From: horen@rs.com (Jonathan B. Horen)
Subject: Re: Israel: Chutzpah at the Negotiating Ta
Reply-To: horen@rs.com
Organization: Renaissance Software, Inc.
Date: Wed, 12 Aug 1992 16:37:09 PDT

In article 12478@das.harvard.edu, adam@endor.uucp (Adam Shostack) writes:
>In article <10248@sun13.scri.fsu.edu> stricher@masig.fsu.edu (Char Aznabul) writes:
>>In article <1992Aug9.214257.18012@usenet.ins.cwru.edu>  
>>bc744@cleveland.Freenet.Edu (Mark Ira Kaufman) writes:
>
>>+    If peace nevers materializes, it might be partially due to the
>>+ fact that the Arab side has offered nothing.  They do nothing but
>>+ make demands.  This, as much as anything, will force the peace to
>>+ be nothing more than a dream.
>
>>And what would you like them to offer? If they say they will not
>>destroy Irael, you will call them liars! 
>
>>So *what* conecessions would you have them make?
>
>1. Change the Covenant to reflect the new thinking - specifically, the
>call to armed struggle as the main instrument of change, the claim to
>the whole area, and a recognition of the right of all Israelis to live
>within secure, recognized, and undisputed boundaries.
>
>2. Call off the boycott.
>
>3. Apologize for the senseless murder of Olympic Athletes, cripples,
>Europeans, and everyone not directly involved in the conflict.
>
>They could even recognize Israels right to exist, in clear, explicit
>language.
>
>Maybe call for a halt to violent protests for a month.
>
>Meet in the region, Cairo or Tel-Aviv should both be acceptable sites
>to all parties.  Why are middle East peace talks taking place in
>Washington?  Parties should negotiate with each other, not via Baker.


>>So *what* conecessions would you have them make?

This is not the point! "Concessions" are only 1/2 of the equation. When I
responded to Mr. Kaufman's posting, I wrote "...the Arab side has nothing
to offer." And the question then becomes "What does the Arab side have to
offer Israel?"

If t.p.m.netters will forgive me a short digression: in Tehillim (non-Jews
call them Psalms) it is written "Shun evil and do good" (as the answer to
the question "Who is the man who wants life? [what should he do?]". How
relevant this formula is for our particular conflict -- although "shun evil"
is a prerequisite, it is only 1/2 of what is required; that is, after (and
it is *only* after0 one has "shunned evil", one must then "do good".

So, if the first part of the equation of the Arab side is to "shun evil",
and Mr. Shostack's list enumerates several ways which would signify to the
Israeli side that the Arab side had, in fact, "shunned evil", where is the
remainder? Where are the lists, the suggestions, whether from Israelis or
from Arabs, enumerating the constructive things that the Arab side could
do, in order to "do good" and finish the equation?

And where, oh where, are the Arab suggestions for what the Israeli side
could do? We've already given back the entire Sinai Penninsula, we will
reach some kind of agreement with the Arab side vis-a-vis autonomy. But
where are the Arab suggestions for a *full* relationship? 

Where are the Arabs saying "Yes, we want Israeli technology"? Where are
they? Where are the Arabs saying "Yes, we want joint investment in regional
resource management/development"? Where are they?

Where is the "rest of the story"? (apologies to Paul Harvey :-)