Below is the OCR text representation for this newspapers page.

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