Israel’s Peace Plan

The Op-Ed Page of July 13 perfectly demonstrated three approaches to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

Conrad’s noxious cartoon typified a childish approach, which looks for good guys and bad guys in a region where very little is black and white. He uses the murder of Israeli civilians to score points against Israel’s government--the Palestinian who forced the bus off a cliff had a similar goal in mind. By ignoring the categoric barbarity of terrorism, Conrad becomes its apologist. In his eagerness to blame Israel for all, he becomes terror’s accomplice.

Dov Aharoni, in his call for Israeli annexation of the West Bank and Gaza, typifies the fantasist approach (“Palestine’s Peace May Lie East of the Jordan”). His solution attempts a wondrous leap of logic, an ideologically-fueled ride into the Land of Never-Never. He would offer West Bank and Gaza Arabs a choice of living under Israeli rule or going to Jordan. Once they give their obvious answer--none of the above--Israel would have to either incorporate 1.6 million Arabs into its democratic structure, institute apartheid, or forcefully expel them.

Prof. Yehoshafat Harkabi’s column typifies a problem-oriented approach (“Feeding the Extremists on Both Sides”). Unlike Aharoni and Conrad, he has devoted his life to the active quest for solutions. The current problem, in Harkabi’s view, lies in taking diplomatic advantage of a fleeting, historic opportunity for settlement. Hard-line Israeli and PLO positions, or U.S. inaction, increase the odds that the opportunity will vanish, that the extremists will win.

The Mideast conflict is too delicate to be left to those who seek instant cures by either pointing fingers or promoting fantasies. There are Israeli Harkabis and Palestinian Harkabis: We must ensure that their voices are heeded above the furor and fanaticism of the Israeli-Palestinian debate.

ROBERT ESHMAN

Santa Monica