Conor Friedersdorf’s editorial entitled "Biased U.S. Cannot Foster Mid-East Peace" is full of misinformation and misrepresentation. While I cannot address all of his arguments in this letter, I will try to address the most vexing ones. First, the assertion that the U.S. maintains close ties with Israel because "the prowess of Israel’s army" makes it an invaluable ally is simply not true. The reason for why the U.S continues to have solidarity with Israel is because Israel is the only functional democracy in the Middle East. How can the U.S. form workable relationships with countries that have unworkable governments? Yassir Arafat himself was not democratically elected to the position he holds today.

While it is certainly true that Israel is an ally of the United States, this does not affect America’s ability to be even-handed in the peace process. In fact, the United States has used its friendly relationship with Israel to pressure the country into conceding more land than most Israelis would have ever dreamt of giving away. Indeed, the concessions that the U.S. helped to get then-Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Barak to offer last year were unprecedented. They included all of the remaining areas of the West Bank under Israeli control, and nearly all of East Jerusalem, with the sole exception of the Jewish Quarter.

Palestinian leader Yassir Arafat turned this amazing offer down. Arafat’s decision was all the more galling since the United Nations itself states that if a country conquers land while in a war that is imposed on it, it has the right to maintain the land. Thus, Israel fairly won all of this land, offered to give 99 percent of it back, and the Palestinians rejected the offer. The problem is not that "a US brokered agreement would be disproportionately favorable to Israel," as is contended in the editorial, but rather that the Palestinians refuse to concede anything toward an agreement.

The editorial seeks to portray the Palestinians as politically weak, with no larger powers at their side. This is certainly not true. The Palestinians are solidly backed by Iran, Iraq, Syria, Lebanon...the list goes on. The wealth of these oil-producing states, coupled with their sheer numbers, makes them a very convincing unit. More importantly, the Arab States have joined forces with former Communist regimes to create a pro-PLO lobby in the United Nations. This Pro-PLO lobby ensures the passage of anti-Israel resolutions. Indeed, in 1975, the UN passed Resolution 3379, saying that "Zionism is a form of racism and racial discrimination." It did not repeal this resolution until 1991, and yet even today the UN continues to mistreat Israel. Israel is currently excluded from regional grouping within the UN, and there are efforts currently underway to revive old anti-Zionist resolutions such as 3379. So when the contention is made that the U.S. should allow international organizations such as the UN to solve the problems of the middle east, we would all do well to be skeptical.

Finally, it is important to note that the United States has a great interest in peace in the middle east, perhaps more so than any other country. The United States relies heavily on the region for oil, and oil prices here are more expensive than they are in other industrialized democracies. It is because of America’s interest in the Middle East that the country has worked so hard to achieve peace in the region. While it is certainly Israel’s ally, the U.S. stands to lose a lot by angering the Palestinians and their allies. For thisreason, America’s even-handedness in the region should not be doubted.

Sincerely,

Adam Myers ’03