Dear Victoria,

Thanks for your comments. I think that other people have made similar points to what I would say in response to your criticisms, but let me try to respond anyway. First, there is certainly blame to go around on all sides when it comes to the conflict between Israel and its neighbours. On the other hand, I think that the basic argument that Israel is a colonial state in an Arab land is largely sound. This does not mean that "Israel has no right to exist" (a term I'll come back to in a moment)but it does help to explain why there is so much animosity towards Israel in the region. To Arabs, Israel is like South Africa was to Africans. Like South Africa, Israel is not the worst offender of human rights in the region, but it is what it represents that many of the local states find so offensive.

That being said, it is also true that several Arab states have tried to make peace with Israel, or at least advance diplomatic relations, over the past several years. The most recent and famous example was Saudi Arabia's proposal in 2002 that Israel return Arab land in exchange for peace and recognition from the whole Arab world - something straight out of UN Resolution 242 and an idea that most experts agree will be the basis for whatever final peace does come to this conflict. Israel had no interest in pursuing this, presumably because it felt that it did not need to make sacrifices for peace - a point that gets to my assertion that Israel and the US have been too powerful for too long. More recently, Israel's secret talks with Syria have been disavowed by the Israeli government, apparently because it did not want to offend Bush/Cheney.

Re: Iran: I am no fan of Islamic fundamentalism and the religious and sexual oppression that it brings with it. But the fact is that you talk to your enemies just as much as your friends. Iran poses very little "existential" threat to Israel, but it does have influence among Israel's enemies. Again, improving diplomatic relations with Iran will require making progress on the Palestinian issue, but this is not impossible - if Israel was prepared to recognize that it cannot keep holding onto illegal settlements. Iran has a lot to gain from a better regional relationship with Israel and the reverse is also true.

Moreover, Iran must evolve its democracy and deal with its internal problems on its own. Reform is coming to Iran, given its political fragility. But Western intervention in the 1950s destroyed Iran's first attempt at democracy. The West is, as a result, indirectly responsible for what has happened since. Yes, Iranians and others are responsible for their decisions, but these decisions are being made in a political and historical context that is shaped by the Western powers.

Diplomacy is the best option simply because it is better than war. If two states saw everything the same way and shared exactly the same values, they would probably not be in conflict. Moreover, as I indicated earlier, diplomacy means talking to your enemies. It also means, sometimes, forming uncomfortable alliances.

You evoke the idea of "gender apartheid" - fair enough, but, as you may know, Israel was a stalwart friend of the apartheid-era South African regime. Israel was invaluable in helping that regime build a nuclear bomb. (An interesting fact, given the current hysteria over Iran. It's a fascinating study in the politics of racism to wonder why a South African bomb was so much more acceptable to the West) Does it say anything about Israel that it was willing to support a government supporting racial discrimination? Or was it just a convenient alliance in a dangerous world? Where do you draw the line in condemning one state for having relations with another state that might not live up to your ideals?

I support Israel's right to exist because it does exist. Several generations of Israeli Jews have been born and raised in the country - they have as much right to be there as the Palestinians their ancestors displaced. But Israel was created at the expense of the Palestinians and much of the violence of the region has arisen from that event. Until Israel accepts that historical responsibility and stops acting as though it is blameless in the current conflicts, these things will go on.

Sincerely,

Shaun Narine

Dear Hypatia,

I usually don't get involved in these kind of discussions, but your characterization of the Palestinians is deeply, deeply disturbing. However you explain or defend your attitude, it's quite clear that you hate these people - you seem to regard them, as a group, to be a lesser form of human being, if they are human beings at all. Technically, your attitude may not be "racist" but it is deeply bigoted.

In many ways, the destruction of Palestinian society has been an obvious and expected outcome of years of occupation and oppression. I don't find it difficult to see how so much anger and injustice - combined with impotence - can warp and damage a society. I don't think that too many human societies, living under the kind of pressure that Israel has placed on the Palestinians for so long, would have turned out much differently. Indeed, there are many examples where similar things have happened - eg. the state of the townships in South Africa under apartheid.

I know both Palestinian and Israeli people. All of them are decent human beings. My Palestinian friends are good people who are struggling to not let their experiences of pain and humiliation destroy their humanity. Yet, you would classify them, and everyone like them, as cultural monsters. This is just disturbing. Before you condemn the Palestinians for their hatred and violence, please examine the violence of your own attitudes.

Sincerely,

Shaun Narine