SEEKING JUSTICE? THEN TRY TO SEE THE BIG PICTURE AND RISE ABOVE ANGER AND HATRED

Once again Iranian President Mahmoud Ahmadinejad has proven himself extremely adept at making people’s blood boil. His recent visit to New York with its speaking engagements at the United Nations and at Columbia University is the latest example. The overt purpose of this exercise in political theatrics was to gain sympathy for Iran’s insistence on an unrestrictive nuclear program, including the development of nuclear weapons, an idea that is an anathema in the U.S., Israel and in many other parts of the world.

As several commentators have stated, the visit was a flamboyantly graceless effort to lay claim for Iran and by extension for Ahmadinejad himself to a role of importance on the world stage. It’s also no big stretch to see it as Iran’s attempt to convince world opinion that its nuclear program could not possible have any hostile intent and to appeal for sympathy against would-be attackers of that program. How could anyone attack such a principled nation, Ahmadinejad seems to be saying by his presence, whether Iran is developing hydrogen bombs or sending arms to Iraq to be used against the U.S. military or to Hizballah in Lebanon?

Inflammatory Position on Israel

The main reason that Ahmadinejad is such a disturber of the peace, of course, has to do with his position on Israel. In fact, his pronouncement on Israel has frequently been translated into the assertion that Israel “should be wiped off the map.” As an anti-Israel extremist, Ahmadinejad has further stirred up emotion by aligning himself with those who deny that the holocaust ever took place, calling it “a fabricated legend” in a December 2005 telecast, and then a year later hosting a two-day conference of holocaust deniers.

Questioned in New York about his stands on both Israel and its right to exist and the holocaust, Ahmadinejad responded with a rhetorical question. “Why is it that the Palestinian people are paying the price for an event that they had nothing to do with?” he asked. His past denial of the holocaust notwithstanding, he is telling us that his problem with it now is that, in his opinion, it has been used as a justification for, first of all, the establishment of the state of Israel and, second, as justification for the alleged mistreatment of the Palestinians.

Maddening, Short-Circuited Logic

This linkage of these different assertions makes for a maddening, short-circuited exercise in logic and is not all that dissimilar to the line I have heard from others, particularly from some of those on the left of the Israel-Palestinian issue. Those who see the establishment of Israel, whether with approval or disapproval, only as pay back for the holocaust are drastically undervaluing the reason the nation of Israel came into being, and they play into the hands of the Ahmadinejads of the world and their sinister intent.

As I have previously said in this forum, establishment of the state of Israel was the right thing to do in 1948 for many reasons, of which making a homeland for abused and dispossessed people was only one. However, seeing the establishment of Israel as the be-all and the end-all of a comprehensive verdict in the name of justice for the lost Jews of Europe is entirely unsatisfying. Israel as a nation came into being for a whole slew of reasons--religious, historic, political, economic, social—that is, for reasons as broad and diverse as the founding of the United States of America itself.

Separate Nation in Europe

Had an attempt to mete out justice for the atrocities of World War II been truly made in the years immediately following the war, then what we might have seen would have involved creation for the survivors of a protected area, that is, an independent country, within the area in proximity to their home and the home of generation after generation of their ancestors. I speak of creation of a separate nation in Europe as well as Israel.

Such a protected area in Europe should have been taken from the country whose government, military establishment and people were the perpetrators of the atrocities called the holocaust, that is, from Germany.

That said, it must be acknowledged that the concept of justice when applied in a historic and political context is never clear cut and free of Byzantine complexities. What we have to hope for is that people of good will and compassion on all sides of the issue—people who have risen above anger and hatred, however understandable—will prevail.

To communicate with the author, write Stephen.saft@gmail.com.

Copyright (c ) 2007 by Stephen Alan Saft