Middle East 'road map'
The article by Ahmad Nimer in GLW #537 does not present any solution to the Middle East crisis at all. His claim that, "The overriding priority of the road map is clearly ... a return to the status quo that existed prior to the beginning of the second intifada in September 2000", is simply not accurate. The status quo before the Intifada was no Palestinian state at all. The Road Map actually seeks to produce a viable, free and sovereign Palestinian state that did not exist before September 2000.
To support this state, we must continue to press for a comprehensive uprooting of illegal and provocative Israeli settlements in the West Bank. Most importantly, if the mass Palestinian public in the end do choose to endorse and implement the Road Map — and I emphasise if — then we must respect and support their decision.
To continue opposing the two-state solution even after its implementation will leave us isolated and out in the cold against not only the entire world's support, but also the majority of Palestinians themselves. It will result in the horrendous situation of the far-left being on-side with two other radical ideologies in particular. They are the extremist Islamic fundamentalists, and the ultra right-wing neo-Nazis, both of whom still call for the removal from existence of Israel.
The very fact that we stand in chorus with right-wing neo-Nazis (who still demonstrate through the streets in Europe) in calling for the dismantling of the Jewish state of Israel is something that irks me as a life-long campaigner for leftist causes.
How is it that we have come round to an idea that stands parallel, even on a single issue, with those extreme right-wingers who are so anti-immigration and racist themselves?
Kate Popovic
Newcastle NSW
North Korea and nuclear weapons
I was stunned by Chris Slee's review of Korea — the Unknown War in the May 14 Green Left Weekly. After highlighting the "grotesque extremes of the ... leadership cults", the author went on to assert that "we should defend North Korea's right to develop whatever weapons it feels it needs to defend itself".
This represents the same failed logic which gave us the Cold War's arms race, the oxymoron of "Mutually Assured Destruction" and the dangerous doctrine of "nuclear deterrence".
Where the author admits that "nuclear weapons alone cannot guarantee North Korea's safety", I am certain that these weapons only jeopardise everyone's.
Surely, our shared objectives lie in global nuclear disarmament? Adding more weapons, and giving more leaders the responsibility of not using them, cannot be a sensible step along this path.
I believe that the best hope for North Korea in facing off "the very real threat it faces" is in building alliances and positive relationships with neighbours and other nations, not in escalating military investment.
Justin Tutty
Darwin River NT
Nuclear fallacies
One of the more dismal pro-nuclear PR initiatives in recent years is a booklet titled Nuclear Energy Fallacies, written by retired Newcastle academic Dr Colin Keay and published by Enlightenment Press in 2001.
One of many faults and errors in the booklet is that Keay takes Sutherland shire councillor Genevieve Rankin to task for "frequently" asserting that "Lucas Heights reactor is another potential Chernobyl waiting to happen".
I've contacted Keay asking him for the reference for that quote from Rankin. He says he heard it on a car radio and can provide no further details.
I asked Keay to cite some examples to justify the allegation that Rankin "frequently" compares Lucas Heights and Chernobyl. Keay provided none, but says he is "assured by Sydney listeners that the comparison has frequently been voiced".
In other words, Keay is peddling nuclear fallacies — a number of them parroted by Paddy McGuinness in the Sydney Morning Herald on August 11, 2001.
Having been involved in the campaign against a new reactor at Lucas Heights for some years, I know first-hand that campaigners studiously avoid making specious comparisons between the Lucas Heights reactor and larger power reactors. Specific comparisons, for example concerning radioiodine emissions, or the problems likely to flow from inadequate and non-independent regulation, are of course legitimate.
Nuclear research reactors such as that at Lucas Heights pose less of a public health hazard than large power reactors, but they are dangerous nonetheless. There have been at least five fatal research reactor accidents, but no fatal accidents involving comparable non-reactor technologies such as particle accelerators and spallation sources.
Dr Jim Green
Adelaide
Boycott US products
I've created a personal web site about my own experience of boycotting US products, related to the current occupation of Iraq and the current US policy of "pre-emptive" wars.
Here's an extract from the intro on my site: "I'm a mum (of three — 19, 17 and 11). They're all still at home, as is hubbie. I also work part-time (sometimes full-time), as a Registered Nurse. I live in Australia. I suppose I'm fairly average. Most of the time, I do the shopping. Like millions and millions of people around the world, I'm also horrified by current US foreign policy — and also like millions and millions of people around the world — I can't vote George Bush Junior out.
"The only vote I have is the dollar in my pocket, so I've decided to learn about not buying American products. This is my story — and my strategies. I thought they may be useful in some way, as the decision to buy, or not to buy, is such a personal one. I was also inspired by the recent words (May 2003), of the famous writer Arundhati Roy (relayed by the US radio program Democracy Now!), when she addressed the packed Riverside Church in Harlem, New York. She talks about imperialism and about the need for boycotts (a very old, and very effective, means of non-violent resistance). Here's the audio link: < http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=03/05/15/1615215&mode=threA HREF="mailto:ad&tid=25"><ad&tid=25>.
"You may find my site useful. It also contains a practical (and growing) supermarket list of products I currently avoid, with some alternative suggestions. Here's the link: <http://www.geocities.com/empireboycott>
Kim Bax
Woodill Qld
Zionism debate
Some of the letters in response to Craig Milner's raising of Zionism (Write On, GLW #536) contain facts that are erroneous and discredit the arguments that are presented. In their quests to denounce Zionism, some of these letters contain untruths, myths and even an attempt to denigrate the history of the land.
Firstly, in response to land grabbing, Vic Savoulian (GLW #538 web version) claims that on the Israeli flag "the two blue horizontal lines, one represents Euphrates River and the other the Nile River — the area will be conquered to be 'Greater-Israel'". Far from representing any land grab for "Greater Israel", the two blue horizontal lines on the flag of modern Israel actually represent the talit (Jewish prayer shawl) worn in synagogue or while at prayer. He also claims that "Eretz means Greater", whereas in truth the Hebrew word Eretz means "land of" (variation of aretz, which is "land", used as a reference). There is no other variation on the meaning of the word.
Stephen Davey (GLW #538) erroneously claims that Craig Milner "cites the first Zionist conference to argue that the aim of the movement was not the creation of a nation state of Israel, but then persists in the claim that opposition to that nation state is anti-Zionist". Nowhere in Craig Milner's letter is this written at all. Milner argued that at no time did the conference call for an "exclusively Jewish" state of Israel. Davey's miscomprehension is evident when we realise that the aim of the Zionism conference was very much the creation of the nation of Israel, and Milner never mentioned to the contrary.
Marie McKern (GLW #538) correctly quotes the Bible. Some interesting additions, in the words of the Bible, "On the same day the Lord made a covenant with Abram, saying: 'To your descendants I have given this land..."' (Genesis 15:18). It is interesting to note that the Hebrew verb used in the scriptures is natati, meaning "I have given" (past tense). This passage implies that God had already given the land to the Jews at some earlier time. Abraham was, of course, the patriarch of both the Jewish and Arab tribe. Abraham's son Ishmael left, and from him spawned the Arab tribe. His other son, Issac, carried on the mission of the Jews. Israel is at the core of Jewish identity and peoplehood. Indeed, to repudiate the link between the Jews and the land of Israel is to repudiate the Bible itself. This is a strong moral argument.
Lastly, McKern states that "one can loathe many of the actions of the state of Israel, and at the same time condemn harming an innocent Jew living in this country". I agree. Unfortunately, others in the community don't. They see religious Jewish people here as being responsible for Israeli government decisions. Hence, we have recently seen the highest number of anti-Jewish attacks in Australia since recordings were kept by the Jewish Community Council.
Ruth Anderson
Magill SA
ANZAC tradition decimated
Are Australians supposed to be proud of the troops who are returning from duty in Iraq? If so, then please tell me when I should feel a warm inner glow. The families of service men and women may feel relief that their loved ones have returned home safely, but don't expect the rest of us to cheer!
Australia's armed forces participated in an attack on Iraq without justification and without provocation. They killed innocent Iraqi men, women and children without need. These people did nothing to us.
Our politicians and our armed forces should hang their heads in shame. There was no valour and no honour in attacking Iraq. Our politicians told us that Iraq had weapons of mass destruction that would be used by terrorists. But no weapons of mass destruction have materialised and no links have been shown to exist between Saddam Hussein's regime and terrorist organisations.
Australians were lied to! Now we are being told that our troops went to Iraq to remove a dictator who was supported by the United States for almost half of the time that he was in power.
Members of our armed forces only need to look at what is happening in Iraq now to be ashamed. The US is seeking a mandate from the United Nations to occupy that country and control its oil reserves so they can pay out contracts to American companies. Those companies have been awarded multi-million-dollar contracts to rebuild the destruction wrought by US, British and Australian soldiers. I wonder whether any compensation will be paid to the families whose loved ones were killed or maimed by American cluster bombs?
The recent attacks in Saudi Arabia and Morocco are a product of our own making. You can't attack other countries without provocation and expect there to be no retaliation. Our troops will need to do some soul searching about the wisdom of their involvement in the war with Iraq.
Adam Bonner
Meroo Meadow NSW
Doctors' fees
As patient charges for visits to doctors continue to increase, Dr Rob Walters from the Australian Divisions of General Practice has suggested that the less-well-off are prepared to pay. This misses the point entirely.
Rationally, people will choose the least bad available option. If paying fees is perceived to be better than not seeing a physician, or changing to a new, bulk-billing doctor, patients will obviously pay fees.
This, however, does nothing at all to refute the argument that it is preferable for consultations to be funded from taxation which rises with income and which collects revenue from the healthy as well as the sick.
Brent Howard
Rydalmere NSW
[More letter at <http://www.greenleft.org.au>.]
Driving kids mad
Revelations on the ABC's 4 Corners about Australasian Correctional Management mistreatment of asylum seekers underline one persistent ugly feature of the business — there are many Australians who enjoy this insane cruelty.
They tolerate the jailing without charge or trial of children and the resultant "high rates of depression and self-harm". They believe our taxes should be spent deliberately to drive innocent children mad. Unsurprisingly, many also have been cutting slack to child sex abusers, and they wink at the profitable Asian child sex slave industry.
There is no puzzle about who these people are — polling tells us that they are everywhere. They reflect the triumphalist values of Howardism-Hansonism and its ideological disdain for the tradition of a fair go.
Their persistent use of the word "illegals", enforced by Mr Howard's praetorians, mirrors the "non-person" used by Stalinist regimes and the Nazis' "Jew and Slavic sub-humans". It is deeply racist and evil.
I have a vivid memory of the Coalition victory in March 1996 when I was a patient in a large Sydney hospital. A visitor to the ward began a screeching tirade against "these little people who come over here and take everything". She had targeted an elderly refugee, a distinguished Australian who was dying surrounded by his family.
"John will fix it", his tormentor snarled, strutting and gesticulating. "John will fix it."
Too bloody right.
Peter Woodforde
Melba ACT
From Green Left Weekly, May 28, 2003.
Visit the Green Left Weekly home page.