From: "Martin Land" <martin@multinet.net.il> To: info@gush-shalom.org Date sent: Wed, 7 Aug 2002 12:10:50 +0200 Subject: political purity Send reply to: martin@multinet.net.il Priority: normal The following letter was sent to the editors of Haaretz this morning: Regarding "The blindness of political purity," August 06, 2002 There is no small irony in the editorial position adopted by Haaretz in the matter of Gush Shalom. The peace organization has correlated testimony by Palestinian civilians, regarding allegedly illegal actions by the IDF, with press statements by officers who participated in those actions, and has raised the possibility of providing this material to legal authorities inside and outside of Israel. In the editorial's central argument, Haaretz acknowledges the importance of civilian oversight of the military, but sees that oversight as limited to a moral persuasion that inspires public opinion. Yet, on the other hand, Haaretz regards the possibility that public opinion will fail to "turn against blatantly illegal orders given or executed in the territories" as a real and present danger. If this is the opinion of the Haaretz editors, then it appears disingenuous to accuse others of harboring contempt or announcing "a blunt vote of no confidence in the institutions and public opinion in Israel". Moreover, Haaretz is certainly aware that the creation of International Criminal Court in The Hague was motivated by the difficulty of obtaining justice, or even due process, in societies which tolerate the execution of "blatantly illegal orders", and that the court hears cases when due process has been demonstrably denied. The editorial's objection seems to be that Gush Shalom has somehow violated the boundaries of good taste imposed on non-party peace movements in this country. By this etiquette, the proper place of the extra-parliamentary left is to meet, discuss, form opinion, announce that opinion at public demonstrations, issue statements to the press, and hope for good coverage in Haaretz. Prominent placement in Haaretz assures that the truth will set us free. The problem is known -- surely someone will now do something about it. Gush Shalom and various other left organizations with which Haaretz has taken issue in the past, has essentially asked the question, "Now that the problem is known, how do we insure that something will be done?" In a democracy, opinion is free -- the hard work of democracy is moving beyond opinion to influence. Dr. Martin Land Jerusalem