Newspaper Page Text
Pag* 4 THE SOUTHERN ISRAELITE Au|u.l 24, 1979
The Soitkera Israelite
I hr l4n4K Nni|nper For Southern Jeon,
Ow SSth Year
/
Analysis
PLO hasn’t changed
V*U Gokfear
Ldftar and Pubfabhrr
Farth PowHI
fiissAidrt Ldiar
by Stuart Le wen grub
SoMbewnt Dvector
Infur
lindi IJncoln
A^rrttS4r»g Dtedor
Marfa Nicholas
PraducUon Mtfugn
Pubiahed every Fndcr, by The Southern Hroehte, Inc
Second Class Postage pari at Atknla, Ga (ISSN 00388) IUSPS 77bOEOl
M idwi r] Addirss P O Box 77388. AlUnlc Georgia 30357
Location 188 I5th St . N W Phone (404) 876-8248
Advfrtna^ rales avaalabtr upon request
Subs* rations SIS 00 - I year. $25 00 2 years
Member iewrsr. Teie^fdobc Agency Kefcgous News Service.
Arm car' iewrsb Preyc Assn Geor^d Press Assn . NatrjnaJ Newspnpe- Assn
As the third world turns
A serious problem in United States foreign policy ts in danger
of being overshadowed by a senes of charges and countercharges
between blacks and Jews.
It is sad that actions that took place in spite of the fact that
Andrew Young is black, not because he is, should erupt into name
calling and back-biting, and further deterioration of a black
Jewish alliance that has benefited both groups in past years.
Young’s accomplishments for our country in furthering good
relations with Third World peoples have been acknowledged over
and over again. His early support of Israel and her survival aren’t
being overlooked either.
Whether Andy was the Administration's scapegoat isn’t
completely clear yet. We Jews know what it is like to be cast in that
role and, if true, can sympathize with Young on that point at least.
What we do question is the role the Rev. Joseph Lowery and
SCLC have assumed by interjecting themselves in the very
delicate Mideast situation. Does SCLC belong in this issue? We
think not. Where is their expertise to become involved in as
complex an issue as this on about three day’s notice.
Rarely have we agreed with Hosea Williams, but his charge
that Lowery “is just exploiting the Andy (Young) situation for
publicity" doesn’t seem far off base.
Lowery said earlier this week that since the President didn’t
appoint him, he can’t “dis-appoint” him. That may be, but Joseph
Lowery has disappointed us.
A dream come true
The prospect of any new facility to serve the Jewish
community is exciting., the reality, even more so.
Sunday, the dream of a suburban branch of the Atlanta Jewish
Community Center becomes reality with the dedication of the
Zaban Branch on Tilly Mill Rd.
The facilities of the building itself are outstanding. In
combination with the existing Zaban Park, the recreational
opportunities are almost limitless.
See you there Sunday and often thereafter.
It was predictable but
nevertheless unfortunate that the
resignation of Ambassador
Andrew Young, following public
disclosure of his unauthorized
meeting with a representative of
the PLO. produced a flurry of
heated, and in some cases,
unreasoned and anti-Semitic
reaction from some black leaders
Those who have engaged in this
demogoguery and scapegoating of
Jews and Israel ought to know
better and ought to be chastised
not only by American Jews but by
their fellow black leaders for
fanning the fires of bigotry
Not all black leaders and
spokesmen have used this
resignation to take cheap shots at
the Jewish community. In fact,
several have publicly and privately
expressed their deep concern that
this issue is being falsely and
extraneously used to stimulate a
black-Jewish confrontation. But
as is often the case, the voices of
reason and sanity are being
overshadowed by the shrill cries of
“Jewish pressure." Those who
engage in confrontation style
rhetoric make headlines, while
those who seek to examine the
issues rationally and address
themselves to the problems calmly
are hardly noticed.
While it would be a mistake to
exaggerate the tensions and
friction that presently exist
between blacks and Jews, it would
be equally wrong to deny or ignore
them Some tension and distorted
perceptions do exist. Moreover,
the problems do not relate solely to
Andrew Young and the PLO. Our
differing positions and strategies
on issues such as affirmative
action and quotas, specifically the
Bakke and Weber cases, produced
some (atent animosity which
appears to have emerged as a
tangent to the Young resignation
Efforts are underway nationally
and locally to sit down with
responsible black leaders and
candidly discuss some of the issues
Some of my best friends
ARE TERRORISTS/
\ vu WE s 'K
that divide us as well as those that
unite us. There is a need to develop
better lines of communication,
lines that will not necessarily
ensure agreement in all issues but
which will at least result in
accurate perceptions and an
American Ambassador has the
responsibility to implement his
nation's policy as established by
those elected and appointed to set
that policy and not to act contrary
to that policy.
I suspect that Ambassador
‘To deal with the PLO would be to
confer respectability and recogni
tion on terrorism...’
understanding that agreement on
all issues is not necessary for good
relations to exist. With respect to
the Young resignation, there were
three basic reasons why the
Ambassador offered his
resignation and why the President
had no choice but to accept it.
First, because the Ambassador
had acted in direct contrast to
stated American policy and
commitments in dealing with the
PLO. It is America’s policy that we
will not negotiate with the PLO
until and unless the PLO accepts
U.N. Resolution 242, thereby
acknowledging Israel’s right to
exist. That is a commitment which
has presumably held through three
American Administrations.
Secondly, because Ambassador
Young had been less than truthful
in reporting to his superiors on his
meeting with the PLO
Thirdly, judging from the
Ambassador's own comments,
Mr Young was presented with a
choice. As is well know, several
times in the past. Ambassador
Young had publicly made
statements which were in
contradiction to American policy
or tactless and undiplomatic. His
references to the "stabilizing"
influence of Cuban troops in
Africa, to the “sainthood" of the
Ayatollah Khomeini, to the racism
of the British and of Presidents
Nixon and Ford, and to the
equation of capital punishment in
Florida with summary executions
in Iran had all to some extent been
embarrassing to the Administra
tion. It seems apparent that
Ambassador Young was offered a
choice of having his resignation
accepted or promising to keep his
more controversial views, and
especially those that are
inconsistent with American policy,
to himself, and that the
Ambassador chose the former
If the American Ambassador
had been white, given these
circumstances, the result would
have invariably been the same. In
fact, l think it can be speculated
that if someone other than Andrew
Young had made similar remarks,
a resignation would have been
requested and accepted well before
now
In many respects. Ambassador
Young was an asset to American
foreign policy in that he provided
fresh insights and ideas and
opened up channels of
communication that were both
necessary and desirable, especially
with the newly emerging
Black African nations. Still, an
Young really did believe, and still
does, that the PLO can be turned
into a peace-loving and peace
seeking entity, if only he could
have the chance to persuade them
to trade in their bombs and sub
machine guns for plowshares and
pruning hooks, and that they are
willing and capable of abandoning
their destructive designs on Israel
and their anti-Amencan policies
and rhetoric. Ambassador Young
is a man of deep faith but in this
instance I believe his faith is
terribly misplaced, and there is as
much chance of changing the
PLO's attitudes and conduct as
there is of changing J B Stoner or
the Ku Klux Klan.
Other black leaders, including
Jesse Jackson and Dr. Joseph
Lowery, have picked up on the
theme of “why not talk with the
PLO’’" They ask. “what can be the
harm in talking?" That is, at best, a
naive question The fact is that
“just talking” can do a great deal of
harm and not merely in terms of
Israel
The Palestine Liberation
Organization is a brutal, terrorist
organization. Its stock and trade is
and always has been the killing,
maiming, and the carrying out of
other destructive acts against
innocent civilians, Jewish and non-
Jewish The PLO has murdered
schoolchildren, women, and
helpless unarmed men They have
indiscriminately attacked Jews.
Arabs, Christians, and any one else
who they saw as being friendlv to
Israel
To deal with the PI O would be
to confer respectability and
recognition on terrorism and to
assert that if a terrorist group can
do enough damage and stay in
business long enough, it can
become politically acceptable
Talking to them is a form ol diplo
matic recognition At a time when
civilized people and nations should
be isolating terrorists, there is a
strong move afoot in the Carter
Administration and among
followers of Andrew Young to
make them seem respectable
The PLO has made it clear that
its ultimate goal of the destruction
of the democratic state of Israel is
unchanged, and that its tactics of
terror remain the primary
instrument to fulfill that objective.
The Palestinian National
Covenant of 1968 calls clearly for
an all out war to be waged against
Israel, and that Covenant has been
reaffirmed by the PLO every two
years since.
Moreover, the PLO has clearly
See PLO page 20