To the editors:

Re: “What We Should Have Done” (Opinion, Oct. 3):

Nader R. Hasan’s otherwise insightful article was marred by the casual insertion of a dangerous and misleading phrase. The inclusion of “Israel’s apartheid policies” misrepresents the policies of the Israeli government, undermines American support for the only free and democratic state in the Middle East and delegitimizes those who suffered, and continue to suffer, under apartheid-like regimes.

The claim that Israel is a racist or apartheid state is an example of effective propaganda with no basis in reality. The insistent vilification of Israel, a country that grants all of its citizens, including a large Arab minority, full freedoms, civil rights and perhaps the best living conditions in the region, is and has been a ploy to deflect international and internal focus from the continual abuses of human rights in surrounding nations.

The continued uprising in the West Bank and Gaza provides ample proof of why Israel has not been able to lift road closures and checkpoints. The very same day that the Israeli army eased closures in the Gaza Strip as arranged by Palestinian Authority Chairman Yasir Arafat and Israeli Foreign Minister Shimon Peres, two Hamas terrorists infiltrated a Jewish settlement and killed two Israeli teenagers. In exchange for the lifting of roadblocks, Arafat was supposed to clamp down on Hamas and other terrorist organizations. Israeli intelligence claims that Arafat had prior knowledge of the Hamas attack but did nothing to prevent it.

Israel has continually sought a peaceful and just settlement to the Palestinian problem. Unfortunately, as the events of the last year have shown, Yasir Arafat is an unreliable partner. With no one to secure a settlement with, Israel is forced to rely on her army to protect her citizens. This is not an apartheid or racist tactic; rather it is merely a reflection of reality under terrorist attack.

Joshua Suskewicz ’05

Oct. 4, 2001