Harvard Students for Israel Clarify Stance

To the editors:

On behalf of Harvard Students for Israel (HSI), I am deeply offended by The Crimson's characterization of our organization in "Hillel Issues its Stance on Mideast" (News, Oct. 18). This piece asserts that HSI's "members' opinions tend to be less sympathetic to the Palestinian cause," and it suggests that HSI does not want to reach out to the Arab and Moslem communities on campus in an effort for dialogue and understanding.

First of all, HSI as an organization is founded on one assertion only: the right of the Jewish nation to exist as a sovereign power in its historic homeland. We are not affiliated with any political or religious movements or organizations in Israel or abroad; we are an affiliated group of Harvard Hillel only.

As such, there exists no basis for making claims about what our opinions "tend to be." As the only person authorized to send messages to our e-mail list (which is the only means of contacting our large membership), I know that the Crimson did not take a poll of HSI membership. Therefore, the article must be basing this claim on assumptions or hearsay, neither of which has a place in an objective news article. Our members' views range greatly across the political and ideological spectra on all issues.

But what does the article mean by the vague phrase, "the Palestinian cause," to which it claims HSI members are unsympathetic? Is this referring to the hope for a Palestinian state that is determined to live in peace with Israel? If so, I would suggest that many of HSI's members are not simply "sympathetic" to, but rather are sincerely supportive of "the Palestinian cause." Or is it referring to the use of violent riots and mobs against Israeli soldiers and civilians? If this is "the Palestinian cause," then I concede that HSI members probably oppose Palestinians' using violence instead of negotiation as a means to achieve their goals. I would like to think that we are not anomalous in this regard.

Finally, the article suggests that unlike Harvard Hillel's Interethnic Committee, HSI is uninterested in having joint programs with Harvard's Society of Arab Students (SAS). This is entirely false; we very much desire such events and have been in continued coordination with Hillel's Interethnic Committee with this goal.

Unfortunately, in past years, SAS has refused to co-sponsor events with HSI. As soon as SAS agrees, HSI will gladly co-sponsor discussion events with SAS. We believe deeply in the value of dialogue and are committed to maintaining a peaceful and open environment for all on Harvard's campus.

I call upon the entire Harvard community to join Harvard Students for Israel in prayer for a peaceful and just resolution to the current conflict.

Jonathan M. Gribetz '02

Oct. 18, 2000

The writer is the President of Harvard Students for Israel.

Sympathize with Palestinians

To the editors:

The statement issued by the Harvard Hillel about the conflict in the Middle East shows that the Hillel, as well as Israel, is completely unwilling to face to true issue underlying the conflict. From whom is Israel defending itself? The issue is not, as the statement suggests, one of Israel's right to defend itself and live free from fear. It is the Palestinians' right to do the same.

Israeli military tactics--shooting at areas above the stomach, inflicting eye injuries and blocking hospitals in occupied East Jerusalem--have been condemned by respected international human rights groups including Amnesty International, Human Rights Watch, Physicians for Human Rights and Israeli human rights groups such as B'tselem, Gush Shalom and Rabbis for Human Rights. These human rights groups have no political motive to attack Israel. They simply report the truth, and the truth is ugly when it comes to Israel's illegally sanctioned violation of human rights, which led to the United Nations' condemnation.

Why is it that the Jewish community on this campus and in the U.S. is turning a blind eye to these injustices? Why is it that the Jewish community equates children throwing stones to soldiers in attack helicopters, tanks and heavy artillery? Palestinians have been dehumanized by the state of Israel, and they are fighting for their dignity. I have never heard of 12 and 23-year-olds standing in front IDF war machines for the sake of violence. Nobody would do so unless they knew their fight concerned something especially significant. They are fighting for the Palestinian right to exist, its right to defend itself and its citizens, and right to live free from fear.

If Hillel could add that to its statement, then I would no longer have a disagreement with them.

Mohammad Katranji

Oct. 18, 2000

The writer is a student at the Harvard Extension School.

HSI Not Anti-Palestine

To the editors:

"Hillel Issues Its Stance on the Mideast" (News, Oct. 18) points to the abundance of misunderstanding and misinformation about the current situation in the region. Sadly, however, the article does more to contribute to this misunderstanding than to mitigate it.

In particular, the article's characterization of the opinions of Jewish students is disturbing. One student quoted in the article mentions Jews who are completely unsympathetic to the Palestinian cause in any way, shape or form. As evidence for this startling statement, the article mentions Harvard Students for Israel (HSI), "whose members' opinions tend to be less sympathetic to the Palestinian cause."

In my three years at Harvard, I have never met a Jewish student who is completely unsympathetic to the Palestinian cause. Furthermore, as a member of HSI, I can testify to the political diversity of the group. Most importantly, however, the debate over the recent events in the Middle East is not about one's support for causes, but rather one's beliefs about the legitimacy of violent acts.

Wednesday's article mentions Jews who feared that their relative sympathy for the Palestinian cause was mistaken as anti-Israeli sentiment. Unfortunately, the article makes the same mistake by equating support for Israel with lack of sympathy for Palestinians.

Finally, the article describes the agreement as to a general lack of good information in the U.S. about the history and greater significance of this most recent conflagration. This lack of good information demonstrates itself in the following paragraph, which mentions Ariel Sharon's visit to the Temple Mount accompanied by several hundred armed police officers--accompanied by a handful of bodyguards would have been more accurate.

We can all lament the absence of objective facts about the conflict in the Middle East. We should not have to worry, however, that The Crimson is contributing to this lamentable situation.

D. Cody Dydek '01

Oct. 19, 2000

In Sen. Kerry's Defense

To the editors:

In response to a letter published in The Crimson (Op-Ed, Oct. 18), I did not see Sen. John Kerry's (D-Mass.) remarks at HYPE on Sunday as inappropriate. Rather, I saw a passionate senator who really believed in the causes he was advocating.

I think one of the reasons why youth are not engaged in the political process is that they see the politicians as apathetic. When a politician gives a sterile speech about the importance of voting, I tend to tune out. I can be assured that the politician is giving a well-rehearsed stump speech that he gives to every student group he meets. Furthermore, a politician simply telling youth to vote is not going to make it happen.

On the other hand, when a politician explains to me why my vote matters in particular--that is by addressing current issues--I start to listen. I see such a politician as treating me as an equal. I would much rather a politician speak to me as he speaks to every other voter, even if it is in a partisan way, than talk down to me because I am younger than his other constituents.

The bottom line is that I believe John Kerry did a better job of invigorating the students at HYPE than the other speakers. He put a whole slew of issues on the table, and asked for the students to decide if it was worth their time to vote. His actions were those of a senator who was not yet callous from so-called "Washington politics," but one who actually cares about the people he represents and the issues he deals with.

Geoffrey F. Reed '03

Oct. 18, 2000