for that half-mile. By fixing it this
summer, and using the bus lane idea, maybe
Bus-ops can actually afford to lose the old buses
since they will need less buses and drivers for
the Ross St. routes.
Ben Jelley
Class of2004
The Battalion encourages letters to the edi
tor. Letters must be 200 words or less and
include the author’s name, class and phone
number. The opinion editor reserves the right
to edit letters for length, style and accuracy.
Letters may be submitted in person at 014
Reed McDonald with a valid student ID.
Letters also may be mailed to: 014 Reed
McDonald, MS 1111, Texas A&M University,
College Station, TX 77843-1111. Fax: (979)
845-2647 Email: mailcall@thebattalion.net
D.C. march a victory
for abortion advocates
President target of demonstrators’ wrath
& ratoi -itsKtranM
L ast weekend, I along with more than
1 million other supporters of repro
ductive freedom marched through
the streets of Washington, D.C. This
march, held in a country which has histor
ically told women to sit down and shut up,
was history-making. Sunday’s “March for
Women’s Lives” was the largest single
march in U.S. history.
Most striking about the crowd was its
diversity — mothers, daughters, a promis
ing number of sons and fathers, grandmothers,
great-grandmothers and their grandchildren, who
were black, white, Asian, Hispanic, Methodist,
Catholic, Jewish and so on. The protesters greatly
differed from the estimated 200 protesters who
lined the streets. One can only
imagine how this group, pre
dominantly white males, felt
when thousands of proud
women marched by, demand
ing that men keep their laws
and their misogynistic values
off women’s bodies.
Most memorable, perhaps,
were the countless slogans.
Some were funny (“Let the
Real Bushes Decide”), some
angry (“Hey Bush, Cut Off
My Reproductive Rights and
I’ll Cut Off Yours!”) and
some simply to the point
(“Trust Women”).
It is funny how two words
can embody an issue which
has for decades divided our
country. With a decision that
so profoundly affects the life of a woman, how
can we not trust women? How can Americans
defer to legislatures and executive offices consist
ing of men who will never be pregnant and who
have no business in another person’s choice of
whether or not to bear a child? Becoming a moth
er changes every aspect of a woman’s life. Should
not such a deep and permanent decision be hers to
make? Women can be trusted to make the right
decisions. There is no one better qualified.
In the words of Sandra Day O’Connor, “The
destiny of the woman must be shaped to a large
extent on her own conception of her spiritual
imperatives and her place in society.” With this in
mind, these activists marched for a common goal
— that for every pregnancy, the woman be willing
and the child wanted. It is a goal we should share
as a nation, but will never be reached with the
JOHN DAVID
BLAKLEY
* Sherewasasenseof
urgency in the air dunng
the march. Many speakers
stressed the Bush
administration's intent to
roll back the reproductive
rights which
innumerable women...
have spent their lives to
gain and retain.
agenda of the current administration.
Attempting to prohibit abortion in the
early terms of pregnancy while not allow
ing comprehensive sex education in
schools is impractical. Unfortunately, it is
merely the tip of the iceberg when it
comes to the absurd and hypocritical poli
cies put forth by the White House. This
anti-choice president enjoys spouting rhet
oric about the value of potential life but
has apparently forgotten about many. He
has made cuts to Head Start, after-school services,
low-income housing, school lunches, the Child’s
Health Insurance Program, Medicaid and federal
child-care funding. This administration has consis
tently scaled back public funds for family plan
ning, although more than one-third of American
— — women of reproductive age
rely on these services.
Likewise, through the Global
Gag Rule, Bush has cut all
funding for global reproduc
tive health programs which
accept private funds to provide
abortions. Studies have shown
these cuts have actually
spurred more abortions by
preventing access to safe and
reliable information and
healthcare.
There was a sense of
urgency in the air during the
march. Many speakers
stressed the Bush administra
tion’s intent to roll back the
reproductive rights which
innumerable women, many in
the crowd, have spent their lives to gain and retain.
“Never again,” shouted Whoopi Goldberg,
clutching a clothes hanger, a sad reminder of
what happens when we do not give women a safe
alternative to motherhood. “We are not here just
for ourselves, but for women around the world,”
Ann Richards declared. In countries without elec
tive abortion, a woman dies every six minutes
from injuries caused by unsafe abortion. “We can
not go back,” Gloria Stenheim cried.
And in the name of our daughters and grand
daughters, we will not. The message sent to
President Bush was clear: Roe will survive, free
dom will live and women will never again be sec
ond-class citizens.
John David Blakley is a sophomore
political science major.