Syria and Israel
* Your June 28 article, “Israeli, Syrian Military Chiefs Meet,” asserts that while the stated purpose of the talks was to find ways to protect the security of “both nations,” the real purpose was to “assure Israel that it can safely relinquish the Golan, used by Syria as a platform for artillery attacks on Israel before the 1967 war.”
But Syria also has fears: that a stronger Israel could march on Damascus--either now from the nearby Golan or after an Israeli withdrawal if Syria is forced to greatly cut its armed forces, an Israeli demand.
Further, when will the media report that Israeli provocations drew much of that artillery fire and that the U.N. Security Council condemned Israel three times (Syria, never) for violations of the 1949 Syrian-Israeli armistice agreement? These votes had the support of the Eisenhower and Kennedy administrations.
Why, given all the reporting on Israeli settlers on the Golan, do we not hear of the over 100,000 Syrian civilians driven from 100 villages by the Israeli army in 1967, civilians who also deserve under international law the right to regain their lands and livelihood? Why are we given the issue as seen largely through Israeli lenses?
EDMUND R. HANAUER
Executive Director, Search for Justice
and Equality in Palestine/Israel
Framingham, Mass.
Start your day right
Sign up for Essential California for news, features and recommendations from the L.A. Times and beyond in your inbox six days a week.
You may occasionally receive promotional content from the Los Angeles Times.
