Ted Rosenbaum: The other side of human rights and divestment

Many on Penn's campus are calling for a dialogue regarding the feasibility of University divestment from Israeli arms corporations.

Discussion of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict is important; it leads us to further clarifications of each other's positions. However, divestment does not merit discussion because it stifles discussion of the issues, opting instead for a slew of slogans and rhetoric that undermines the complexities of the situation. Overused phrases such as Apartheid, human rights and illegal occupation attempt to simplify nearly 100 years of conflict in the Middle East into a number of buzzwords.

The organizers of this petition on Penn's campus declare that they do not view themselves as being one-sided or biased; in The Daily Pennsylvanian, Angela Migally wrote an erudite defense of their singling out of the Israeli government for criticism. Nevertheless, glaringly absent from their petition is any mention of the Palestinian Authority or Israel's right to self defense.

The PA is a noted human rights abuser; "collaborators" are tortured and hanged in public squares with police indifference, the death penalty is in high usage without a fair trial and a free press is questionable. Finally, in the worst abuse, the authority not only allows terrorist organizations to operate within its borders, but it actively promotes terrorist attacks (as confirmed by documents found in Yassir Arafat's offices).

Additionally, any reasoned analysis of Israeli and Palestinian history must take into account the provocation behind the military action, which occurs when the PA does not uphold its commitment to crack down on terror. When the PA does not arrest criminals and prevent terrorists from operating, the Israeli government must protect the lives of its citizens.

However, even in protecting the lives of its citizens, the Israeli military has taken precautions to do so in the most humane way possible under the circumstances. A look at the history of the peace process will demonstrate that almost all Israeli incursions into Palestinian territory, designed to dismantle terrorist infrastructure, have occurred following deadly attacks on Israeli civilians.

Many, although commendably not the authors of the Penn divestment petition, justify attacks against civilians as a legitimate form of revolt. B'tselem, a human rights organization, notes, "The settlers constitute a distinctly civilian population, which is entitled to all the protections granted civilians by international law. The Israeli security forces' use of land in the settlements or the membership of some settlers in the Israeli security forces does not affect the status of the other residents living among them, and certainly does not make them proper targets of attack."

While the divestment petition's focus on the Middle East conflict is understandable, its glaring omission of human rights violations by the PA is despicable. While it does indeed call for divestment from "Israel and other human rights violators," there is no mention of the PA as falling into that category. In the context of this petition, focusing on the Middle East without mentioning one of its worst human rights violators is biased, in spite of claims to the contrary.

This one-sided approach undermines the intrinsic Israeli right to self defense. If divestment were to occur, companies such as Boeing, which has spent over $2 billion funding Israel's Arrow program -- a missile defense system designed to protect millions of civilians from chemical, biological and even conventional missile attacks -- would be prevented from upholding the most basic human right of life.

The divestment petition calls for a fulfillment of Palestinian national aspirations through the establishment of a Palestinian state. Many share this vision, including a majority in the Israeli Parliament. The Penn divestment petition does not mention reforming the PA to make it a partner in peace with trustworthy governing institutions. It does nothing to further the goals of human rights or peace as it shifts the dialogue about the conflict from one of reconciliation to one of discord.

This conflict is a painful one, partially because the solution is not clear cut. The University's decision to not divest from Israeli arms companies recognizes the complexity of the issues facing the Middle East today. This decision fosters an environment where the campus dialogue, rather than being preoccupied by a one-sided petition, will be an honest discussion of the situation from both sides.

Ted Rosenbaum is a College junior from Baltimore, Md., and treasurer of Penn's Pro-Israel Activism Committee.

Please note All comments are eligible for publication in The Daily Pennsylvanian.